1. PB#00- 6
  2. Cornwall Commons (Lot Line Change)
  3. 37-1-45. 1
      1. Please specify:
      2. * Describe information requested as fully as possible
      3. <dh&&*>«^<J^
      4. NEGATIVE DEC:
      5. CONDITIONS - NOTES:
      6. LEAD AGENCY:
      7. NEGATIVE DEC:
      8. CONDITIONS - NOTES:
  4. TOWN OF NEW WINDSOR
      1. REQUEST FOR PUBLIC RECORDS
      2. Address
      3. f'o-^r^^
      4. Phone: (_ ^ 1 56 2 7> 7^
      5. Representing:. Li DC-
      6. DEC - 2 2003
  5. Town of New Windsor
  6. Assessors Office
  7. TOWN OF NEW WINDSOR
      1. REQUEST FOR PUBLIC RECORDS
      2. Date Records Requested: ///- ^
      3. Name:
  8. C C \ /& ^c<"/f
      1. FIRE INSPECTOR'S
      2. INTER-OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE
      3. FROM:
      4. SUBJECT:
      5. DATE:
  9. Cornwall Alliance for Responsible Development, CARD
    1. DATE:
    2. yers, Town Supervisor, Town of New Windsor Avenue, New Windsor, New York 12518
    3. CARD Cornwall Commons letters cc to Meyers and
  10. Enclosed Documents
    1. 1) General Documents:
    2. 2) CARD letters with cc to Meyers:
    3. NYSDOT, Dennison, 7/1
    4. (2 pages)
    5. (2 pages) (1 page) (2 pages) (2 pages) (1 page)
    6. Page 1 of20
      1. efs/eejceBflee.
      2. Cornwall Commons' Proposed Development Will Violate the Clean Water Act
      3. The Corps Erroneously Classified Wetland £ as an "Isolated" Wetland.
  11. Cornwall Alliance for Responsible Development, CARD
  12. Army Corp Mishandles Wetland Classification: For Release, June 27,2003
      1. Contact: Mauro Parisi, Chairman, CARD, 845-534-4884
  13. Cornwall Alliance for Responsible Development, CARD
  14. Holding the Environmental Line
  15. J .^SaS^ ^
      1. Re: NYS DOT Cornwall Commons, Rte. 9W requests/permits/approvals/plans
      2. (Re: NYS DOT Cornwall Commons, Rte. 9W requests, etc., Dennison, July 1, 2003)
  16. IMMEDIATE ATTENTION REQUESTED
      1. Re: Cornwall Commons Wetlands, FGEIS & SEQRA: No Response
    1. SUN 3 0 2003
  17. -W W^ ¥^^
      1. (Re: Cornwall Commons & Wetland 'E,' key concerns, CARD, June 20, 2003)
  18. :p;.f;::s:. ' ^ .
  19. Mill S8W232003 '";:
    1. i<* JUN18 2Q03
  20. TOWN SUPERVISOR
    1. TOWN OF NEW WINDSOR PLANNING BOARD
    2. REVIEW COMMENTS
  21. Town of New Windsor
    1. Notice of Adoption of and
    2. Lead Agency Written SEQR Findings Statement
    3. Cornwall Commons Land Development
      1. LEAD AGENCY:
      2. NEGATIVE DEC:
    4. APPROVAL:
      1. CONDITIONS - NOTES:
  22. Town of New Windsor
  23. Town of New Windsor
      1. OFFICE OF THE PLANNING BOARD
    1. Notice of Adoption of and
    2. Lead Agency Written SEQR Findings Statement
    3. Cornwall Commons Land Development
  24. Go. OG
      1. NEGATIVE DEC
      2. APPROVAL:
      3. CONDITIONS - NOTES:
  25. Town of New W^idsor
  26. {own of New V^jndsor
  27. Assessor's Office
      1. LORRAINE (LANC & TULLY)
      2. P.O. BOX 687
      3. GOSHEN, NY 10924
      4. livin
      5. g the
  28. statuas Lea
  29. s ofthd Agency
  30. pe~h ^
      1. Octobe7
      2. , 2003
      3. SEQR16
      4. , 200A 3
      5. Publialong c Hea^hwith
      6. ofheg
      7. andTectttilr
      8. co—,ln H
      9. , ™ E'
      10. ^T"„^
  31. ^d-4and^^^^ ^
      1. Re: Cornwall Commons & Wetland 'E' Update and Sollami cc copies
      2. Re: Cornwall Commons & Wetland 'E' Update and Sollami cc copies
  32. Cornwall Alliance for Responsible Development, CARD
  33. FOIL REQUEST
    1. DATE: June 18,2003
    2. Town Clerk/FOILS
    3. Town of New Windsor 555 Union Avenue New Windsor, New York 12518
  34. RECEIVED
      1. JUN 2 0 2003
  35. CE
    1. Re: Cornwall Commons proposed development project
  36. e EI w
  37. ^"OON ./TV
      1. NEGATIVE DEC:
      2. APPROVAL:
      3. CONDITIONS - NOTES:
    1. OFFICE OF THE PLANNING BOARD
    2. ^COBOWITZ AND GlJBITS, ISP
      1. PLANNING BOARD
      2. REVIEW COMMENTS
      3. REVIEW NAME: PROJECT LOCATION:
      4. PROJECT NUMBER: DATE:
      5. DESCRIPTION:
      6. TOWN OF NEW WINDSOR
      7. PLANNING BOARD
      8. REVIEW COMMENTS
      9. RESULTS OF P.H^IEETINl# i G OF : ^'"•: / '^7^ ^
      10. LEAD AGENCY:
      11. NEGATIVE DEC:
      12. APPROVAL:
      13. DISCUSSION/APPROVAL CONDITIONS:
      14. JAN 3 0 2001
      15. Town of New Windsor Bldg.Oept.
  38. t ACOBOWITZ AND GUBITS™
      1. OFFICE OF THE PLANNING BOARD
      2. PROJECT REVIEW SHEET
  39. Town of New mndsor
      1. OFFICE OF THE PLANNING BOARD
      2. PROJECT REVIEW SHEET
      3. CORNWALL COMMONS SUBDIVISION
      4. OFFICE OF THE PLANNING BOARD
      5. PROJECT REVIEW SHEET
      6. TO: WATER DEPARTMENT
      7. CORNWALL COMMONS SUBDIVISION
    1. INTER-OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE
  40. Town of New mndsor
  41. oo o£
  42. •own of New Wftdsor
    1. OFFICE OF THE PLANNING BOARD
    2. PROJECT REVIEW SHEET
    3. TO: WATER DEPARTMENT
    4. CORNWALL COMMONS
  43. 00 .6
  44. f\A r /^A/a^c
      1. INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM
      2. TO: New Windsor Planning Board
      3. FROM: Town Fire Inspector
      4. DATE: March 21, 2000
      5. SUBJECT: Cornwall Commons
      6. APPLICANT/OWNER PROXY STATEMENT
      7. (for professional representation)
    1. C^OWH^A***!^ LLC.
      1. tkPLICANT/OWNER PROXYST ANIENT
      2. PART 1 - PROJECT INFORMATION
      3. A. Site Description
      4. C. ZONING AND PLAN^ivj^< G INFORMATION
      5. D. Informational Details
      6. E. Verification
    2. TOlQoFNEW WINDSOR PLANN&BOARD SUBDIVISION/LOT LINE CHANGE CHECKLIST
    3. SAMPLE:
      1. PREPARER'S ACKNOWLEDGMENT:

PB#00- 6

Back to top


Cornwall Commons
(Lot Line Change)

Back to top


37-1-45. 1

0
\
£V
^!&*a*s&*M£Mi£iM
^fe^a^^^pfessi^ff '•%£»&&*&
*^*fe^*^^^^,'^,fg*4*^-^w
RT. 9W & FORGE HILL RD.
60 LOT SUB. (JACOBOWITZ)
M£&^M^XB

,\6 I
|
I
|i
m
n
/)pp£
•pf
-
£c,4»0teJ

PLANNING BOARD
TOWN OF NEW WINDSOR
AS OF: 01/23/2007
PAGE: 1
LISTING OF PLANNING BOARDACTIONS
STAGE:
STATUS [Open, Withd]
W [Disap, Appr]
FOR PROJECT NUMBER
NAME
APPLICANT
0-6
CORNWALL COMMONS LLC - SUBDIVISION
CORNWALL COMMONS, LLC
- -DATE- - MEETING-PURPOSE
ACTION-TAKEN
01/01/2006 PROPERTY ANNEXTED TO CORNWAL CLOSE FILE
01/14/2 004 REQUEST FOR EXT PRELIM APPR GRANTED 6 MONTHS
. EXPIRES 8/27/04
08/27/2003 P.B. APPEARANCE
PRELIMINARY APP
. NEED DRAINAGE DISTRICT - NEED FIRE APPROVAL BEFORE GOING TO
. HEALTH DEPARTMENT
07/23/2003 P.B. APPEARANCE
ADOPT SEQRA FINDINGS
. ADOPTED SEQRA FINDINGS STATEMENT
07/09/2003 P.B. APPEARANCE - PUB HEARIN CLOSED PH -RETURN
. DISCUSS ROADS WITH MARK & HENRY KROLL - NO PUBLIC COMMENT -
. ANDY KRIEGER, MARK & APPLICANT TO DISCUSS ADOPTING FINDINGS
. - POSSIBLY ON NEXT AGENDA
05/14/2003 P.B. APPEARANCE
SCHED PH
04/24/2002 P.B. APPEARANCE
ACCEPT DGEIS
03/22/2 000 P.B. APPEARANCE
DISCUSSED PROJECT
. REQUESTED AT LEAST AN EMERGENCY ACCESS TO COMMERCIAL AREA
03/08/2000 P.B. APPEARANCE - DISCUSSION SUBMIT APPLIC

TOWN OF NEW WINDSOR ex/ i6
Id
TOWN CLERK'S OFFICE
555 UNION AVENUE
NEW WINDSOR, NEW YORK 12553
Telephone: (845) 563-4611
Fax: (845) 563-4670
^\
APR 1 2 2006
1765
'~ir>r;
i
REQUEST FOR PUBLIC RECORDS
j XOWN CLERK'S
Q^lOl
Date:
¥~
)±-o{
Name:
&<cL
Z^A^-
-~ fea-T^cL^a/^y
/^rac***^ ^
Address:
JV
U/W A
£* >
0^
*+£
^~~er&e'f~
M^~
oTS"7 !
Phone: f
?3 L
)
*7(
?3*f
Representing:^
Please specify:
* Property location (street address
ox
section, block and lot number)
* Department yon are requesting records from
* Describe information requested as fully as possible
P^oJj
3-7-l-VZl
lXuct^a4^f^j
&M*€*tf*W*i
J*i*-
«%&,
^lyi^JL
&&*•*
<dh&&*>«^<J^
Documents may not be taken from this office.

i
*
August 24, 2005
32
CORRESPONDENCE
CORNWALL COMMONS - REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF PRELIMINARY
APPROVAL
MR. PETOR: Correspondence, Cornwall Commons, request
for extension of the preliminary approval. Dear
Chairperson Petro and Board Members: I'm writing to
you on behalf of Cornwall Commons, the applicant that
formally requests that the planning board grant an
extension of the preliminary approval of the
above-referenced subdivision which expires on August
27, 2005. We continue to work diligently, various
involved agencies, not yet been able to obtain all
necessary approvals from involved agencies submitted to
both the Town of Cornwall and Town of New Windsor,
requests an extension of the applicant's property
located in the Town of New Windsor and Town of
Cornwall, therefore, we are requesting that the board
extend the preliminary approval for an additional six
months to run from August 27, 2005 to February 27, 2006
at your next meeting. Michele L. Babcock for Mr.
Joseph Amato. Mark, any problems with that?
MR. EDSALL: No, I think it's reasonable, given the
fact that the two towns are trying to finish this
arrangement, I'd suggest you grant it.
MR. PETRO: Motion for 6 month extension.
MR. SCHLESINGER: Make a motion for six month extension
for the preliminary approval for the Cornwall Commons.
MR. MINUTA: Second it.
MR. PETRO: Motion has been made and seconded that the
New Windsor Planning Board grant six month extension
for the Cornwall Commons for preliminary approval. Any
further discussion? If not, roll call.

1
*
August 24, 2005
33
ROLL CALL
MR.
MR.
MR.
MR.
MR.
SCHLESINGER
MASON
GALLAGHER
MINUTA
PETRO
AYE
AYE
AYE
AYE
AYE

GERALD N. JACOBOWITZ
DAVID B. GUBITS
JOHN H. THOMAS JR.
GERALD A. LENNON
PETER R. ERIKSEN
HOWARD PROTTER
DONALD G. NICHOL
LARRY WOLINSKY
ROBERT E. DINARDO
J. BENJAMIN GAILEY
MARK A. KROHN*
JOHN C. CAPPELLO
GEORGE W. LITHCO
MICHAEL L. CAREY
* L L M IN TAXATION
JACOBOWITZ AND GUBITSLLP
COUNSELORS AT LAW
158 ORANGE AVENUE
POST OFFICE BOX 367
WALDEN, NEW YORK 12586-0367
(845)778-2121 (845) 778-5173 FAX
E-mail:
info@iacobowitz.com
G. BRIAN MORGAN
KIRK VAN TASSELL
SANFORD R. ALTMAN
MARK T. STARKMAN
AMANDA B. BRADY
IRA J. COHEN
MICHELE L. BABCOCK
GARY M. SCHUSTER
WILLIAM E. DUQUETTE
KARA J. CAVALLO
JAYNE E. DALY
NICOLE M. MARIANI
JOHN S. HICKS*
PAULA ELAINE KAY*
* Of Counsel
June 7, 2005
Hon. Chairperson and Planning Board
Town of New Windsor
555 Union Avenue
New Windsor, New York 12553
Re:
Cornwall Commons
Our File No. 203-123
Dear Chairperson Petro and Board Members:
I am writing on behalf of Cornwall Commons, the applicant, to formally request that the
Planning Board grant an extension of the preliminary approval of the above referenced subdivision
which expires on August 27, 2005.
The applicant and his consultants continue to work diligently with the various involved agencies
and are processing the applications in order to obtain the approvals necessary prior to final subdivision
approval. Nevertheless, we have not yet been able to obtain all of the necessary approvals from all
involved agencies. Additionally, a petition has been submitted to both the Town of Cornwall and the
Town of New Windsor requesting the annexation of the applicant's property located in the Town of
New Windsor to the Town of Cornwall. Therefore, we respectfully request that the Board extend the
preliminary approval for an additional six-months, to run from August 27, 2005 to February 27, 2006,
at your next meeting.
I thank the Board in advance for your attention and consideration in this matter.
Very truly yours,
Michel
ikh
e L. Babcoc
{
k
MU/
cc:
Mr. Joseph Amato
W:\203\123\MB1591.WPD

