Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Procedures Extensions topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning board debates whether to give the town discretion to extend approvals beyond two years
Summary
The board heard a broad discussion and split views on draft town legislation that would allow extensions past the current two‑year approval window. Members urged clearer criteria for "good cause," more data on how often delays are caused by third‑party agencies, and time‑boxed extensions rather than open‑ended approvals.
The Goshen Planning Board spent a lengthy portion of its meeting advising the town board on proposed changes to the municipality's approval‑expiration rules, weighing whether to allow the planning board discretion to grant extensions beyond the existing two‑year limit.
"Why mess with it?" one member asked, reflecting one view that two years has worked and that extensions could complicate zoning consistency. Others pushed back, citing delays caused by outside agencies and long permit backlogs. "If you're gonna extend the time beyond the two years, I think you're also gonna need to extend that they're still grandfathered with respect to new zoning in that window," said one participant during the exchange on grandfathering and vested rights.
Discussion topics included whether environmental regulations (for example, wetland delineations or DOH/DEC reviews) should be exempt from grandfathering, what documentation applicants should supply to prove a legitimate third‑party delay, whether extensions should be capped (examples discussed ranged from one additional year to doubling the period), and how to avoid creating inconsistent treatment between sophisticated, well‑financed applicants and smaller local developers.
Several members recommended gathering data on how many applications are materially affected by the two‑year rule and how often outside agencies cause the delay. The board's chair asked members to send written comments to the town board attorney; the planning board will compile the input into a single advisory submission.
No formal policy position was adopted at the meeting. The board voiced broad agreement that any change should include objective criteria for "good cause," a defined maximum extension period, and clearer expectations for documentation from applicants and third‑party agencies.
