By Jeff Green, on March 24th, 2010%
SE Planning Board Recap 3/22/10
Posted by: “Lynne Eckardt” lynne.eckardt@gmail.com
Date: Wed Mar 24, 2010 7:31 am ((PDT))
Hi All,
Even though I still attend almost every Planning Board meeting I haven’t
tackled a recap for quite a while but this one is really too good or bad
(depending on your bent) to pass . . . → Read More: SE Planning Board Recap 3/22/10
By Jeff Green, on August 9th, 2009%
Board’s Denial of Access Road Needed for Senior Housing Development on Abutting Parcel Upheld
Petitioner, BBJ Associates, LLC, owns land that straddles the municipal border between the Towns of Kent and Carmel. It plans to build a multi-family senior citizens’ development on a portion of its land located in the Town of Carmel. . . . → Read More: Board’s Denial of Access Road Needed for Senior Housing Development on Abutting Parcel Upheld
By dawnpowell, on May 9th, 2009%
Planning Board Putnam Valley, April 20, 2009
I am one Planning Board meeting behind, but the April 20 meeting was noteworthy enough to go back to it.
There is a lot of noise on the tape, and in the meeting room. Would the Town Board please resolve this problem?
For me, there were . . . → Read More: Putnam Valley Planning Board – April 20
By dawnpowell, on March 27th, 2009%
Planning Board March 23, 2009 I got to the backroom at 5:40. The illegal meeting was already in progress, with planner, attorney, clerk, and a little later, the wetlands inspector. They were talking about a neg dec when I went in. Mr. Mike Raimondi announced in the backroom, that Adorno would be off the . . . → Read More: Putnam Valley Planning Board – 3/23/09
By dawnpowell, on March 16th, 2009%
Putnam Valley Planning Board 3/9/09
There was no quorum for an illegal backroom meeting until 5:44. The PB Attorney was not present in the backroom. It was announced back there that “Adorno” would be off the agenda. They discussed the Gair application and the apartment above the garage.
There were three public hearings. No . . . → Read More: PV Planning Board 3/9/09
By dawnpowell, on March 1st, 2009%
Summary Rose Hills Cemetery – this is an expansion of a use that does not conform to our zoning code. There have been numerous prior variances, and the environmental review did not include this expansion. That constitutes segmentation under state law – SEQRA – State Environmental Quality Review Act. This is the cemetery on . . . → Read More: Putnam Valley Planning Board & Wordsmiths 2/23/09
Putnam Valley Planning Board
The major issues with the current project are the drawing of 900 gallons per day from the stream and the segmentation of the environmental review. . . . → Read More: Putnam Valley Planning Board