February 23, 2005
18
CORRESPONDENCE:
CORNWALL COMMONS SUBDIVISION (00-06)
MR. PETRO: Cornwall Commons subdivision, request for 6
month extension of preliminary approval which will
expire on 2/27/05, it's basically that simple. Due to
the size and scope of the project, it is next to
impossible to obtain all the necessary approvals from
all the involved agencies within the timeframe
allotted, therefore, I respectfully request that the
board extend preliminary approval for additional six
months to run from February 27', 2005 to August 27,
2005. Thank you. Any problem with that, Mar}.?
MR. EDSALL: I think it's a reasonable request.
MR. PETRO: Gentlemen, any problems? Entertain a
motion for 6 month extension.
MR. MASON: So moved.
MR. SCHLESINGER: Second it.
MR. MASON: Motion has been made and seconded that the
New Windsor Planning Board grant 6 month extension of
preliminary approval to the Cornwall Commons
subdivision and we'll run it from those dates, check
those, make sure they're correct.
ROLL CALL
MR. SCHLESINGER AYE
MR. MASON
AYE
MR. MINUTA
AYE
MR. ARGENIO
ABSTAIN
MR. PETRO
AYE

RESULTS OF P.B. MEETING OF:.
PROJECT:
TIA/^ ^
£3.ao$S
P.B.#
LEAD AGENCY:
AUTHORIZE COORD. LETTER: Y_
TAKE LEAD AGENCY:
Y
N
N
NEGATIVE DEC:
M)
S)
VOTE: A.
CARRIED: Y
N
SEND TO O.C. PLANNING: Y
SEND TO DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION: Y
REFER TO Z.B.A.: M)_
S).
r0TE:
N
RETURN TO WORK SHOP: Y
N
APPROVAL: -
-^S%^^
*/
P/udo7fl
M)5 S)M
VOTE:A .^ N
6
. APPROVED:
N
M)
S)
VOTE: A
N
CARRIED: Y
N
PUBLIC
HEARING:
WAIVED:
M)
S)
VOTE: A
N
CLOSED:
SCHEDULE PJL: Y
N
CONDITIONS - NOTES:
i

>-ILE No.389 02/18 '05 08:44
ID^COBCWITZ&GUBITS
FAX:84577851 73
PAGE
GEfiAuDN JACOEOWITZ
DAVID B GUQlTS
uOHN H. THOMAS JR
GERALD A LENNON
PETER R ER'KSEN
HOWARD PROTTER
DONALD G NIC HOu.
LARRY WOL;NSKY
ROBERT E DINAR JO
J EENJAMIN GAILFY
MARK A. KROHN*
JCMNC.CA=PELLO
GEORGE W. LlTHCO
•l. I. M IN UXAllOhl
JACOBOWITZ AND GUBITS.LKP
COUNSELORS AT LAW
isSORANfih AVIiNt'h
I'OSl OH"!fhBOX367
WA1.DI.N. NKW YORK l25(K>-M6T
(845) 77H-212I (845) 778-5173
\-A\
E-mail: infofa'iacobowitz.cofn
November 22, 2004
MICriAEL L CAREY
G BRIAN MORGAN
KIRK VAN TASSELL
SANFORD R. ALTMAN
MARKT STARKMAN
AMANDA 6 BRADY
iRA J. COHEN
MICHELE L. 6A6COCK
GARYM SCHUSTER
WILLIAM E. DUQUETTE
LINDA f MADOFF'
JOHN S. HICKS*
PAULA ELAINE KAY'
*0' Cajnial
Hon. James Petro, Chairperson ar:d Planning Board
Town of New Windsor
555 Union Avenue
New Windsor, New York 12553
Re:
Cornwall Commons
Our File No. 203-123
Dear Chairperson Petro and Board Members:
I am writing on behalf of Cornwall Commons, the applicant, to formerly request that the
Planning Board giant an extension of the preliminary approval for the above referenced subdivision
granted by your board on June 9, 2004.
The applicant and his consultants are still working diligently with the various involved agencies
and are processing the applications in order to obtain the approvals necessary to obtain prior to final
subdivision approval. Due to the size and scope of the project it is next to impossible to obtain all of
the necessary approvals from all involved agencies within the time frame allotted. I, therefore,
respectfully request that the Board extend the preliminary approval for an additional six-months, to run
from February 27, 2005 to August 27, 2005, at your next meeting.
I thank the Board in advance for your attention and consideration in this matter.
Very trujy yours,
J/
John C/Cappello
cc:
Mr. Joseph Amato
(yKAi-lkJ C~me/)-tti £tr<?trt">n
W.aoi'l23'MfrlG7! WW)
J

GERALD N. JACOBOWITZ
DAVID B. GUBITS
JOHN H. THOMAS JR.
GERALD A. LENNON
PETER R. ERIKSEN
HOWARD PROTTER
DONALD G. NICHOL
LARRY WO LIN SKY
ROBERT E. DINARDO
J. BENJAMIN GAILEY
MARK A. KROHN*
JOHN C. CAPPELLO
GEORGE W. LITHCO
•LLM IN TAXATION
JACOBOWITZ AND GUBITS,
COUNSELORS AT LAW
158 ORANGE AVENUE
POST OFFICE BOX 367
WALDEN, NEW YORK 12586-0367
LLP
(845)778-2121 (845) 778-5173 FAX
E-mail: info@iacobowitz.com
May 28, 2004
^
Hon. James Petro, Chairperson and Planning Board
Town of New Windsor
555 Union Avenue
New Windsor, New York 12553
MICHAEL L. CAREY
G. BRIAN MORGAN
KIRK VAN TASSELL
SANFORD R. ALTMAN
MARK T. STARKMAN
AMANDA B. BRADY
IRA J. COHEN
MICHELE L. BABCOCK
LINDA F. MADOFF*
JOHN S. HICKS*
PAULA ELAINE KAY*
*0f Counsel
&
J
Via Facsimile: 563-4693
and Regular Mail
Ke:
Cornwall commons
Our File No. 203-123
Dear Chairperson Petro and Board Members:
I am writing on behalf of Cornwall Commons, the applicant, to formerly request that the
Planning Board grant a second extension of the preliminary approval for the above referenced
subdivision granted by your board on August 27, 2003.
The applicant and his consultants are still working diligently with the various involved agencies
and are processing the applications in order to obtain the approvals necessary to obtain prior to final
subdivision approval. Due to the size and scope of the project it is next to impossible to obtain all of
the necessary approvals from all involved agencies within the time frame allotted. I, therefore,
respectfully request that the Board extend the preliminary approval for an additional six-months, to run
from August 27, 2004 to February 27, 2005, at your next meeting.
I thank the Board in advance for your attention and consideration in this matter.
^john C. Cappeflo
cc:
Mr. Joseph Amato
<g
£ 4
&J
6
0 juf
t'/Ww
ybct
e-truuJ £> 7>lx.4t&>
*&<£W^
Jo MiX -AM dsKtoU */ •&&&!<*-&*-•
\m\MU06!3.WI'D
/
J w
1 2004
W.\203\i:

June 9, 2004
71
CORRESPONDENCE
CORNWALL COMMONS LLC (00-06)
MR. EDSALL: As I understand it, they have a letter in
to the board requesting an extension OF their
preliminary approval. It may in fact be expiring
either in late July or August. What they're requesting
is six months from that date forward. I reviewed the
new code under 257-13 paragraph H, it does allow
extensions for six months. Just so the board's aware
of it, the new code limits it to four extensions unless
you can prove a specific hardship or cause why you
should get more than four extensions, you're not going
to get it so there's a limit now on the new version of
the code so I would recommend that you grant the six
months.
MR. PETRO: Motion for a 6 month extension.
MR. ARGENIO: So moved.
MR. KARNAVEZOS: Second it.
MR. PETRO: Motion has been made and seconded that the
New Windsor Planning Board grant 6 month extension to
the Cornwall Commons. Any further discussion from the
board members? If not, Myra, you'll check the dates,
make sure they run together?
MS. MASON: Yes.
MR. PETRO: Roll call.
ROLL CALL
MR. MASON
AYE
MR. SCELESINGER AYE
MR. ARGENIO
AYE
MR. KARNAVEZOS
AYE

June 9, 2004
72
MR. PETRO
AYE

-GERALD N. JACOBOWITZ
DAVID B. GUBITS
JOHN H. THOMAS JR.
GERALD A. LENNON
PETER R. ERIKSEN
HOWARD PROTTER
DONALD G. NICHOL
LARRY WOLINSKY
ROBERT E. DINARDO
J. BENJAMIN GAILEY
MARK A. KROHN*
JOHN C. CAPPELLO
* LLM IN TAXATION
JACOBOWITZ AND GUBITSJLLP
COUNSELORS AT
LAW
158 0RANGF AVHNUF.
POST OFFICF. BOX 367
WALDliN, NFW YORK 12586-0307
(845)778-2121 (845) 778-5173 FAX
E-mail: info@iacobowitz.com
GEORGE W. LITHCO
MICHAEL L. CAREY
G. BRIAN MORGAN
TODD N. ROBINSON
KIRK VAN TASSELL
SANFORD R. ALTMAN
PAULA ELAINE KAY
MARK T. STARKMAN
AMANDA B. BRADY
LINDA F. MADOFF*
JOHN S. HICKS*
*0f Counsel
January 6, 2004
Hon. James Petro, Chairperson and Planning Board
Town of New Windsor
555 Union Avenue
New Windsor, Ne\v^¥t3flTl2553
Via Facsimile: 563-4693
and Regular Mail
Le:
Cornwall Commons
OurFite-Nor203-123
Dear Chairperson Petro and Board Members:
I am writing on behalf of Cornwall Commons, the applicant, to formerly request that the
Planning Board grant an extension of the preliminary approval for the above referenced subdivision
granted by your board.
The applicant and his consultants have been working diligently with the various involved
agencies and are processing the applications in order to obtain the approvals necessary to obtain prior to
final subdivision approval. Due to the size and scope of the project it will take a considerable amount
of time to process these applications. I, therefore, respectfully request that the Board extend the
preliminary approval for a additional 6 months, at your next meeting.
I thank the Board in advance for your attention and consideration in this matter.
Veryjpihr
yours,?
-<Fohn C. Cappello
cc:
Mr. Joseph Amato
W:\203\123 MU()23<> Wl'l)

January 14, 2004
22
CORRESPONDENCE;
CORNWALL COMMONS LLC (00-06)
MR. PETRO: I have a letter. "Dear Chairperson Petro
and Board Members: I'm writing on behalf of Cornwall
Commons, the applicant, to form a request granting
extension for preliminary approval for the
above-referenced subdivision granted by your board."
John C. Cappello. Does anybody have any problem with
that? Mark, you don't have a problem?
MR. EDSALL: No, they've got a lot of issues they're
working on.
MR. ARGENIO: Where is that?
MR. PETRO: Cornwall Commons off 9W Forge Hill Road.
All right, motion for six month extension.
MR. ARGENIO: So moved.
MR. LANDER: Second it.
MR. PETRO: Motion's been made and seconded that the
New Windsor Planning Board grant 6 month extension to
the Cornwall Commons LLC. Any further discussion from
the board members? If not, roll call.
ROLL CALL
MR. SCHLESINGER AYE
MR. MASON
AYE
MR. LANDER
AYE
MR. ARGENIO
AYE
MR. PETRO
AYE
/fy~fCUA&<L>
f/AJ/d

RESULTS OF P.B. MEETING OF:
PROJECT:
fl&L<rU
<M&'
fai*.
'V>U«%^
&J,*/AI/ £7. £v#5
P.B. #
oo ~OG
LEAD AGENCY:
AUTHORIZE COORD. LETTER: Y_
TAKE LEAD AGENCY:
Y
N
N
NEGATIVE DEC:
M)
S)
VOTE: A
N
CARRIED: Y
N
M)
S)
VOTE: A
N
CARRIED: Y
N
PUBLIC HEARING:
WAIVED:
M)
S)
VOTE: A
N_
CLOSED:
SCHEDULE P.H.: Y
N
SEND TO O.C. PLANNING: Y
SEND TO DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION: Y
REFER TO Z.B.A.: M)_
S).
VOTE:
A
N
RETURN TO WORK SHOP: Y N
APPROVAL:
P/zdbhuiaw/
M)
/?S) B
VOTE:A . ^N
£
NEED NEW PLANS :Y
N
CONDITIONS - NOTES:
Mmw *&*Ai
*~7i£zs/
-7?MJ Jf)w.
/Lktu^bte/'
Cifra?M*i(
T
k)/&£ue7
J ALIMS? J**,** J? -y/^ttrU £)&&£<

August 27, 2003
12
REGULAR ITEMS:
CORNWALL COMMONS SUBDIVISION (#00-06)
John Cappello, Esq. and Mr. Art Tully of Lane & Tully
appeared before the board for this proposal.
MR. PETRO: Proposed 66 lot residential subdivision for
single family homes. This application was previously
reviewed at the 22 March 2000, 24 April 2002, 14 May
2003, 9 July 2003, 23 July 2003 planning board
meetings. Both Cornwall and New Windsor Planning
Boards have adopted findings and concluded the SEQRA
process. The application is returned seeking
preliminary approval such that they can proceed with
the preparation of application packages to various
state and county agencies. That roadway that was going
in, did you get that straightened out with the
dedication to the town?
MR. CAPPELLO: We have a note there that it's to be
dedicated to the Town of New Windsor and what the
findings statement that you adopted does is it directs
us to agree on the appropriate mechanism between
preliminary and final approval because we may actually
have to go through an annexation proceeding. But since
we figured we're going to have a while to spend while
we're getting DEC and all the various approvals, we'll
take care of it at that point and get the highway
superintendents together and the supervisors together
to come up with the best mechanism. Right now, it's
probably since there's nothing else involved except the
road portion, it's not, shouldn't be that difficult to
go through an annexation proceeding other than being a
little time consuming. So we wanted to make sure we
had the design accepted and so we can move forward and
take care of that.
MR. PETRO: Mark makes a note that you're going to have
to get together with the highway superintendent to

August 27, 2003
13
discuss storm water system layouts and applicant is
reminded of the need to petition for the creation of a
drainage district in support of the common drainage
facilities in New Windsor, that would all come before,
this would be conditional final approval, preliminary
approval before final, you have a lot of work to do.
MR. CAPPELLO: Yeah, we have to go to all the various
agencies so it will be a while.
MR. PETRO: We've seen this 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 times, I
know you've been to Cornwall.
MR. CAPPELLO: Yes, we have preliminary approval for
the five commercial lots in the Town of Cornwall.
MR. PETRO: It was a positive dec also so you did--
MR. CAPPELLO: We went through the whole Environmental
Impact Statement.
MR. PETRO: Mark, I know you don't, I just want to
proceed and do a preliminary approval because I've seen
it so many times. Does anybody have anything
outstanding or something different they want to talk
about? If not, I'll entertain a motion.
MR. ARGENIO: Motion for preliminary approval for
Cornwall Commons major subdivision.
MR. BRESNAN: Second it.
MR. PETRO: Motion has been made and seconded that the
New Windsor Planning Board grant preliminary approval
to this Cornwall Commons major subdivision on Route 9W.
Just a side note, this plan is under review from the
municipal highway department, preliminary approval has
been given. Mark, we don't have anything current on
fire now? On 3/16/2000 he reviewed it, approved the
conceptual project conceptually, however, he went on to

August 2 7, 2 003
14
a number of things, I don't have much more current than
that. Somewhere between preliminary and final, we can
get that resolved, is that all right?
MR. EDSALL: The two issues the fire inspector had was
number one, the loop access which this board required
and is part of the plan now and number two, the water
main layout and hydrant layouts which before they can
go to the health department they have to submit to us,
we'll make sure the fire inspector looks at it.
MR. PETRO: We have a motion that's been made and
seconded. Is there any further discussion from the
board members? If not, roll call.
ROLL CALL
MR. LANDER
AYE
MR. BRESNAN
AYE
MR. KARNAVEZOS
AYE
MR. ARGENIO
AYE
MR. PETRO
AYE

1763
/'
£ Z
.v -v -f
i-L~

Back to top


TOWN OF NEW WINDSOR
TOWN CLERK'S OFFICE
555 UNION AVENUE
NEW WINDSOR, NEW YORK 12553
Telephone: (845) 563-4611
Fax: (845) 563-4670
REQUEST FOR PUBLIC RECORDS
(Please specify or describe item (s) requested)
Date Records Requested:
L't/f& /* $
Name: A^
cHo,
1 j , & l- j
V
Address
f'o-^r^^
Phone: (_
^
1
56 2
7> 7^
Representing:.
Li DC-
Documents may not be taken from this office.

