Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board holds over 110,000 sq ft Lawrence Street contractor‑yard site plan; traffic and pedestrian mitigation required
Summary
An applicant for a 110,000‑square‑foot contractor storage yard on Lawrence Street presented mitigations including restricted left turns, evening limits for tractor‑trailers, sidewalks and landscaping; the board kept the public hearing open and adjourned the matter to September 9 for further review.
The Town Board heard an extended presentation and public comment on a proposed approximately 110,000‑square‑foot contractor storage yard at 1 Lawrence Street. The project, which includes outdoor storage and truck access, prompted detailed traffic and pedestrian safety questions from board members and residents.
Staff and the applicant described a package of mitigation measures intended to reduce off‑site impacts: left‑turn restrictions at the western driveway during peak commuter hours, a prohibition on right turns out by trucks at one driveway, specification that large WB‑50 tractor‑trailers be limited to an off‑peak window (proposed 7 p.m. to 7 a.m. for occasional deliveries), a new sidewalk along the frontage, crosswalk markings, stop signage, flashing driveway alerts and a landscaping plan requiring 145 trees. The applicant also agreed to a fenced site, restrictions on on‑site vehicle maintenance and an excavation work plan tied to the site’s brownfield remediation status.
Residents and board members worried about pedestrian safety near the South County Trailway, bus‑stop access for workers, potential off‑site truck routing through nearby villages and the adequacy of proposed hours and enforcement. The town’s traffic consultant said mitigation hours were chosen because traffic volumes fall substantially in off‑peak periods and that occasional tractor‑trailer access could be managed with restrictions and monitoring.
Given the complexity of environmental, traffic and planning questions and additional submissions received from staff and outside reviewers, the board agreed to keep the hearing open and adjourn to September 9 to allow staff to prepare a draft negative declaration or additional materials for board review.
The applicant asked the board to close the hearing or, at minimum, direct staff to prepare the environmental documentation; board members asked for more time to digest materials and to coordinate with the planning and engineering staff before any determination.
With public safety and off‑site traffic control the central concerns, the hearing remains open for further comment and staff review.
