New Paltz CVS project needs waivers

When it comes to the application to build some retail between the Thruway and Putt Corners Road, the New Paltz Town Planning Board is generally supportive of waivers to new provisions of the zoning code. But its power to do so is constrained under the rules. Applicants will have to seek relief from two other groups, the town board and the ZBA, before proceeding. 

Principals of Trans-Hudson Management, the corporate developer of the CVS project proposed near the Thruway in New Paltz, don’t want to have to build a second story — a core tenet of the gateway zoning — and they want a drive-through window for the restaurant that will be sited there. The ZBA could grant all the requests through variances, but the town board must be given a chance to weigh in first.

The waiver to allow a drive-through window was passed by majority vote of the planning board at an earlier meeting, but only on September 14 was it referred to the town board for consideration. As the code is written, the waiver can only be approved by a unanimous vote by the planning board. In the case of a majority but not all members being in favor, it becomes a recommendation to be acted on by the town’s elected body instead. 

This is the first test of the gateway zoning code, and it’s taking time for the volunteers and their consultants to familiarize themselves with all the details.

Acting on the waiver of the second story has proven more complex, because the requirement is listed in two separate places in the code: one focuses on the architectural aspects of the structure, and the other covers the bulk standards, or the mass of the buildings approved. One of the town’s code enforcement officers, Stacy Delarede, was asked to provide an interpretation of the code so board members would know the limits of their authority. Delarede determined that the architectural aspect is the only part that board members have the power to waive, and that the bulk standard could only be addressed through the granting of a variance. 

As board attorney Richard Golden explained it, the waiver would only reference how many stories the building appears to have, not how many it actually had. For example, if a second floor was put in under the first — partially underground — that would fulfill the bulk requirement to have two stories, but not the architectural requirement to appear to have two stories. Alternatively, a facade that gives the appearance of a second story would comply with the architectural rules, and not the bulk requirements.

The applicant’s attorney, Kathy Zalantis, doesn’t want either. Zalantis maintains that no retail tenant would be interested in second-story space, and that it wouldn’t be appropriate to put apartments on a narrow lot surrounded by three busy roads. The attorney declined to offer an opinion on the potential of renting space on the second floor as professional offices.

The applicant will now be able to file for a variance of the bulk requirement before the ZBA and make a case to the town board about the other two requests.