Village boards keep public hearing open on proposed four‑unit at 30 Brady Road after neighbors raise concerns

WARWICK, N.Y. — The Village Board and Planning Board of Warwick left a joint public hearing open July 14 on an application to demolish a three‑bedroom house at 30 Brady Road and build a four‑unit residence after multiple neighbors voiced concerns about lighting, refuse, parking, traffic and the owner’s history of property maintenance.

Chris Collins, managing principal of Base 10 Architecture, described the project as a four‑unit building “designed to fit within the neighborhood,” and said the plan provides four parking spaces, including one accessible space, individual trash cans for each unit and two recycling bins. “This is the existing building that we want to remove. Dilapidated, needs to be replaced,” Collins said.

Neighbors who live near the property told the boards they welcomed removal of the visibly deteriorated house but said the proposal raises new problems. “I don’t want my home illuminated because of their parking lot,” said Karen Ulrich, who told the board she has lived adjacent to the property for 34 years and asked for dark‑sky lighting and taller screening. Ulrich also asked who would enforce trash storage and yard maintenance if the property again fell into disrepair.

Other speakers raised similar concerns about privacy, vermin and odors from an on‑site trash enclosure, inadequate guest parking, and increased traffic from nearby developments. Jane Roberts asked the board to “come visually” and see how eight parking spaces and a trash enclosure would look from neighbors’ decks; Alan Roberts said a six‑foot screen would not adequately block views because neighbors are elevated above the site.

Resident Megan Cook framed her remarks around the village comprehensive plan. She told the boards the proposed 4,500‑square‑foot structure is larger than nearby houses and argued that approving the project without an affordability requirement would undermine the plan’s goals. Cook said county planners had “commended the village and the applicant for addressing the missing middle” and, according to Cook’s remarks in the record, recommended designating one unit as affordable with a rent cap the transcript records as $16.25 per month; the village code does not currently impose an affordability requirement.

Several neighbors urged the boards to require a clear, enforceable maintenance and management plan as a condition of any approval. “A special permit needs to be earned,” Don Kilcoyne said. Speakers warned that approving a special permit without strong conditions could create a precedent for further conversions in the neighborhood.

Board members and the planning board attorney cautioned that the architectural review board’s approval is advisory and does not itself approve a project. The planning board attorney recommended the applicant provide written responses to the public comments and proposed that the hearing be closed subject to a 10‑day written comment period so the planning board, serving as lead agency, can review submissions, consider revisions and complete environmental review (SEQR) before the Village Board begins formal deliberations on the special use permit.

The boards voted by voice to close the public hearing subject to a 10‑day written submission period and asked that the applicant respond in writing to the comments on file. No final decision on the special use permit or site plan was made; the planning board will continue environmental review and the Village Board will resume deliberations once those steps are complete.

A copy of the application is available on the village website (villageofwarwickny.gov) and at the building/planning department at 77 Main Street. Written comments may be submitted to the planning department during the 10‑day period the boards set at the hearing.