Goshen Planning Board presses American Recline Reclaimed on site violations, gives weeks to respond

The Goshen Planning Board told the owner of American Recline Reclaimed LLC on Monday that multiple conditions tied to a prior special-use approval remain unresolved and must be fixed or the town will pursue enforcement.

Board staff opened the discussion by summarizing a July 1 inspection that found four noncompliant items: trailers located in setback areas, wood products and slabs strapped to the chain-link fence, material stored where required parking stalls are shown, and faint or missing ADA stall striping as well as an outstanding sign-permit application. "If no violations were put out, everything was in order ... then the special use permit would renew automatically," staff said, but the inspection recorded violations that prevent automatic renewal.

Applicant Sal, who identified himself as the owner and said he rebuilt a burned structure on the site, acknowledged the items and described practical and financial constraints. "I got a quote for 8,000 to have it demolished and taken away," Sal said of one north-side trailer that he said is stuck in the ground and cannot be rolled out. He added he filed for a demolition permit but has not paid the fee because money is tight and his insurer denied coverage for the accessory structure.

Board members and staff debated whether some of the wood slabs and barn doors strapped to the fence are a permitted display or impermissible storage in the setback. Staff said the resolution approving the site plan did not memorialize display allowances and recommended the applicant either move storage out of required stalls and setbacks or seek an amendment that explicitly permits the display. "If the applicant comes back with a tremendous site plan, I think that that item should be resolved and addressed," staff said.

Staff explained enforcement options if the applicant does not take corrective action: "Maybe, issue additional violations and actually go to court," the planner said, adding that fines and a judge’s review of both sides can motivate compliance. The planner also noted that the resolution’s timing did not provide an extra remedial period: some violations predated the approval and were discovered during the required one-year inspection.

Board members suggested potential remedies short of immediate prosecution, including applying for a variance or purchasing a narrow strip of adjoining land to eliminate the setback encroachment. The planner advised the applicant to provide a clear timetable of repairs and plan revisions, saying staff could consider enforcement discretion if the applicant demonstrates progress. The board specifically asked for interim fixes that can be completed quickly — re-striping the ADA stall and submitting a sign-permit application — and requested a remediation schedule.

The board did not take a formal vote at the meeting on the permit’s renewal; instead staff said they will follow up after the applicant submits a timeline and plan revisions. The planner cautioned that if violations remain unaddressed, the town’s next steps could include fines and court proceedings.

The board also discussed logistics and definitions used for enforcement: staff reiterated that one ADA stall, an ADA aisle and signs are required per the approved plan, and that storage of slabs and trailers in setback areas conflicts with the site-plan conditions. Sal said he would return with a timeline and consider alternatives, including relocation, variance requests and neighbor negotiations.

The matter remains open pending submission of updated site plans, confirmation of striping and sign permit paperwork, and a remediation schedule from the applicant.