Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Development Parking Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board refers Eagle Ridge clubhouse parking to ZBA after debate over counting visitor spaces and tall retaining walls
Summary
Planning board members questioned a proposed two‑story, 5,100‑sq‑ft clubhouse at Eagle Ridge over counting dispersed visitor parking toward a required 56 spaces and concerns about 12–13.5‑ft retaining walls; the board voted to send the parking/count issue to the ZBA and scheduled a site visit to review wall heights and sight lines.
The Planning Board on April 27 reviewed the Eagle Ridge clubhouse proposal, a two‑story, approximately 5,100‑square‑foot building with a pool, bocce and pickleball courts, and significant grading. Corey Salma, counsel for the applicant, said the project was previously approved in a master site plan and that site plan approval for the clubhouse is required before a building permit.
Salma told the board the clubhouse and associated uses generated a parking calculation of 56 required spaces; the team proposed 26 dedicated spaces adjacent to the building plus use of dispersed visitor spaces across the development to meet the remainder. Salma said, "Based on the size of the clubhouse... we needed 56 spaces. We're providing 26 right in front of the building. The other 30, we were utilizing the visitor parking throughout the project." Planning staff and members replied that visitor parking cannot be double‑counted as required parking for a new building and suggested the developer seek a variance or formal determination from the zoning board.
Board members also flagged retaining‑wall heights (the staff memo and developer materials showed top‑of‑wall elevations of roughly 12 to 13.5 feet in places) and visual impacts facing the adjacent community park. Project architect Himansh Taylor walked the board through the clubhouse program and confirmed tiered walls and landscape mitigation; the applicant offered enhanced vegetation, surface finishes and additional screening to reduce the visual impact.
The board voted to refer the parking/count issue to the ZBA so the developer can seek a variance or formal interpretation; the board also arranged for a site visit so members could view topography, sight lines and the relationship to the nearby park. The meeting record shows the board acknowledged ongoing DEC cleanup requirements on part of the larger site (pesticide remediation and naturally occurring metals) and noted a large bond memo associated with the project will move forward to the town board for further review.
Why it matters: The parking and wall‑height issues affect whether the clubhouse can move forward under the town's standard parking rules or must seek relief at the ZBA; retaining‑wall heights and remediation obligations have design, environmental and cost implications.
Next steps: Applicant to pursue a ZBA referral/variance for the parking count; the board will perform a site visit to review wall locations and sight lines and the town engineer will forward the bond memo to the town board for financial review.