Myr-fl
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
TOWN OF CORNWALL TOWN BOARD
Introductory Local Law #9 of 2003
Determination:
Please take notice that, according to the provisions of NYQJ
617.7, the Town of Cornwall Town Board, as lead agency, having reviewe
considered an environmental assessment form and proposed local law/or the proposed
action has determined that the actions as cited and described below will not have an
adverse impact on the environment and the Town Board has, therefore, adopted a
resolution to this effect.
C<ff
von
1/
Lead Agency:
Contact Person:
SEQRA:
Town of Cornwall Town Board
James Sollami, Supervisor
Town of Cornwall
183 Main Street
Cornwall, New Yorl^42518
Unlisted, less than 25/acres are impacted
n)IC E
I
W
L
DEC - 2 2003
TOWN OF NEW WINDSOR
SUPERVISOR'S OFFICE
Location:
Parcel of land on east side of Route 32 south of New Windsor town line and
greater than 300 feet from Route 32
Tax Map Parcel:
Section 9, Block 1, Lot 54
Action:
Rezone a portion of lot 54 from HC (Highway Commercial) to R3 (Residence)
Project Description, Background and Reasons Supporting the Negative
Declaration:
The Introductory Local Law proposes to rezone portions of a 24 acre
parcel not already zoned R3 to R3 from HC with the exception of the first 300+ feet off
Route 32 as shown on a map prepared by Eustance and Horowitz of Circleville, New
York. The proposed zoning will allow for the development of a senior housing project of
up to 215 dwellings on less than 24 acres_which is well under the allowjaJbleJiO dwellings
per acre or proposed (by Local Law #8 of 2003p15 dwellings per acre. The site is
served by central water and sewer, is located directly off Route 32, is within walking
distance of Route 32/94 Hannafords and the five corners intersection and lies
immediately adjacent to the Knox Village housing development in the Town of New
Windsor.
The zone change is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan Update of 2003 and
the GEIS supporting that document and the Negative Declaration issued on November
25, 2003. Because these uses are proposed in both the adopted plan and proposed
zoning law (LL# 8 of 2003) and the supporting Negative Declaration and are more
compatible with surrounding uses than the potential HC district uses, there is no
environmental impact as a result of this decision.
Date of Action:
November 25, 2003
Date of Mailing:
November 26, 2003

Involved Agencies:
Town of Cornwall Town Board
183 Main Street
Cornwall, New York 12518
Interested Agencies/Parties:
Town of Cornwall Planning Board
183 Main Street
Cornwall, New York 12518
Orange County Planning Department
124 Main Street
Goshen, New York 10924
Town of New Windsor
555 Union Avenue
New Windsor, NY 12553
Michael Donnelly, Esquire
PO Box 610
Goshen, New York 10924
John Sarcone, Esquire
125 Jackson Avenue
Cornwall, New York 12518

Back to top


Town of New Windsor
555 Union Avenue
New Windsor, New York 12553
Telephone: (845) 563-4631
Fax: (845) 563-4693

Back to top


Assessors Office
February 26, 2004
Bloom & Bloom, P.C.
Att: Daniel Bloom
530 Blooming Grove Turnpike
New Windsor, NY 12553
Re:
Skulevold, Rolf: Cornwall property - your file # 13552
Dear Mr. Bloom,
According to our records, the attached list of property owners are within five hundred
(500) feet of the above referenced properties.
The charge for this service is $35.00, minus your deposit of $25.00.
Please remit the balance of $10.00 to the Town Clerk's office.
Sincerely,
J.yTodd Wiley, IAO
Assessor
JTW/tmp
Attachments
CC: Myra Mason, ZBA
r
•*
\ <>i

(v 4-4 .'2 I ""
Micle. Michael
40 Riley Road - Unit 2
New Windsor, NY 12553
07—4--12.1
Caslelo. Joseph
PA) Box M2HKS
lloboken. NJ U7D30
07-4-17
&
07-4-18.2
Ciancio. Sandy
&.
Rhoda L
593 Lakeside Road
Newburgh, NY 12550
07-4-20.1
Modh, PareshR
1136 Route 94
New Windsor, NY 12553
07-5-2
Sparado, Robert J
1 0S9 Route 94
New Windsor, NY 12553
07-5-6
Kanemoto, Edward
544 Lake Road
Monroe. NY 10950
07-5-9
Maurice, Frank
14 Maurice Lane
P.O. Box 366
New Windsor, NY 12553
(v-5-12 & 07-5-13
\aeleno, Frederick &Christine
40S Carlton Circle
New Windsor, NY 12553
07-0-1
Monroy, Santiago & Lidia
1 145 Route 94
New Windsor, NY 12553
67-4-6
Duffy, James E
30 Riley Road
New Windsor, NY 12553
67-4-12.2
Erie Properties Corp.
401 So. Water Street
Newburgh, NY 12550
67-4-18.1
The Ciancio Corporation
593 Lakeside Road
Newburgh, NY 12550
67-4-21
Moshhil, Inc.
14 Fillmore Court-#201
Monroe, NY 10950
67-5-4
Collini, Ferdinando & Angela
P.O. Box 116
Vails Gate, NY 12584
67-5-7
Mayer, Richard G & Karen E
1113 Route 94
New Windsor, NY 12553
67-5-10.2
Mule, Robert & Victoria
P.O. Box 565
Vails Gate, NY 12584
67-5-14
Bates, Kenneth & Patricia
P.O. Box 294
Vails Gate, NY 12584
67-6-2
Syvertsen, Leif Finn
1 Gerow Lane
New Windsor, NY 12553
67-4-11
Hopkins, George & Edna
P.O. Box 31
Vails Gate, NY 12584
67-4-16
Hudson Valley Drilling
2177 Route 94
Salisbury Mills, NY 12577
67-4-19
Peterson, Vernon & Brenda
P.O. Box 494
Vails Gate, NY 12584
67-5-1
Nagy, Daniel J & Carol A
P.O. Box 66
Vails Gate, NY 12584
67-5-5
Waltke, Robert
Beecher Hill Road - Box 137A
Wallkill, NY 12589
67-5-8 & 67-5-10.1
Stockdale, Arthur D
140 VT Route 117
Jericho, VT 05465
67-5-11
Refined Home Renovation Co.
c/o Charles O'Kelly
P.O. Box 2588
Newburgh, NY 12550
67-5-15
County of Orange
255-275 Main Street
Goshen, NY 10924

PLANNING BOARD
TOWN OF NEW WINDSOR
555 UNION AVENUE
NEW WINDSOR, N.Y. 12553
Appl No:
1-42
SEC-BLK-LOT:
65-1-61-1
File Date:05/23/2001
Project
Name
:MEADOWBROOK ESTATES
Type:l
Owner's Name
:ETRUSCAN ENT. C/O FRANK CAVALARI
Phone:
(84 5) 561-8119
Address:
10 MEADOWBROOK RD. - NEW WINDSOR NY 12553
Applicant's
Name:
WEINBERG, DAVID
Address:
94 0 SOUTH AVE - WESTFIELD, NJ 07091
Phone:
(908) 301-1811
Preparer's Name:
TECTONIC ENGINEERING
Address:
P.O. BOX 37 - MOUNTAINVILLE, NY 10952
Phone:
(845) 534-5959
Proxy/Attny's
Name
:WOLINSKY, LARRY
Address:
15 8 ORANGE AVE - WALDEN, NY 12 58 6
Phone:
(845) 778-2121
Notify
:SAMUELSON, JANE
Location:RT.
94
Phone:
(845) 534-5959
Acreage
Zoned
Prop-Class
Stage
129.760
R-1&3
0
Status
0
Printed-on
03/30/2004
Schl-Dist Sewr-Dist
CORN
Fire-Dist
Light-Dist
Appl for:
74 LOT RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISIOIN WITH RELATED INFRASTRUCTURE
Addl Municipal Services:
Streets:
Water:
Sewer:
Garbage:
4s *P ?//s/o3

PLANNING BOARD
TOWN
OF
NEW
WINDSOR
555
UNION
AVENUE
NEW WINDSOR, N.Y.
12553
Appl No: 0-6
SEC-BLK-LOT:3 7-l-45-l
File Date:03/l4/2000
Project
Name
:CORNWALL COMMONS LLC - SUBDIVISION
Type:1
Owner's Name:CORNWALL COMMONS, LLC
Phone: (914) 928-9121
Address:
615 ROUTE 32, P.O. BOX 502 - HIGHLAND MILLS, N Y 10 93 0
Applicant's
Name
:CORNWALL COMMONS, LLC
Phone: (914) 928-9121
Address:
615 ROUTE 32, P.O. BOX 502 - HIGHLAND MILLS, NY 10 93 0
Preparer's Name:LA GROUP
Phone: (518) 587-8100
Address:
40 LONG ALLEY, SARATOGA SPRINGS, NY 12 866
Proxy/Attny's
Name:
JACOBOWITZ & GUBITS, LLP
Phone:
(914) 778-2121
Address:
158 ORANGE AVE - PO BOX 3 67 WALDEN, NY 12 58 6
Notify:
GERALD JACOBOWITZ, ESQ
Location:NYS RT. 9W
Printed-on
03/30/2004
Schl-Dist
Sewr-Dist
CORN
Appl
for:
60 LOT RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION
Phone: (914) 778-2121
Acreage
Zoned
Prop-Class
Stage
52.800
R-3
0
Status
O
Fire-Dist
Light-Dist
Addl Municipal Services:
Streets:
Water:
Sewer:
Garbage:
4* at */*-f/*3
hat PtelfjawAy rff****/

PLANNING BOARD
TOWN OF NEW WINDSOR
555 UNION AVENUE
NEW WINDSOR, N.Y. 12553
Appl No:
3-23
SEC-BLK-LOT:54-l-44-2
File Date:07/l5/2003
Project Name
:SHADOW FAX RUN SUBDIVISION PA2003-0371
Typerl
Owner's Name:WAUGH,
SUSAN & JOHN
Address:
63 7 JACKSON AVENUE - NEW WINDSOR, NY
Phone:
(845) 564-4538
Applicant's Name
:SHADOW FAX RUN (DREW KARTIGANER)
Phone:
(845) 562-4499
Address:
555 BLOOMING GROVE TPK. - NEW WINDSOR, NY
Preparer's Name:MJS
ENGINEERING
Address:
2 61 GREENWICH AVE - GOSHEN, NY 10 924
Phone:
(845) 291-8650
Proxy/Attny's Name:
Address:
Phone
Notify:
JAMES CLEARWATER
Location:
JACKSON AVENUE
Phone:
(845) 291-8650
Acreage
Zoned
Prop-Class
Stage
69.500
R-l
0
Status
0
Printed-on
Schl-Dist Sewr-Dist
03/30/2004
WASH
Fire-Dist
Light-Dist
Appl for:
PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION OF 22 BUILDING LOTS
Addl Municipal Services:
Streets:
Water:
Sewer:
Garbage:
#6 O -f 3/*°/'¥ '
fa
Af6 Apf*Mf*l*
L

PLANNING BOARD
TOWN OF NEW WINDSOR
555 UNION AVENUE
NEW WINDSOR, N.Y. 12553
Appl No: 3-22
SEC-BLK-LOT:
54-1-53-1
File
Date:07/15/2003
Project Name:
MIDDLE EARTH DEVELOPMENT PA20 03-0342
Type:l
Owner's Name
:CLEMENT, JOHN & CLAY, DOROTHY
Phone
: (845) 496-4938
Address:
248 STATION ROAD - ROCK TAVERN, NY 12575
Applicant's Name:MIDDLE EARTH DEVELOPMENT (KARTIGANER)
Phone:
(845) 562-4499
Address:
555 BLOOMING GROVE TPK - NEW WINDSOR, NY 12 553
Preparer's Name:MJS ENGINEERING
Address:
261 GREENWICH AVE - GOSHEN, NY 10924
Phone:
(845) 291-8650
Proxy/Attny's Name:JOHN HICKS, ESQ.
Address:
15
8
ORANGE AVE
-
WALDEN,
NY
Phone:
(845) 778-2121
Notify:
JAMES CLEARWATER (MJS ENGINEERING)
Location:
STATION ROAD
Phone:
(845) 291-8650
Acreage
Zoned
Prop-Class
Stage
96.620
R-l
0
Status
O
Printed-on
Schl-Dist Sewr-Dist
03/30/2004
WASH
Fire-Dist
Light-Dist
Appl for
SUBDIVISION PROPOSAL FOR 27 RESIDENTIAL BUILDING LOTS.
Addl Municipal Services:
Streets:
Water:
Sewer:
Garbage:
fo of
3/3o/o¥-
has AS* //-M/ioMj

