Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board reviews lot‑line adjustment tied to proposed 10‑unit townhouse project on East Lake Boulevard
Summary
The Planning Board reviewed a proposed transfer of 147.16 sq ft to consolidate parcels for a 10‑unit townhouse proposal on East Lake Boulevard, but staff warned SEQR and site‑plan review must proceed together and asked for a full EAF due to environmental flags.
The Town of Carmel Planning Board heard a presentation on April 22 about a proposed lot‑line adjustment intended to consolidate several parcels and support a planned 10‑unit townhouse development fronting on East Lake Boulevard.
Josephina, representing Site Design Consultants, and her consultant explained the transfer of approximately 147.16 square feet is a small corner addition taken from a Route 6 parcel to be merged with adjacent town‑owned land and another parcel; when combined the lots would total roughly 34,000 square feet, which helps satisfy the recreation/open‑space requirement for the residential proposal.
Staff cautioned the lot‑line adjustment is intrinsically linked to a separate site‑plan application for the 10‑unit development and that acting on the lot transfer alone could constitute improper segmentation under SEQR. Planning staff advised that SEQR review and any lead‑agency designation must cover both the lot‑line adjustment and the site plan together. Pat and Rich said the board should not designate lead agency for the lot transfer tonight and asked the applicant to provide a full long‑form EAF; the short form flagged potential archaeological sensitivity, proximity to threatened or endangered species, and possible environmental remediation concerns.
Board members asked how the proposal would affect local infrastructure: the applicant said the townhouse units would be on private well water (Putnam County DOH involvement) and tied into existing town sewer collection with ultimate wastewater treatment oversight by the New York City DEP; staff noted the zoning permits six units on the site and that 10 units would require variances for density if pursued. The applicant told the board the town‑owned parcel connection will enable an ADA‑accessible pedestrian connection to proposed open space and recreation for residents.
Board members expressed general support for merging the properties to enable redevelopment of an otherwise marginal parcel but emphasized that detailed site‑plan materials, architectural renderings and the long EAF are required before any formal approvals or SEQR determinations. The board also requested staff comments in writing and a return appearance once the full site plan and environmental materials are submitted.
Next steps: applicant to submit a full long‑form EAF, the complete site‑plan package and architectural renderings; SEQR and site‑plan review will proceed together, and the board will not finalize the lot‑line adjustment until those steps are complete.
