Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Subdivision topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning board orders lead‑agency circulation for 254 Center Ave subdivision; consultants flag archaeology, hazardous‑waste and SWIP updates
Summary
Applicant proposes demolishing an existing house to subdivide a ~18,400 sq ft lot into two parcels for paired townhouses; board voted to circulate intent to be lead agency and asked the applicant to update the SWIP, submit a preliminary plat, and pursue SHPO consultation and a Phase 1 environmental site assessment as needed.
The Planning Board on Oct. 15 began review of a revised application for 254 Center Avenue, where the applicant proposes to demolish an existing single‑family dwelling and subdivide an 18,400‑square‑foot parcel into two lots for two townhouses (one on each new lot).
Engineer Greg Catripoli summarized the proposal: “The lot is in total about 18,400 square feet, and we're subdividing it into 2 lots, about 9,200 square feet each. There is an existing single family dwelling on the lot that's gonna be demolished, in order to subdivide it.” Consultants told the board the submitted SWIP and some survey materials still reflect the previous design and must be updated to match the current proposal.
Alicia, the planning consultant, reported that her EAF run identified two issues that require follow up: the site is adjacent to an area flagged as potentially containing archaeological resources and the mapper indicated potential for hazardous‑waste remediation. She recommended the applicant initiate SHPO consultation via CRIS and prepare a Phase 1 environmental site assessment. She also requested standard submittal items: a construction plan clarifying exterior lighting, an updated preliminary plat with signature blocks, and a demonstration that proposed utilities and septic arrangements meet county health and floodplain requirements.
Board members asked questions about whether the proposed paired townhouses can legally be built abutting a property line and whether shared elements (a terrace and garage connection) will require easements and maintenance agreements; the applicant and consultant said easements and maintenance agreements could be required as conditions for certificate of occupancy. The board voted to circulate an intent to be lead agency for SEQRA (declare the project an unlisted action) and to notify involved agencies; the vote carried.
Next steps identified by the board: the applicant must provide revised engineering and survey materials, a compliant SWIP, a preliminary plat consistent with the subdivision code, and the environmental follow‑ups (SHPO consultation and, if required by site history, a Phase 1 ESA) before the board completes its SEQRA determination and site plan review.