NEGATIVE DECLARATION
PURSUANT TO THE STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEW ACT
BY THE CORNWALL TOWN BOARD
(REAFFIRMATION OF NEGATIVE DECLARATION ON COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
FOR ZONING AMENDMENTS EFFECTUATING SAID PLAN)
Introduction
Town Law Section 263 requires that zoning be undertaken "in accordance with a
comprehensive plan." The Town of Cornwall Planning Board last adopted a
Comprehensive Plan on November 25, 2003. The Cornwall Town Board in the exercise
of its zoning authority granted under Town Law 261 and 263, as well as the substantial
body of case law dealing with comprehensive plans, has conducted a major re-
evaluation of the Town's prior 1992 Master Plan for the purpose of updating its Master
Plan or Comprehensive Plan and its zoning law. The Town Board has served as Lead
Agency pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act ("SEQRA"), Article 8 of
the New York Environmental Conservation Law, and the regulations promulgated
thereunder (6 NYCRR Part 617) and issues this Negative Declaration in conjunction with
the Proposed Action, which is the adoption of Local Laws #8 and 9 of 2003, the zoning
amendments which effectuate the 2003 Comprehensive Plan. The Negative Declaration
sets forth a summary of the Proposed Action and summarizes the decisions made and
the rationale for the Board's decisions in adopting the Plan and these amendments. The
Negative Declaration also provides a more detailed discussion for the supporting facts
and information relied on by the Board to support the decision.
Lead Agency and Project Sponsor:
Town of Cornwall Town Board
Contact Person:
James A. Sollami, Supervisor
Town of Cornwall Town Hall
183 Main Street
Cornwall, New York 12518
(845) 534-3760
SEQRA status:
Type 1
Location:
Town - Wide, Town of Cornwall
County of Orange
Tax Map Parcel:
Town-wide
Action:
Adoption of Local Laws #8 and 9 of 2003 for the effectuation of the 2003
Comprehensive Plan Update and Zoning Map
1

Project Description. Background and Reasons Supporting the Negative Declaration:
The Town of Cornwall undertook a review of its land use policies in 2002 by first
appointing a comprehensive plan committee comprised of planning board and town
board members along with citizen representatives. During the 17 months in which the
Town of Cornwall Comprehensive Plan Committee met, it had considered the content of
the comprehensive plan update and Town Law Section 272-a, which at subsection 3
sets forth the content of a town comprehensive plan: "The town comprehensive plan
may
include the following topics at the level of detail adapted to the special requirements
of the town." The committee considered these items (a) through (o) from section 272-a
(3) of the Town Law, in relation to the level of detail it deemed appropriate given
changes in Cornwall and other conditions since the Master Plan for Conservation and
Development was adopted by the Town of Cornwall on December 7, 1992. It had been
the stated intent of the Town Board to update the plan for the purpose of encouraging
economic development with tax positive ratables in the special context of Cornwall's
environment.
The committee met at least once a month, with all meetings open to and participated in
fully by the public. The Comprehensive Plan Committee held a public hearing on May
20, 2003. On June 10, 2003 the committee met and recommended the plan to the Town
Board with a three-page addendum referring to changes to the plan that had been
presented at the hearing.
During the past summer the town board met to discuss and consider the plan and
conducted a public hearing on October 21, 2003. Following the hearing the town board
required certain amendments or addenda which are considered as part of the GEIS.
The Town of Cornwall Town Board has considered the plan and has initiated the
environmental review process, adopting a Positive Declaration and requiring the
preparation of a Generic Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS) to review the potential
environmental impacts of adopting the Plan update, including implementation of its
recommended policies.
A Generic Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS) is intentionally broader and more
general in nature than a site-specific Environmental Impact Statement. It may include an
assessment of specific impacts where possible, and may discuss the constraints and
consequences of the proposed action in general terms. A GEIS is an appropriate tool to
evaluate the potential effects of an action such as adopting a Comprehensive Plan. It
does not preclude or eliminate the need for an environmental evaluation of a future site -
specific development proposal to the Town or its Planning Board.
Background
The Town of Cornwall last adopted a comprehensive plan in 1992 which included many
land use policy and zoning recommendations that remain valid today. However, there
have been changes in local and external economic, social and environmental conditions
since the Master Plan was prepared and adopted by the planning board in 1992.
Results of the 2000 Census of Population and Housing are now available which
facilitates socio-economic comparisons between now and then. The dynamics of the
past ten years puts the issues identified in the 1992 Plan and the recommended goals
and objectives in perspective, highlighting those that are still valid. Also, based on
2

revisions to Section 272-a of Town Law, it is the Town Board that must now adopt the
Comprehensive Plan.
The critical planning issues identified in the 1992 Master Plan included:
• Regional Growth Pressures / Growth Management
• Economic Development
• Natural Environment
• Affordability of Housing
• Open Space
• Design and Aesthetics
• Agriculture Preservation
• Sensitivity to the Needs of Various Population Segments
• Water and Sewer Systems
o Roads and Traffic
Though most of these issues are still relevant, regional growth pressures have not
severely impacted Cornwall due to its distance from an interchange with the New York
State Thruway, accessibility of much of its terrain, and the fact that about 40 percent of
land is now reserved for open space (13 percent more than ten years ago). Agricultural
preservation remains important to community character and small town charm and much
of the farmland has been preserved or is proposed for preservation through the
Schunnemunk Agricultural / Scenic Overlay District or proposed new Mountain
Conservation and Agricultural Rural Residential Districts. These protected areas should
be maintained and expanded where found to be necessary. Also, all aspects of the
1992 plan have been incorporated into the current plan by reference unless they were
specifically changed.
Impacts on Land and Land Use
• The zoning amendments expand the Main Street /Downtown area toward the
hospital and Cedar Lane which strengthens the issues considered most important
such as the retail/service mix, parking and traffic circulation and aesthetics
• Local Law #8 establishes Architectural Design District regulations.
The downtown Cornwall study component indicates that steps should be taken to
implement the plan which are protective of the downtown and its land use and economic
environment which is provided for in this amendment.
The Comprehensive Plan also contains a land use and conservation plan component
which describes the proposed land uses.
A primary issue remaining from the 1992 Plan is the continuous desire to preserve
community character and environmentally sensitive areas while promoting economic
development in Cornwall. Economic development does not necessarily require large-
scale industrial and commercial development. The strength of Cornwall lies in its many
small, well-established businesses, its viable downtown area, its historic significance,
proximity to major attractions such as West Point and its beautiful natural setting in the
Hudson River Valley. All of these features support the 1992 Plan conclusion that the
most appropriate industry for Cornwall is tourism. The land use categories used in
preparing Local Laws #8 and 9 which support the Plan Update include the following:
3

• Conservation Lands: Lands owned by conservation and open space groups, areas
dedicated to open space, reservoirs and their watershed areas and open space
areas containing museums, hotels and conference centers on large parcels as part
of an open space enclave. Residential uses in such areas are generally related to
the open space uses and are allowed at an overall density of one unit per ten acres.
Clustering will allow residences on smaller lots subject to conservation easements.
• Agricultural Lands: Existing lands in agricultural use proposed for preservation for
agricultural use into the future. Such areas are in locations which may have
residential zoning at densities of one unit per four to ten acres.
Rural Residential (Conservation Density): Rural areas in scenic overlay or ridge
preservation, steep slopes and conservation and preservation areas. Density of
residential development would be allowed at one unit per four acres and clustering
will be encouraged. Bed and Breakfast Inns and Bed and Breakfasts are allowed on
larger lots.
Suburban Residential (Low Density):
Residential development is allowed at
densities of one unit per two acres but, because water or sewer may be available in
these areas, clustering should be encouraged to preserve open space and to make
utility services more efficient.
Bed and Breakfasts, crafts and antique stores are
allowed in these areas on larger lots.
Suburban Residential (Medium Density):
These areas contain the heart of
Cornwall's residential development from the village west around the Canterbury
area, along the New Windsor border and across the Thruway along Orrs Mills Road
to the new high school. Densities allow for half-acre single family lots with multi-
family and townhouse units in selected areas as well as Planned Adult Communities
(PAC's) at higher densities.
Local Business: Local business uses are limited to convenience stores, gas stations
and small retail and service uses serving scattered residential areas.
Downtown Commercial: Mixed commercial and residential area located only along
Main Street in Cornwall's Historic Downtown Commercial area.
Highway Commercial: Larger commercial uses such as motor vehicle dealerships,
catering halls, lumber yards, auto repair and other uses generally found along
highways such as small strip malls. These areas are relegated to sections of Routes
9W, 32 and 94 but should be buffered from local residential areas.
Conservation/Planned Development: These areas are expanded from prior CPD
areas to include planned adult communities, a mix of commercial, office park, limited
warehousing, hotel / conference center, public and quasi - public areas with
substantial conservation and setback limitations established to provide for tax
positive ratables while preserving environmental features.
Planned Industrial Areas: These areas are basic industrial areas limited to existing
industrial locations along Shore Road and the Thruway.
4

Summary of Major Recommendations of the plan included in Local Laws #8 and 9
The primary tools for land use and conservation plan implementation are through the
zoning law and the plan states that new regulations should be prepared and adopted for
the following amendments to the zoning law, Chapter 158 of the Town of Cornwall Code.
These included:
1.
Architectural Review procedures are recommended for inclusion as a Planning
Board responsibility with advice from either an architectural consultant or special board.
2.
Planned Adult Communities regulations with design guidelines are recommended
for inclusion in the Zoning Law.
3.
Schedule of permitted uses has been revised to include the following
recommendations:
a.
Truck and freight terminals are not appropriate at any location in Cornwall and
should be removed from the schedule of permitted uses.
b.
Museums, art centers and outdoor recreational uses are now permitted in the
MCR zone.
c.
Proposed Planned Adult Communities are now permitted as a conditional use in
the CPD and new SR-1, SR-2, and HC zones.
d.
Hotels, conference centers, and inns will be permitted in the MCR and CPD
zones. Bed and breakfast and country inns will be permitted in some residential zones,
commercial zones and in the CPD zone.
Required Permits and Approvals
The Town of Cornwall Town Board is the only agency with the authority to adopt the
proposed Zoning Amendments, pursuant to Section 261 and 263 of New York State
Town Law. Adjoining municipalities and the Orange County Planning Department will
receive copies of this document as Interested Agencies.
The Town of Cornwall Planning Board according to Town Law may review and approve
the plan. A copy of the committee's recommendations was given to Planning Board
members prior to the May 20, 2003 hearing. The final version was delivered to the
Planning Board on September 26, 2003. Amendments were provided at the request of
the Town Board on October 31, 2003 and are part of this review and Negative
Declaration.
Summary of Impacts
This Generic Environmental Impact Statement identified no significant harmful impacts
associated with adopting and implementing the proposed Zoning Amendments. The
policies promote protection of sensitive environmental features and community
character, along with a reasonable level of balanced land use which provide for a variety
of housing densities and types. Economic development policies related to commercial
and industrial locations also considered areas with optimally suitable environmental
conditions for such land uses. These are considered beneficial impacts.
5

In addition, the plan recommends that further environmental regulations be considered
and prepared.
These would also be protective of the environment, including such
regulations as local wetland regulations, stream preservation regulations and aesthetic
regulations pertaining to architectural review.
Alternative Actions
The proposed Zoning Amendment effectuates the Plan and is comprehensive by nature
and, as a result, considers and balances multiple resource issues while addressing the
reasonable needs of the community for change and growth. The "no-action alternative"
would involve not adopting or implementing the proposed Plan Update and retaining the
existing 1992 Plan and current zoning. This was the sole alternative used as a basis for
comparison through the Generic Environmental Impact Statement.
The 1992 Plan was reviewed by the Committee and its consultant to identify specific
elements that required updating due to environmental, economic and demographic
changes since it was adopted. Though many of the Goals and Objectives remain valid,
there were certain elements that required a more current approach and these were the
subjects of the Plan Update. Changes to the plan were made, finally, as a result of the
last public hearing in October 2003 and are effectuated in Local Law #8.
The committee considered numerous public comments and discussions throughout the
planning process, many of which were incorporated into the Plan Update and its policies.
The document recommended to the Town Board as the culmination of the
Comprehensive Plan Committee's work was, therefore, a well-considered,
comprehensive and balanced plan update. Final changes to the plan were made as a
result of the last public hearing in October 2003 and these local laws are a result of
those changes.
impact on Environmental Setting and Community Character
Cornwall's distance from Interstate Highways and limited capacity of the thoroughfares
that do exist impact the economic development potential of the Town. The Plan update
took these locational features into consideration by recommending that economic
activities that require intense use of roadways and highway access such as truck
terminals, distribution centers and large commercial developments be discouraged. The
preferred economic development activities are those that are tourism related and that
enhance the small or local business establishments that define Cornwall's identity as a
scenic area rich in historic, natural and cultural attractions.
The Plan Update includes a stated policy that, in order to preserve its small town
character and remain a destination point for passenger vehicles rather than an access
point for truck traffic, the Town is not in favor of locating a NYS Thruway interchange
within its boundaries. These policies are intended to alleviate any potential additional
truck traffic beyond the capacity of the existing roadway network. This is of particular
importance along Route 32 and portions of Routes 9W and 94 where major widening
could impact adjacent stream corridors, wetlands, steep grades, flood plains and scenic
corridors.
The proposed Plan Update incorporates information and maps regarding environmental
conditions and limitations within the town of Cornwall. There are numerous references
6

to the visual character and the importance to the town's natural environment to its future
- from a land use as well as an economic development perspective.
Information included on the Plan maps is described in the following summaries of
environmental conditions. Also included in the summaries are potential impacts that
were considered and proposed mitigation, if necessary.
Impacts on Land (Mountains and hillsides)
Approximately 35 percent of the Town of Cornwall includes areas of steep terrain, with
natural grades of 20 percent or more and ridge lines above the slopes. These areas are
found in the southwest part of town (Schunnemunk Mountain Preservation Area) and
along the east border of the Town from the New York Military Academy to the Black
Rock and Storm King areas. Although much of this land is owned by public or non-profit
organizations and is covered by conservation easements, further protection was
considered important to prevent loss of preserved land through sale or other transfer of
ownership.
The proposed Plan Update strengthens the mandate to protect the hillsides, ridgelines
and steep slopes as recommended in the 1992 Plan. Yet this protection must also be
done in balance with the need to implement the Economic Development objectives and
need to enhance the Town's revenue. In order to meet these potentially conflicting
objectives, the Plan Update states that these sensitive lands will continue to be
preserved through two environmental overlay districts and that clustered residential
development be encouraged in other areas of town. The existing Schunnemunk
Agricultural Scenic Overlay and Ridge Preservation Overlay Districts include a large
portion of the preserved land, while the rest would be included in the new Mountain and
Conservation Residence (MCR) District and the Agricultural Rural Residence (ARR)
District.
The MCR district is intended to accommodate the existing RR (Rural Residential area
uses such as parkland, Black Rock Forest, conservation easements and protected open
space, agricultural uses, and other uses not already included in the overlay districts as
they exist. Minimum lot size for all uses in the MCR zone is 10 aces. The intent of this
requirement is that, as land is preserved in conservation easements, those parcels will
be rezoned to MCR and protected from resubdivision. The economic development
policies can be furthered by allowing hotels and bed and breakfasts to encourage
tourism and allow the open space and recreational uses to be supplemental to the
natural beauty provided to visitors by the mountains and hillsides.
The effect of the proposed Plan is beneficial and protective with respect to the
mountains and hilly terrain and alleviates potential impacts not fully covered in the 1992
Plan. No mitigation measures are needed because the impacts are beneficial.
7

Impacts on Open Space and Recreation (Scenic roads and trails)
The proposed Plan Update notes the importance of certain roads that are entryways to
the Town and their importance as gateways to Cornwall's natural scenic beauty and
small town charm. Primary areas of concern are along Route 32 near the Storm King
Art Center and Angola Road through Mountainville, Route 94 and Route 9W near the
New York Military Academy as well as the downtown entry points at Quaker Avenue and
Main Street. The proposed Plan Update encourages enhancing the visual impact of
these areas with tree planting and landscape treatments where needed, limitations on
the size and character of non-residential development, and maintaining large - lot
residential development and requiring clustered residential development where
appropriate. Another recommendation to protect the scenic beauty of Cornwall was
modification of the intensity of some of the uses allowed in the Conservation Planned
Development District as proposed in the 1992 Plan. These recommendations are
discussed in the Land Use and Zoning portion of this GEIS.
The Plan Update also notes that portions of several major trails pass through Cornwall
and encourages linking existing trails with historic sites, thereby creating an historic trail
to augment tourism opportunities. These trails are shown on the Open Space and
Conservation Plan.
The proposed Plan Update is beneficial with respect to the scenic roads and trails in
Cornwall and alleviates any potential harmful impacts that could have resulted from the
1992 Plan. No mitigation measures are needed because the impacts are beneficial.
Impacts on Water Resources
The proposed Plan Update briefly addresses concerns regarding wetlands, streams, and
floodplains noting that there is a need to strengthen existing regulations and create new
regulations to alleviate these concerns. The Open Space element of the Plan Update
recommends that the Town prepare and adopt wetland, stream preservation and
conservation easement guidelines including increased setbacks from banks of streams.
The proposed Plan Update advocates a positive and protective policy toward wetlands,
streams and floodplains and supports existing and future regulations that will further
protect these water resources. No harmful impacts on water resources will be caused
by the Plan Update, thus, no mitigation is necessary.
Impacts on Water Resources (Aquifer and Well-head Protection)
The proposed Plan Update does not include extensive information about groundwater
resources. However, the Open Space and Conservation Plan does map the existing
public water supply wells, the 5 and 10 year protection zones and the 200 foot and 1500
foot wellhead protection buffers. Wellhead protection areas to be developed and
regulated by the Town, in coordination with the Orange County Water Authority (OCWA),
will be beneficial to the protection of the Town and Village water supplies.
The proposed Plan supports the protection of the town's critical natural resources, not
the least of which in importance are its aquifers and groundwater quality. These areas
were mapped on the Open Space and Conservation Plan early in the planning process
and their presence was carefully considered in the recommendations regarding
8

residential densities, open space preservation, and in the Town's concurrence with the
Village recommendation to expand the Water District. The proposed Plan Update is
beneficial with respect to the aquifer and well-head protection in Cornwall and alleviates
any potential negative impacts that could have resulted from previous Plan
recommendations. No mitigation measures are needed because the impacts are
beneficial.
Impacts on Water Resources (Surface water bodies, surface watercourses and
preservation areas)
The Open Space Plan identifies the numerous surface water bodies, wetlands and
streams, as well as preservation areas in which they are located. The proposed Plan
Update recognizes the importance of providing buffer areas along streams and other
water bodies as a means of protecting water quality and strongly recommends this
regulation. The importance that the Plan Update places on strengthening existing
regulations and adopting new regulations for water bodies and watercourses indicates
that the impacts will clearly be beneficial and no mitigation measures are required.
Impacts on Water Resources (Floodplains)
Although the Plan Update does not address floodplains specifically, they are shown on
the Open Space Plan along Moodna Creek, Woodbury Creek and a small area west of
Angola Road and north of Erin Court. The 1992 Plan states that all development should
avoid encroachment in the 100 year floodplain. This policy is clearly supported in certain
Plan Update zoning recommendations that identify areas to be down-zoned from PIO to
CPD or Residential zoning districts. No harmful impacts on Floodplains are anticipated
from this proposed Plan Update, thus, mitigation measures are not required.
Impacts on Water (Drainage improvements)
Although the Plan Update does not specifically address drainage improvements, the
Town deals with this issue regularly through site plan review and subdivision regulations.
Furthermore, new EPA guidelines extend SPDES permit for stormwater runoff and
erosion control from 5 acres to an acre of developed land or less under certain
conditions. The strengthened Federal and State regulations along with Plan Update
recommendations with regard to furthering environmental protection, indicate that the
proposed Plan Update will produce beneficial impacts toward implementing drainage
improvements. Therefore, no mitigation measures are required.
Impacts on Traffic and Transportation
The proposed Plan Update does not include a specific transportation element.
However, references to its link with land use issues are found throughout the Plan and
transportation and parking issues are addressed thoroughly in the Downtown
Revitalization element of the Plan Update. The 1992 Plan devoted an entire section to
Transportation issues and the Plan Update restates the goal to "Provide a variety of
motor vehicle, rail and bicycle / pedestrian transportation alternatives in areas of existing
and future housing and employment activity."
Some examples of specific
recommendations to alleviate traffic and parking problems include the proposed parking
plan and traffic circulation improvements in the Downtown Revitalization element,
Cornwall's clear policy statement against providing a NYS Thruway interchange within
the Town, recommendation to prohibit truck terminals and limit other uses that would
create harmful impacts on roads in the Town industrial areas, and recommendation to
extend and link pedestrian and bicycle trails throughout the Town where feasible.
9

The proposed Plan Update recommends numerous zoning changes, cluster
development, expanding pedestrian access and parking improvements in the Downtown
area, all of which are expected to produce beneficial impacts on the roads and alleviate
traffic problems. Thus, no mitigation measures are required.
Impacts on Public Facilities and Services (Water and Sewer Utilities)
The proposed Plan Update notes that central water services are currently provided by
the Town of Cornwall in co-operation with the Village of Cornwall-on-Hudson and the
Town of New Windsor. These water and sewer service areas are limited to the
northeast portion of the Town due to the environmentally sensitive nature of much of the
land in the west and southeasterly portions of Town. The Plan includes a water service
area map showing existing water districts as well as proposed water service areas.
As stated in the Plan Update, the Village recommended extending the water area west
to cover much of the area east of the NYS Thruway and both sides of Orrs Mills Road
west of the Thruway up to Route 94. The Town Board favored this expansion proposed
by the Village in late 2002, and voted for its approval in March, 2003. The new water
service area may expand farther to the north as additional property owners request
service.
The Plan Update notes that sewer service areas should also be considered for
expansion into all higher density residential areas including the suburban density
residential and developed SR-2 areas along with the Cornwall Commons PIO
area.
The Plan Update supports the actions being taken by the Town, in cooperation with the
water and sewer districts, to expand and upgrade these service areas. No harmful
impacts are anticipated from Plan Update recommendations regarding water and sewer
service. Therefore, no mitigation measures are necessary.
Impacts on Schools
The proposed Plan does not create significant impacts on the Cornwall Central School
District or on its facilities. The proposed Plan does include some recommendations that
are expected to be positive or beneficial impacts for the school district. For example,
regulations for Planned Adult Communities (PAC) that restrict occupancy to adults age
55 and over are recommended in several locations. If developed, these communities
will not generate additional school children, however, they will produce significant
revenues for the Town and the School District. Another recommendation was to change
the land use designation for properties along Palomino Drive just east of the new High
School to suburban residential from industrial. This will allow use more compatible with
the high school, thereby, producing a positive or beneficial impact. Many of the
recommendations regarding parking, aesthetic and traffic flow improvement in downtown
Cornwall will result in beneficial impacts to the middle school and the Willow Avenue
Elementary School, both of which are adjacent to downtown Cornwall.
Given the anticipated neutral or beneficial impacts on the Cornwall Central School
District and its facilities, no mitigation is required.
10

Impacts on Recreation and Parkland; Open Space
The proposed Plan Update recognizes the importance of recreation, parkland and open
space to Cornwall by devoting an entire section to this issue and incorporating relevant
recommendations in this regard throughout the document. The Town Recreation
Department, established in 1998, is responsible for recreation programs and 44 acres of
town parkland. The Town intends to acquire a 40 acre site off of Angola Road near
Kendridge Farm from Cornwall Central School District for a proposed Town Park.
Many recreation and open space areas operated by nonprofit and other public agencies
are found throughout the Town and are inventoried in Table 5.1. The Town of Cornwall
includes 15,833 acres, approximately 6,500 acres of which is preserved for open space
or recreation. This represents 41 percent of the Town and a 1,300 acre increase since
the 1992 Plan. At that time 5,200 acres, or 32 percent of the Town was included in the
total preserved for open space or recreation. Cornwall has 1,271 acres of parkland
including 1,100 of State parkland, and 78 acres of private recreation area.
Approximately 4,765 acres of other private or publicly owned open space is included in
the 6,500 acre total noted above.
The Plan recognizes the need for open space and recreation, but cautions that this must
be weighed against the real problem for Town revenues resulting from such a high
proportion of tax exempt land. To alleviate this potential conflict, future land set-asides
should be in the two environmental overlay areas and through clustering of development
elsewhere in the Town. Additional recommendation to support open space preservation
and recreation include the following:
I.
Fees in lieu of parkland should be raised to support recreation development
and required of all residential properties. The recommendation is a $2,000 fee
in lieu of parkland.
II.
Market the Town as a scenic recreational area and provide for land uses in
nearby commercial and higher density residential areas that will attract tourists
and encourage development of Planned Adult Communities.
III.
Limit commercial and industrial uses to those that are small in scale,
generate modest amounts of traffic and will blend into the community.
IV.
Conduct a recreation study in coordination with a Town Central Park Plan to
determine future recreation needs in terms of land area and uses for an
estimated future Town -Village population of 15,000.
The proposed Plan Update recommends actions and policies that support the
preservation of open space and provision of recreational land. Thus, any impacts are
expected to be beneficial and no mitigation measures are necessary.
11

Impacts on Public Facilities
The proposed Plan Update does not include a Public Facilities element as the 1992 Plan
addressed Community Facilities. However, the Town's goal regarding Community
Facilities is to ensure that existing facilities continue to adequately serve populations
they are intended to serve, and to provide new facilities in areas planned for future
development.
Various public facilities are referred to throughout the Plan Update, as appropriate. For
example, the Plan Update provides the background for the recommendation to "expand
the water and sewer districts as proposed in order to allow appropriate residential or
commercial development, working with the Village of Cornwall-on-Hudson and the Town
of New Windsor where necessary." Another facility mentioned is the DPW Garage
located in the northeast section of the Town adjacent to the Village. The Plan
recommends that this area be rezoned to PIO to more accurately reflect land uses such
as the DPW Garage and other non-residential properties. The Open Space and
Recreation element notes that a recreation study should be done in conjunction with
planning a new Central Park on the site proposed for acquisition and development. This
may present an opportunity in the future to expand Town Hall, Justice Court, the Police
Department, the Library or other facilities into a portion of the existing park adjacent to
Town Hall, if necessary.
Due to the moderate growth anticipated from the policies and recommendations in the
proposed Plan Update, no significant impact on the Town's Public Facilities or ability to
serve the current and future population is anticipated. The only exception may be in the
limited revenues resulting from the large amount of protected open space. To address
this potential impact, the Plan Update proposes revenue - generating land uses at
appropriate locations and a recreation fee in lieu of parkland. Other than the fiscal
concern, no other significant impacts are anticipated. Thus, no further mitigation
measures are necessary.
Impacts on Agriculture
The agricultural uses lie within areas not proposed for central services and which are
proposed for preservation in the plan. Therefore, there will be no significant impact on
agriculture.
Other Impacts- cultural, solid waste, energy, irreversible, growth inducement
The proposed Plan Update discusses cultural resources in the town relevant to
maintaining its historic character and encouraging tourism related economic
development activities. The Town Board notes that the Planning Board is charged with
evaluating SEQR for land use applications, and appropriately considers cultural
resources among other things. This is also true of solid waste. Although solid waste
generation may be less under the proposed Plan Update, this can vary depending on the
specific needs of commercial and industrial users that may locate in the town. Nothing
in the proposed Plan encourages significant waste generators to operate in the town,
therefore it is appropriate for the Planning Board to evaluate the specific solid waste
impacts of a given land use during its local permit and SEQR review process. The solid
waste and recycling issues are handled through the Orange County Department of
Public Works which collects and disposes of all solid waste produced in Orange County.
At the present time, the County has expanded its recycling program which applies to all
communities and will be enforced in 2004.
12

This Generic Environmental Impact Statement does not anticipate any significant energy
use and conservation impacts from implementing this proposed Plan Update. There is
nothing in the Plan that would encourage any significant change in use or conservation
of energy as compared with the 1992 Plan and current zoning.
Irreversible of Irretrievable Commitments of Resources, Unavoidable Impacts
The proposed Plan Update does not irreversibly or irretrievably commit the town's own
municipal resources, nor does it promote the irreversible commitment of any other
natural resources. Rather, the Plan's policies promote thoughtful, balanced land use
that protects the town's character and resources, consistent with a reasonable use of
land as envisioned in the Plan Update. The only unavoidable potential impacts that
might be anticipated from adopting and implementing the Plan is that some individual
property owners may feel that their property value - or their anticipated property value -
might be changed by specific zone changes adopted pursuant to this Plan. These are
not truly impacts so much as differences in perception. The fact is that community
character is very important and affects property values beneficially, such that quality
communities are more desirable, as are lands adjoining open spaces. In Balance, the
town board perceives that choosing an appropriate level of land use densities and
pursuing quality community objectives, as described in the Orange County Plan, will
benefit the community 's well-being, as well as the property values of all.
Growth - inducing Aspects of Action
The proposed Plan Update and Zoning Law Amendments does not induce growth
overall, but is a carefully considered, comprehensive set of policies designed to address
the future development of the Town of Cornwall and balance its growth. It is not
appropriate to consider the proposed Plan Update a response to growth where it actually
is a forward-looking set of policies designed to address the town's future comprehensive
land use and community well-being, consistent with sections 272-a, 261 and 263 of New
York State Town Law.
Impact on Future Regulations and Developments in Regard to SEQRA
The zoning regulations developed based on the Comprehensive Plan Update are in
accordance with the adopted plan. SEQRA issues addressed in the plan cover zone
changes and amendments in accordance with the plan.
Since this GEIS is, by definition, generic and not site - specific, any future development
proposal before the Planning Board or Town Board must fully address SEQRA and this
document in no way inhibits any future SEQRA action of these boards in regard to future
development proposals.
Date of Action:
December 2, 2003
Date of Mailing:
December 3, 2003
Involved Agencies:
Town of Cornwall Town Board
Main Street
Chester, New York 12518
13

Interested Agencies/Parties:
Town of Cornwall Planning Board
183 Main Street
Cornwall, New York 12518
Village of Comwall-on-Hudson
325 Hudson
Cornwall-on-Hudson, NY 12520
Orange County Planning Department
124 Main Street
Goshen, New York 10924
Town of Blooming Grove
6 Horton Road
Blooming Grove, New York 10914
Town of New Windsor
555 Union Avenue
New Windsor, NY 12553
Town of Woodbury
511 Route 32
Highland Mills, NY 10930
Town of Highlands
213 Main Street
Highland Falls, NY 12543
Palisades Interstate Park Commission
Administration Building
Bear Mountain State Park
Bear Mountain, NY 10911-0427
14

1763

Back to top


TOWN OF NEW WINDSOR
TOWN CLERK'S OFFICE
555 UNION AVENUE
NEW WINDSOR, NEW YORK 12553
Telephone: (845) 563-4611
Fax: (845) 563-4670
REQUEST FOR PUBLIC RECORDS
(Please specify or describe item (s) requested)
'£&£*)
&/
/hLi~
<2w way 5
${P/ZL?<2/h+jQ»S
^
/P/LSTfi'^iAJG- £?<24tf~tb
Date Records Requested:
///- ^
Name:
Address:
/^ f
tM+,tJ?&-
Frslk.i
Phone
• (
~g ^ ^
-
tt*
*
-»-*7
Representing:
Documents may not be taken from this office.

NOTICE~DFiNTENT TO DECLARE LEAD AGENCY
CHESTNUTlfVQODS
TOWN OF CORNWALL PLANNING BOARD, COUNTY OF ORANGE
Please take notice that7
Environmental Conservation
according to the provisions of Article 8 of the
Law and the New York Code of Rules and
Regulations Part 617.6, the Town of Cornwall Planning Board has resolved to seek
Lead Agency status for purposes of Coordinated Review of the project named
below:
Name of Project: Chestnut Woods Project
Action Type: Tyj
Location: Town of Cornwall, County of Orange
Locatiortse^st side of NYS Route 32 at
the Moodna
own of New Windsor line, abutting
Zoning District: R-3 Residential, HC Highway Commercial
Tax Map Parcel: Section 9 Block 1 Lot 19.2
Summary of Action:
The action involvesva request for site plan appro'vaJ^o^--pri5ject~injfcz^ving the
construction tff^^&^qwelling units and clubhouslCa 14-room bed^ajad^oreakfast
facility, and^O^OOO square feet of retail on a site witrra^gross totaTof approximately
24 acres. ^Eh©>tra^ris located on the east side of New York State Route 32 at the
Town of New Windsor municipal boundary, and the easterly part of the site abuts
both the Moodna Creek and Knox's Headquarters, which listed on the State and
National Register of Historic Places. The site itself also contains a dwelling that is
also Register-eligible. Central water and sewer services will need to be provided
for the site.
The Planning Board has determined the action to be Type I due to its abutting
Knox's Headquarters. The applicant has indicated the intent to prepare a Draft
Environmental Impact Statement and desires the matter of Lead Agency to be
established at the earliest possible juncture.
Date of Intent to Seek Lead Agency Resolution: October 6, 2003
Date of Mailing: October 27, 2003
Agency Address: Town of Cornwall Planning Board
Town Hall - 183 Main Street
Cornwall, New York 12518
Tel.(845) 534-9429

Back to top


C C \ /& ^c<"/f
BiCjOlif
OCT 2<9| 2003

Contact Person: Neil Novesky, Planning Board Chairman
Attachment: LF EAF Part I, site location on p/o Cornwall USGS topo quadrange
Involved and Interested Agencies:
Involved and Interested Agencies to Receive a Copy of the EIS and this Notice:
Town of Cornwall Town Board
183 Main Street
/
Cornwall, New York 12518
/
Town of New Windsor Town Board
/
555 Union Avenue
]/
New Windsor, New York 12553
NYS Department of Transportation - Region 8
attn: Planning Department
4 Burnett Boulevard
Poughkeepsie, NY 12603
NYS DEC Region 3
21 South Putt Corners Road
NewPaltz, NY 12561
NYS OPRHP
Field Services Bureau - Peebles Island
PO Box 189
Waterford, NY 12188-0189
Orange County Department of Planning
124 Main Street
Goshen, NY 10924


CORNWALL PLANNING BOARD MEETING
REGULAR MEETING
November 3, 2003
CALL TO ORDER
CORRESPONDENCE
DISCUSSION
DECISION
OLD BUSINESS
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
RESOLUTION
Jeheber
Village Center -
7:30 P.M.
Project#2001-16
Public Hearing
Meadowbrook Estates
Rt.94
Subdivision
Section: 4 Block: 1 Lot: 9.22&11
Project#2002-ll
Public Hearing
Versland
Old Rt. 32
Subdivision
Section: 36 Block: 1 Lot: 8&9
Project#2003-7
Lands of Raffaele Leone
Mineral Springs Road
Subdivision
Section: 30 Block: 2 Lot: 5
Project#2003-14
Project#2003-17
s
Satterly
281 Jackson Avenue
Subdivision
Section: 1 Block: 1 Lot: 10
No Maps
- Torres
111 Main Street
Day Care-Neg Dec
Section: 15 Block: 3 Lot: II
Project#2003-20
Gray/Douglas
16 Willow Avenue
Lot Line Change
Section: 22 Block: 1 Lot:
13
f

677.20
Appendix A
State Environmental Quality Review
FULL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM
Purpose: The full EAF is designed to help applicants and agencies determine, in an orderly manner, whether a project or action may
be significant. The question of whether an action may be significant is not always easy to answer. Frequently, there are aspects of
a project that sre subjective or unmeasurable. It is also understood that those who determine significance may have little or no formal
knowledge of the environment or may not be technically expert in environmental analysis. In addition, many who have knowledge
in one particular area may not be aware of the broader concerns affecting the question of significance.
The full EAF is intended to provide a method whereby applicants and agencies can be assured that the determination process
has been orderly, comprehensive in nature, yet flexible enough to allow introduction of information to fit a project or action.
Full EAF Components: The full EAF is comprised of three parts:
Part 1: Provides objective data and information about a given project and its site. By identifying basic project data, it assists
a reviewer in the analysis that takes place in Parts 2 and 3.
Part Z: Focuses on identifying the range of possible impacts that may occur from a project or action. It provides guidance
as to whether an impact is likely to be considered small to moderate or whether it is a potentlaliy-large impact. The
form also identifies whether an impact can be mitigated or reduced.
Part 3: If any impact in Part 2 is identified as potentiaily-large, then Part 3 is used to evaluate whether Dr not the impact is
actually important.
THIS AREA FOR LEAD AGENCY USE ONLY
DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE - Type 1 and Unlisted Actions
Identify the Portions of EAF completed for this project:
Parti
L_JPart
O Part
2
2
[
D
Part 3
Upon review of the information recorded on this EAF (Parts 1 and 2 and 3 if appropriate), and any other supporting information, and
considering both the magnitude and importance of each impact, it is reasonably determined by the lead agency that:
I""'') A. The project will not result in any large and important impact(s) and, therefore, is one which will not have a
significant impact on the environment, therefore a negative declaration will be prepared.
[_J B. Although the project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect
for this Unlisted Action because the mitigation measures described in PART 3 have been required, therefore
a CONDITIONED negative declaration will be prepared.*
[ J C. The project may result in one or more large and important impacts that may have a significant impact on the
environment, therefore a positive declaration will be prepared.
* A Conditioned Negative Declaration is only valid for Unlisted Actions
Site Plan Application - Chestnut Woods At Cornwall
Name of Action
Town of Cornwall
Name of Lead Agency
Print or Type Name of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency
Title of Responsible Officer
Signature of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency
Signature of Preparer (If different from responsible officer^
website
Date
Page 1 of 21

PART 1--PROJECT INFORMATION
Prepared by Project Sponsor
NOTICE: This document is designed to assist in determining whether the action proposed may have a significant effect on the
environment. Please complete the entire form, Parts A through E. Answers to these questions will be considered as part of the
application for approval and may be subject to further verification and public review. Provide any additional Information you believe
will be needed to complete Parts 2 and 3.
It is expected that completion of the full EAF will be dependent on information currently available and will not involve new studies,
research or investigation. If information requiring such additional work is unavailable, so indicate and specify each instance.
Name of Action S'tc ^'an APpl>cation - Chestnut Woods ar Cornwall
Location of Action (Include Street Address, Municipality and County)
Route 32 Town of Cornwall Orange County
Name of Applicant/Sponsor
Dr Morton Haber
Address 118 Tower Hill Road
City/PO Tuxedo Park
State NY
Zip Code 10937
Business Telephone
845-567-0822
Name of Owner (if different)
Address
City / PO
State
Zip Code
Business Telephone
Description of Action:
Site Plan Application seeking approval of 20,000 sq ft of retail space in the highway commercial zone,
and 228 residential units. 14 bed and breakfast units and clubhouse.
Page 2 of 21

Please Complete Each Question-Indicate N.A. if not applicable
A. SITE DESCRIPTION
Physical setting of overall project, both developed and undeveloped areas.
1. Present Land Use: [ | Urban
{_}Industrial
\*s
|Commercial
1/1 Residential (suburban)
| |Rural (non-farm)
f^l Forest
| (Agriculture j [other
Total acreage of project area.
23,96 acres.
APPROXIMATE ACREAGE
Meadow
or
Brushland (Non-agricultural)
Forested
Agricultural (Includes orchards, cropland, pasture, etc)
Wetland (Freshwater or tidal as per Articles 24,25 of ECL)
Water Surface Area
Unvegetated (Rock, earth or fill)
Roads, buildings and other paved surfaces
Other (Indicate type) Lawns, stormwater facilities
PRESENTLY
1.0
14.76
acres
acres
8.2 acres
acres
acres
acres
acres
AFTER COMPLETION
0.26 acres
1.0 acres
arrps.
8.2 arrp<;
acres
acres
5.0 acres
9.0 acres
3. What is predominant soil type(s) on project site?
a. Soil drainage:
fl_
(Well drained
% of site
8
*
1 Moderately well drained
70 % of site.
Qll Poorly drained
30_% of site
b. If any agricultural land is involved, how many acres of soil are classified within soil group 1 through 4 of the NYS Land
Classification System?
Q.acres (see 1 NYCRR 370).
4. Are there bedrock outcroppings on project site? |_J Yes
[jiT] No
a. What is depth to bedrock
5.0+ (in feet)
5. Approximate percentage of proposed project site with slopes:
[3 0-10%
20_%
(310- 15%
74 %
[7] 15% or greater JO %
6. Is project substantially contiguous to, or contain a building, site, or district, listed on the State or National Registers of
Historic Places?
[_j Yes
[•] No
7. is project substantially contiguous to a site listed on the Register of National Natural Landmarks?
Yes
H.M0
3. What is the depth of the water table?
0-6+ (in feet)
9. is site located over a primary, principal, or sole source aquifer?
{ |Yes
f ' | No
10 Do hunting, fishing or shell fishing opportunities presently exist in the project area?
| (Yes
\*\
No
Page 3 of 21

11. Does project site contain any species, of plant or animal lire that is identified as threatened or endangered?
LJves F?lNo
According to:
^
_
^
^
^
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
12. Are there any unique or unusual land forms on the project site? (i.e., cliffs, dunes, other geological formations?
Dves
B No
Descibe:
13. Is the project site presently used by the community or neighborhood as an open space or recreation area?
NO
If V&S., explain:
|
,_,
_ _
_
14. Does the present site include scenic views known to be important to the community?
[_jYes
No
15. Streams within or contiguous to project area
1
• "
Moodna Creek
a. Name of Stream and name of River to which it is tributary
16. J-akes, porids. wetland areas_^_^j"_Q|" cop_^[g"o^ ^o.P.rQ!^^...'?.r??.:.
f
Yes, ACOE wetland
b. Size (in acres);
Page 4 of 21

17 Is the site sRrvea by existing public utilities?
[[Jj Yes
[_J No
a. If YES, does sufficient capacity exist to allow connection?
tEjYes
No
b. If YES, will improvements be necessary to allow connection?
FiTlYes
F"~jfvlo
1 a. Is the site located in an agricultural district certified pursuant to Agriculture and Markets Law, Article 25-AA. Section 303 and
19.
'
304
's s
thth
?
e
e
sitsite
e
locatelocated
d
iin
n
0
oo
Ye
r
r
substantiasubstantiall
s
H
l yy
N
,
contiguou
o
conti
s to a Critical Environmental Area designated pursuant to Article 8 of the ECL,
and6NYCRR6l7? f^Yes
[T|No
20. Has the site ever been used Tor the disposal of solid or hazardous wastes?
F*~] Yes
f3^°
B. Project Description
1. Physical dimensions and scale of project (fill in dimensions as appropriate).
a. Total contiguous acreage owned or controlled by project sponsor:
23.96 acres.
b. Project acreage to be developed:
14.0 acres initially;
14.0 acres ultimately.
c. Project acreage to remain undeveloped: 9.96
acres.
d. Length of project, in miles:
NA_ (if appropriate)
e. If the project is an expansion, indicate percent of expansion proposed.
NA
%
f. Number of off-street parking spaces existing
0; proposed 300± including garages
g. Maximum vehicular trips generated per hour;
200_(upan completion of project)?
h. If residential: Number and type of housing units:
One Family
Two Family
Multiple Family
Condominium
Initially
228
Ultimately
228
i. Dimensions (in feet) of largest proposed structure:
35. height;
68, width;
305 length.
j. Linear feet of frontage along a public thoroughfare project will occupy is?
350,ft.
2. How much natural material (i.e. rock, earth, etc.) will be removed from the site?
NA tons/cubic yards.
3. Will disturbed areas be reclaimed
["jYes
LJNo
ilN/A
a. It yes, for what intended purpose is the site being reclaimed?
i Lawn and passive recreation
bc
.
. WilWill
l
topsoiupper l
subsoibe
stockpilel
be stockpiled
for reclamationd
for reclamation
?
?
L5jYes
LJ No
No
4. How many acres of vegetation (trees, shrubs, ground covers) will be removed from site''
5,0 acres,
Page 5 of 21

5 Will any mature forest (over 100 years old) or other locally-important vegetation be removed by this project?
• Yes
H No
6. If single phase project: Anticipated period of construction: NA months, (including demolition)
7. if multi-phased
a. Total number of phases anticipated
3_ (number)
b. Anticipated date of commencement phase 1:
Apr month 2005 year, (including demolition)
c. Approximate completion date of final phase:
Dec month
2008 year.
d. Is phase 1 functionally dependent on subsequent phases? |i J Yes
\ m
| No
8. Will blasting occur during construction?
[
| Yes (JJJ No
9. Number of jobs generated: during construction
120 ; after project is complete
10. Number of jobs eliminated by this project
°
.
11. Will project require relocation of any projects or facilities? [ , | Yes t.'J No
If yes, explain:
12. Is surface liquid waste disposal involved?
Yes 1*1 No
a. If yes, indicate type of waste (sewage, industrial, etc) and amount
b. Name of water body into which effluent will be discharged
13, is subsurface liquid waste disposal involved? [_J Yes
[_•] No
Type
14. Will surface area of an existing water body increase or decrease by proposal? E |Yes
If yes, explain:
No
15. Is project or any portion of project located in a 100 year flood plain? •
Yes
HNO
16. Will the project generate solid waste? L^J Yes L_J No
a. If yes, what is the amount per month?
150 tons
b. if yes, will an existing solid waste facility be used?
Yes JTINO
,f
„ Cornwall Refuse District
Cornwall NY
c. If yes, give name
u
; location
d. Will any wastes not go into a sewage disposal system or into a sanitary landfill? LJYes
H
No
Page 6 of 21
/.00
• d
ujessift
50/-bS/0t
S-t>0T.
19B
St>3
ZUN0hl0H?3DN^lSri3

e If yes, explain
No
IT""}
17 Will the project involve the disposal of solid waste?
t
j Yes
a. IF yes, what is the anticipated rate of disposal?
tons/month.
b If yes, what is the anticipated site life?
yeais.
18. Will project use herbicides or pesticides? | jYes
No
19. Will project routinely produce odors (more than one hour per day)?
\
Yes
jNo
20. Will project produce operating noise exceeding the local ambient noise levels? LJYes |"JNo
21, Will project result in an increase in energy use?
\j^_
Yes
\
j No
If yes, indicate type(s)
22. ir water supply is from wells, indicate pumping capacity
NA gallons/minute,
23. Total anticipated water usage per day 52 946 gallons/day.
24 Docs project involve Local, State or Federal funding? [ ] Yes _•_ No
If yes, explain:
Page 7 of 21
80S "d
wega'TT
£0/t>Z/0I
Si^I T3S 3t>8
ZJ.IMQfcOH$33NyXSri3

25. Approvals Required:
City. Town, Village Board
Eves
City. Town, Village Planning Board Eves
No
No
City, Town Zoning Board
City, County Health Department
Eves
Other Local Agencies
ves
E
Other Regional Agencies
ves
E
State Agencies
Federal Agencies
Eves
Dves B
No
No
No
No
No
No
Type
Zoning Petition
Submittal Date
Site Plan
Water Main Ext
NYSDEC
Sewer Main Ext
NYS DOT - Entrance
C- Zoning and Planning Information
1. Does proposed action involve a planning or zoning decision?
IT Yes, indicate decision required:
| " } Zoning amendment
j_J Zoning variance
[_J New/revision of master plan
| " 1 site plan
El Special use permit
[ I Resource management piar
Subdivision
PI Other
Page 8 of 21
600 *d uesS'TT
50/V2/0T
sf2T rse
sips
zxiMoyoHSaowisra

2
What is the zoning classification^) of the site?
Highway Commerical - HC
i Residential - R-3
3. What is the maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the present zoning?
[
6 240 Units
4. What is the proposed zoning of the site?
Highway Commerical - HC
Residential - R-3
5. What is the maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the proposed zoning?
6. Is the proposed action consistent with the recommended uses in adopted local land use plans?
[_J Yes
J_J No
7. What are the predominant land use(s) and zoning classifications within a
VA
mile radius of proposed action?
HC - Highway Commercial
R-3 - Residential
PID - Planned Interchange Development
8. Is the proposed acton compatible with adjoining/surrounding land uses with a Vo mile?
["ii'JYes
F~l No
9. If the proposed action is the subdivision of land, how many lots are proposed?
NA
a. What is the minimum lot si/e proposed?
Page 9 of 21
0T0 -d
-"e=;5:T:T
£O/tS/0T
SfrOT T3B 5t>3
211M0d0H'«3DNyiSn3

10. Will proposed action require any authorization^) for rhe formation of sewer or water districts? [_J Yes [«J No
1 'i. Will the proposed action create a demand for any community provided services (recreation, education, police, fire protection?
0Yes
[j|No
a. If yes, is existing capacity sufficient to handle projected demand?
{"J Yes
£ j No
12. Will the proposed action result in the generation of traffic significantly above present levels?
Yes H No
a. If yes, is the existing road network adequate to handle the additional traffic.
LjYes
J J No
0. Informational Details
Attach any additional information as may be needed to clarify your project If there are or may be any adverse impacts
associated with your proposal, please discuss such impacts and the measures which you propose to mitigate or avoid them.
E. Verification
I certify that the information provided above is true to the best of my knowledge.
Applicant/Sponsor Name Dr. Morton Haber
Date
Signature
Title
If the action is in the Coastal Area, and you are a state agency, complete the Coastal Assessment Form before proceeding with this
assessment.
Page 10 of 21
TT0 'd
^eeS'TT
SO/fS/OT
2f0l tSS St>8
21ir-104J0HS3aN^XSn3

McGOEY, HAUSER and EDSALL
CONSULTING ENGINEERS P.C.
RICHARD D. McGOEY, P.E . (NY&PA)
WILLIAM J. HAUSER, P.E. (NY&NJ)
MARK J. EDSALL, P.E. (NY.NJ&PA)
JAMES M. FARR, P.E. (NY&PA)
I ] Main Office
33 Airport Center Drive
Suite #202
New Windsor, New York 12553
(845)567-3100
e-mail:
mheny@mhepc.com
II
Regional Office
507 Broad Street
Milford, Pennsylvania 18337
(570) 296-2765
e-mail:
mhepa@mhepc.com
Writer's E-mail Address:
mje(a)jiihepc. com
TOWN OF NEW WINDSOR
PLANNING BOARD
REVIEW COMMENTS
PROJECT NAME:
PROJECT LOCATION:
PROJECT NUMBER:
DATE:
DESCRIPTION:
CORNWALL COMMONS MAJOR SUBDIVISION
NYS ROUTE 9W
SECTION 37 - BLOCK 1 - LOT 45.1
00-06
27 AUGUST 2003
THE APPLICATION PROPOSES THE SUBDIVISION OF THE 52.8+/- ACRE
PARCEL INTO SIXTY-SIX (66) SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS. THE
APPLICATION WAS PREVIOUSLY REVIEWED AT THE 22 MARCH 2000, 24
APRIL 2002, 14 MAY 2003, 9 JULY 2003 AND 23 JULY 2003 PLANNING BOARD
MEETINGS.
This application is part of an overall Cornwall Commons development, which spans the Town line into the
Town of Cornwall. The Town of Cornwall Planning Board is also considering a subdivision application in
their PIO zone for a subdivision. Both the Cornwall and New Windsor Planning Boards have adopted
Findings and have concluded SEQRA.
The applicant has returned at this meeting seeking Preliminary approval such that they can proceed
the preparation of application packages to the various State and County agencies.
with
2.
I have no objection to consideration of Preliminary approval, with the understanding that all agency approval
packages are subject to Town review (as well as Town and Village of Cornwall, where applicable), and a
coordination meeting with New Windsor's highway superintendent to discuss stormwater system layouts, etc.
3.
The applicant is reminded that final plans will require all metes and bounds, seal/signature of a licensed
surveyor, and final verification of zoning compliance of all lots. Also, the applicant is reminded of the need to
petition for the creation of a drainage district in support of the common drainage facilities in New Windsor.
Mark/T. Edsall, P^T,\P.P.
Plarmintj Board Engineer
MJli/st
NW00-06-27Aug03.doc

FIRE INSPECTOR'S
INTER-OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE
Town Planning Board
Frank Malloy, Asst. Fire Inspector
Cornwall Commons
10 September 2003
Planning Board Reference Number: PB-00-06
Date Received: 8-20-2003
Fire Prevention Reference Number: FPS-03-039
A review of the above referenced subdivision plans was conducted on
10 September 2003, with the following being noted:
1)
Need: layout and dimension of cul-de-sac
The plans at this time are unacceptable.
Plans Dated: April 21, 2003
Frank Ma^y
Asst. Fire Inspector
FM/dh
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
DATE:

Back to top


Cornwall Alliance for Responsible Development, CARD
22j3ak Street, Cornwall, New York 12518
•: 845-534-4884, FAX: 845-534-2445
DATE:
TO:
Re:
yers, Town Supervisor, Town of New Windsor
Avenue, New Windsor, New York 12518
CARD Cornwall Commons letters cc to Meyers and

Back to top


Enclosed Documents
1) General Documents:
SUPERVI^QRyOFFICE
Riverkeeper's notice of intent to sue Cornwall Commons, 7/2/030 (5 pages)
CARD Press Release, 6/27/03
(1 page)
CARD Op Ed, June 26, 2003
(1 page)
Orange Environment letter, Planning Board/Supervisor 6/15/03 (2 pages)
2) CARD letters with cc to Meyers:
NYSDOT, Dennison, 7/1
NYSDEC, Moran, 6/29
Town of Cornwall Planning Board/Lead Agency, 6/27
NYSDEC, Moran, 6/20
Town of Cornwall Supervisor, Sol lam i, 6/20
Town of Cornwall Supervisor, Sollami, 6/18
(2 pages)
(2 pages)
(1 page)
(2 pages)
(2 pages)
(1 page)
Page 1 of20
U
/^-^
Ufy2U>^ /
fatsS^

efs/eejceBflee.
July 2,2003
Cornwall Commons, L.L.C.
P.O. Box 503
Highland Mills, NY I093O
Joseph Amato
Kent Management Corporation
600 Rt. 33
Highland Mill, NY 10930
Robert G. Torgersen
Landscape Architecture and Environmental Services
Three Main Drive
Nanuet,NY 10954
RE:
Notice of Intent to Sue Cornwall Commons, LX.C, Kent Management Corporation,
and Landscape Architecture and Environmental Services for Imminent Clean Water Act
Violations at a Planned Development Site Known as "Cornwall Commons," Located on
U.S. Route 9W in the Towns of Cornwall and New Windsor, NY.
Dear Sirs:
This letter constitutes RiverkeeperJs NOTICE OF INTENT TO SUE me Cornwall Commons,
L.L.C, Kent Management Corporation, and Landscape Architecture an(^nvh:onmental Services
(herein after "Cornwall Commons'*) for imminent violations of the federal Clean) Water Act
("CWA"), 33 U.S.C. §1251 et sea... The waterways in dispute exist on Al97J aire lot of
delineated land owned by Cornwall Commons, located northwest of N,Y\S. Route 9W, in the
vicinity of Route 218 ramps, extending to Frost Lane on the south, and adjsujjmg the former O &
W Railway line on the west, in the Towns of Cornwall and New Windsor, Orange County, New
York. Specifically, this letter gives notice of our intent to seek redress for anticipated illegal,
dredging and filling of a federally regulated wetland and intermittent stream by the Cornwall
Commons without a proper permit pursuant to 33 U.S.C. § 1344.
Riverkeeper protects and safeguards the ecological integrity of the Hudson River,, its tributaries,
and the New York City Drinking Water Supply, On behalf of our members, we routinely file
citizen suits under the CWA to prevent and remediate environmental pollution problems. Many
of our members and constituents live near and routinely recreate in and on the waters of the
Moodna Creek watershed, which will be harmed by the proposed development.
25 Wing & Wing • Garrison, NY 10524-9910 • 845424.4149•fax: 845424.4150 •
wwwjiverkeeper.org

Cornwall Commons' Proposed Development Will Violate the Clean Water Act
The CWA prohibits the dredging and filling of navigable waterways except when pursuant to
and in compliance with a permit See 33 U.S.C. § 1311(a); 33U.S.C. § 1342. The determination
of non-navigability by the United States Aimy Corps of Engineers ("Corps") is subject to
arbitrary and capricious review, based on the consideration of relevant factors or whether there
has been a clear error of judgment See Citizens to Preserve,Overton Park, Inc. v. Volpe, 401
U.S. 402,416 (1971); 5 TJ.S.C. § 706(2). The CWA defines "navigable waters" as "Waters of the
United States." See 33 U.S.C. § 1362(7), Waters of the United States include all rivers, lakes,
ponds, streams, and other surface waters connected to traditionally navigable waterways. See
United States v. Riverside BayvJew Homes. Inc.. 474 U.S. 121, 88 (1985)., The Supreme Court
has recognized Congress5 intent under the Clean Water Act to protect waters that may not be
traditionally navigable yet still maintain a surface water connection. See Id., at 133. hi 2001 r the
Supreme Court refused to extend CWA jurisdiction to so called "isolated" wetlands (wetlands
without a surface water connection to traditionally navigable waterways) whose sole basis for
jurisdiction is the use by migratory birds. See Solid Waste Agency ofNorthem Cook County v.
United States Army Corps of Engineers. 531 U.S. 159,121 S.Ct 675 (2001). The Act defines
"pollutant" to include solid waste, dredged spoils rock, and sand. 33 U.S.C. § 1362(6). "Point
source" is defined as "any discemable, confined and discrete conveyance, including but not
limited to any pipe, ditch, channel, tunnel, conduit, well, discrete fissure.. .from which pollutants
are or may be discharged " 33 U.S.C. § 1362(14).
Cornwall Commons is proceeding with plans to develop over a federally protected wetland and
stream without a CWA permit, violating 33 U.S.C. § 1344, 33 C.F.R. § 328 (2) and (3), 33
C.F.R. § 328(a)(7). The stream in question runs north-by-riortheast from "Wetland E" and drains
into Moodna Creek. Construction activities during development will likely resulting in the
grading over, filling, dredging, and altering of the stream, and possibly of Wetland E,
introducing into those waters dirt, sand, solid waste and other construction debris. The
development site map shows several lots and roadways situated directly in the stream bed.
Therefore, we hereby place Cornwall Commons on notice, pursuant to sections 505(a) and (b) of
the CWA, 33 U.S.C. § 1365(a) and (b), for anticipatory violations of effluent standards and
limitations as defined by CWA § 505 (f), 33 U.S.C. § 1365(f), by discharging pollutants into
waters of the United States without a permit required under CWA section 301(a), 33 U.S.C. §
1311(a).
The Corps Erroneously Classified Wetland £ as an "Isolated" Wetland.
Five freshwater wetland watersheds have been identified at the site of dispute. They are
identified as Wetland A, C, D, E, and an unnamed smaller wetland on the northwest bank of the
property line. Wetlands A C, and D have been deemed by the Corps to be federally regulated.
The regulatory status of Wetland E, however, was deteirmined by the Corps on June 6,2001 to be
not within federal jurisdiction due to isolation (lack of surface water connection between a
wetland and a navigable waterway). This determination was based on a visual survey of the site
by a Corps investigator. The Corps' June 6,2001 finding of non-jurisdiction for Wetland E
contradicts their earlier survey observations, made on April 8,1999, which noted a stream
outflow exiting from Wetland E.
2

Hydroquest Documented Substantial Flows from Wetland E Through an Intermittent
Stream and Into Moodna Creek.
A hydrological survey conducted by Hydroquest hydrologist Paul Rubin found an intermittent
stream outflow from Wetland E (a seasonal wetland 2.5 acres in size) to the Moodna Creek (a
navigable waterway), consistent with initial Corps findings on April 8,1999. See Attachment A.
Hydroquest conducted its survey on September 29,2002, during the normal wet season. The
documented total rainfall between September and November of 2002 for the state of New Yor^
according to the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration, was approximately
17.42 inches. See National Aeronautic and Atmospheric Administration, National Climate Data
Center,
US Climate at a Glance, available at
http://climvis.ncdc.noaa.gov/cgi-
bin/cag3/hr_display3,pl (last modified June 19,2003). This is almost twice the documented 9.89
inches received from June through August of 2001, when the Corps conducted their June
6f
2001
survey. See National Aeronautic and Atmospheric Administration, National Climate Data
Center,
US Climate at a Glance, available at
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/
research/cag3/Y8.html (last modified June 19,2003). Paul Rubin suggests that the timing of the
visual survey on June 6,2001, during a dry month of a drought year, is one reason why an
intermittent stream was not visually noticeable to the Corps' inspectors. See Attachment A, at 3.
This determination, therefore, may in fact be arbitrary and capricious, especially given the fact
that the Corps admits observing a flow on April 8,1999. Since Wetland E has a surface water
connection to the Moodna Creek and the Hudson River, it is not the character of wetland
excluded from jurisdiction pursuant to Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County v. United
States Army Corps of Engineers, 531 U.S. 159,121 S.Ct 675 (2001).
According to the Hydroquest survey, only one outlet was observed at Wetland E, coinciding with
a low drainage channel along a stone wall. See Attachment A, Fig. 1. Physical evidence of high
outflow was discernable based on the presence of "washed, relatively leaf-free, channel,, washed
cobbles, stream aligned twigs and leaf stems, matted leaves^ and small vegetal debris dams." See
Attachment A, at 3. The width of th&high flow channel (measured with a taut level line above
the channel) measured to be 12.8 feet. When formerly full,, the channel had a maximum depth of
0.74 feet with a water-filled cross-sectional area of 5.4 ft2. IcL The cross sectional measurements
of the channel depicted in Figure 1 is exaggerated (2X vertical exaggeration), but the relative
dimensions of the channel are to scale. Id.
Hydroquest compared the outflow channel from Wetland C to the outflow channel from Wetland
E and observed that the drainage basin of Wetland E is larger than Wetland C. Id, at 4. Since the
physical setting and condition of both sites were virtually identical, and given that Wetland Ers
outflow channel is larger than that of Wetland C, Hydroquest suggested that the stream outflow
from Wetland E must also be intermittent. Id; Hydroquest identified. Wetland E's stream outflow
as a defined tributary system (i.e. stream channel), meeting the criteria of waters of the United
States under section 404 of the CWA. Id.
Relative to the site development map submitted by Cornwall Commons^ this intermittent stream
flows from the northern corner of Wetland E following northeasterly through the northern tip of
the Town of Cornwall, into the proposed development that is to occur in the southern point of the
Town of New Windsor, and ultimately into Moodna Creek. See Attachment A, Fig. 1. The flow
3

of this stream shgfa% parallels and is within a mile o£Ri. 9W. As noted above, the proposed
roadways
$n&
lots will directly impact the stream in several places.
Wetland £ and its outfall stream are ecologically Important Awarding to renowned ecological
consultant JJG. Barbour, who conducted several surveys of die site in question, several
^threatened species" of flora have been discovered in and around Wetland E. These include a
prevalent population <ofweak steliage sed^j^dpossibly alsoI3ie threatened floral species of
Emmons sedge, which have been ohserved in abundance throughout WetlandsC and D, Faunal
populations of Jefferson salamander and Blue-spotted salamander, both "species of special
concern" in the State ofNew York, have also been identified in and around Wetland E.
This Notice of Intent to SuesuSScientiy states grounds Jfor filing suit Anyacts by Cornwall
Commons to dredge, fill, alter, or disturb Wetland
E
and its ont&ll stream without a permit will
be m violation of 33 U5.C§ 1344. Asnotedin3U.S.C § 1319(d) and 40Ci7JR-§ 19.4,
violators are subjectlo a civllpenaay not to exceedSSl^OQ for each of ;such violation. At the
close of the 60-day notice period, unless significant progress is made in remedying and
preventing ^iese violations, we intend to ;fiTeaeiti2^siiitagamst Cornwall Cornmons pursuant
to33U.SjC. §1365 (a) for violations of 33 U.3.C. § 1344 and all violations that occur after
receipt of this nonce letter. Pursuant to the CWA, we wll seekpenalties, attorney's fees and
costs,as well as an injimctioh against envh^^
violations. During the 60-4ay CWA notice
period, "we wouldbe willing to discuss effectivie^Demedies for the violations noted in this letter.
If you wish to pursuesuchdiscussions in the absence of htigation, we^suggest that you initiate
those-discussions withinten (1$) days<©f receiving this notices© that a meeting can be arranged
andsertiementnegotiations may cornpletedhefore the endefthenoticeperiod. At the close of
the notice period, unless signi&cantprogressis made in i^nedying and preventing these
violations, we intend to file a citizen suit against Cornwall Commons under CWA § 505(a), 33
ILS.C. § 1365(a),and33 UJS.C. $ 1344.
If you wish to discuss these matters mirther, please do nothesitate to contact the undersigned at
(S45)424-4149 x-230.
Very truly^Eours
Basil Seggos
Investigator
Jusun Bloom
Staff Attorney
4

Cc:
Christie Whitman, Administrator
United States Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW
Washington, D.C. 20460
John Ashcroft, Attorney General
UnTted^tatesi3errai1rnentT>f Justice
10th Street & Constitution Ave., NW
Washington, D.C. 20530
Jane M. Kenny, Regional Administrator
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Region II
290 Broadway
New York, NY 10007-1866
Erin M. Crotty, Commissioner
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
625 Broadway
Albany, NY 12233-1011
Marc Moran, Regional Administrator
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Region 3
21 South Putt Corners Road
New Paltz, NY 12561-1696 .
5

Back to top


Cornwall Alliance for Responsible Development, CARD
22
Oak
Street,
Cornwall, New York
12518
Phone:
845-534-4884 FAX: 845-534-2445

Back to top


Army Corp Mishandles Wetland Classification: For Release, June 27,2003
• In May of 2000, the Town of Cornwall Planning Board had been designated SEQRA Lead Agency for the
Generic Environmental Review of a proposed Cornwall Commons development plan slated for a large
forested parcel on the bo/de/oflCornwall and New Windsor—
143 acres of which are in the Town of
Cornwall, the remaining 5z of which He within the Town of New Windsor, near the Hudson River.
• On January 9, 2001, the\jLJnjtea States Supreme Court ruled on
the Federal status of "isolated wetlands"
in Solid Waste Agency ofNorth Cook County v. U.S. Army Corp of Engineers No. 99-1178.
The court
ruled that isolated waters can no longer be classified as Waters of the United States as defined under section
404 of the Clean Water Act.
• A SEQRA public hearing on Cornwall Commons was held on October 7,2002. In response to the
complex
hydrology and wetlands present at the Cornwall Commons site, renowned hydrologist, Paul Rubin,
was hired
by Cornwall Alliance for Responsible Development (CARD) and Cornwall Citizens for
Appropriate Development CCAD to
do a study of the site
and submit his report to the Planning Board
Lead Agency.
The hydrology report submitted by Rubin to both the Army Corp of Engineers and to the SEQRA
Lead Agency
documents the
hydrological connection between a large and highly productive wetland
known as Wetland "E," and Moodna Creek, a tributary to the Hudson River.
It also identified other
key features and characteristics of the site's hydrology and wetland systems.
• Rubin's documentation, dated October 9, 2002, of an
intermittent stream-flow connection between
Wetland "E" and Moodna Creek was offered as a revision to a June 6,2001 jurisdictional survey
performed by the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers (USACOE).
In a letter dated, June 26, 2001, USACOE
agent, Brian Orzel, states, "this wetland
appears
to be isolated" (emphasis added). Rubin's documentation
refutes Orzel's statement.
• An April 15, 2003 Findings Statement completely ignored Rubin's hydrology report.
The reqord cites
no further studies, surveys or responses to Rubin's report. A
complete disregard for expert scientific
documentation and conclusions
flies in the face of SEQRA and Federal Law.
• CARD has contacted local, State and Federal officials
requesting that no further approvals or actions be
taken relative to Cornwall Commons until such time as the planning board's and Army Corp's
mishandling of Rubin's report is resolved.
As of this release, there has been no response to CARD'S
numerous letters and inquiries to the Army Corp of Engineers and the Town of Cornwall Planning Board.
Orange Environment and other environmental organizations concur with CARD'S findings to date.
Contact: Mauro Parisi, Chairman, CARD, 845-534-4884
Page 1 of 1

Back to top


Cornwall Alliance for Responsible Development, CARD
22 Oak Street, Cornwall, New York 12518
Tel: 845-534-4884, Fax.: 845-534-2445
FOR OP ED SECTION

Back to top


Holding the Environmental Line
June 26, 2003
Environmentalism in America needs to be seen against the backdrop of big business and
big money. On the one hand, we have concerned citizens and organizations, along with a
growing number of enlightened public officials; on the other hand, we have highly
motivated development interests with formidable financial and political resources.
Americans are, for the most part, an environmentally conscious people. With the
possible exception of right-wing die hards, and indifferent corporations, most Americans
believe that environmental regulations and laws are necessary for protecting our
environment and our natural resources.
What most people are not aware of is the fact that (with all of our regulations,
environmental organizations, and individual activists) many sensitive resources continue
to disappear on a daily basis. The problem lies not so much with existing laws and
regulations (although, in some cases, this is also true), but at the implementation level.
It has been said that everything happens locally, i.e., in a village, a city, a township, a
county. Many environmental decisions are made at the local level in town and village
halls across the country. To illustrate the difficulty of holding the environmental line at
the local level, let's look at the example of a developer who purchases a large tract of
land in a Township (let's say a two-hundred-acre parcel) for the purpose of development.
Now the developer makes it known to local officials that he or she would like to develop
the site as a mega-mall, a senior housing project, an industrial park, or whatever.
Many towns and villages struggle with increasing property taxes, the need for more
revenue, escalating education costs, a sagging economy, and more~not to mention, a
shortage of qualified public servants, and a general over-reliance on less than impartial
local consultants.
Big developers specialize in selling projects to 'Town Hall,' coming fully equipped with
an arsenal of capital and resources that outstrips that of most small municipalities.
Attorneys, advertising consultants, development consultants, and a variety of other
"experts" are on call to support the developer's claims.
Page 1 or 2

LNVIRONMENI
X'nft&'bKtork
/MT£-KOGn (V£.£u^7*fc
June 15,2003
Neil Novesky, Chair, and members ofthe Planning Board
\S fa ^ ^
/&"«*«/
CC: Jim Sollami, Supervisor and Trustees
^
p
,.
'
Town of Cornwall
c-c
v /"-^
^o/f ^ ^ t
re: Cornwall Commons
Dear Mr. Novesky and Planning Board Members:
pending * . outcome of/review
Sffi J £
E^ZT£S ?
"*""
*
^
fromconS^^^
USACOEit/ ^
** ^
"» "* « ™d -ciu^SS " and
2'
SSstaUmdicates
that
,
it
ifnis
no
f
mor°
E a
e
Tisolate
e ^ ^d ^
than
WetlM
the othe
d E
r wetland
as *»*«s »
on
^ethn
e Drooertour
reviev w
k
hydrologically connected to the Moodna system andX
r^?r
^ P ^ '
I
undergoing challenge,
^
'
*e Corps
findm Sts »dis Pute
and
3.
Tie statement by developer's counsel Cappello that development ofthe parcel will
aTlf^Tt 0
**»?«&*•
CaUSi"8 h » ™d ^ -ologTcafchange
m

Back to top


J .^SaS^ ^
ftoracor^iderationXTw^sXllritJ 0Wn
^t o how ^ w«^ d disappeared
* . that it exists and that
^^Z^T^^TJZ :
* * "*
**
order to resolve this dispute aLTv i«! H
. administrative court should be convened in
jurisdictionaoutcomdispute
e
oveof r
thil
th^^^JS^"^*s e
disputfact
thatlhe
can
e
bwetlane seen
d E
"^^S^X^^
system
Z^^T1^™*
1 ^
'
gWe
**
n * *
"
^
E
iS no
-
punted on recycled paper
f%
I «pz-

development should be approved and if so what mitigations will be required. In sum, these
questions trigger the need to convene an administrative court to resolve the issue. In addition to
delaying issuance of a final approval for the project, we ask the Board to take steps to resolve the
aforementioned dispute through an administrative court.
Finally, if for no other reason than the fact that the current impact review gives the
appearance of covering up the existence and consideration for this wetland, the board should
suspend action 0"n this matter until the USACOE issue is resolved and until the dispute of facts is
resolved by a trier of truth.
Sincerely,
Uchaei R. Edelstein, President
\*
5,c. ,
P«3<

IMMEDIATE ATTENTION REQUESTED
Mauro Salvatore Parisi, Chairman
Cornwall Alliance for Responsible Development, CARD
22 Oak Street, Cornwall, New York 12518
July 1,2003
Robert Dennison, Director, Region 8
State of New York Department of Transportation
4 Bernett Boulevard
Poughkeepsie, New York 12603
Re: NYS DOT Cornwall Commons, Rte. 9W requests/permits/approvals/plans
Dear Mr. Dennison:
We are writing to you regarding the status of the proposed Cornwall Commons project in the Towns of
Cornwall and New Windsor adjacent to Route 9W. We hereby request that all NYS DOT actions,
approvals, permits, applications, etc. be withheld until such time as issues relating the mishandling of
the New York State SEQRA process relative to a Federal component of the proposed project is fully
addressed and resolved (please list below).
As president of Cornwall Citizens for Appropriate Development (CCAD), I first made contact with
you on the above-captioned matter, via fax letter dated June 16, 1999 which was responded to by Mrs.
Jennifer P. Clark, NYS DOT Design Manager, in a letter dated June 24, 1999. Among other things,
she acknowledged our request to be placed on your agency's mailing list for the subject project and
confirmed this would be done.
At that time, we also contacted Gerry Wertzel, Jr., Design Group, NYS DOT Region 8 in a letter dated
June 16, 1999 regarding NYS DOT-related information on the proposed Cornwall Commons/
Cornwall School District/Rte. 9W development plan. We received a response letter from him dated
June 21, 1999. The letter was helpful in clarifying the NYS DOT's involvement at that time.
As both acting president of CCAD and as the Chairman of Cornwall Alliance for Responsible
Development (CARD), I am writing you to inform you of the following circumstances surrounding
the current Cornwall Commons proposal:
1) A SEQRA public hearing for a Cornwall Commons DGEIS was held on October 7, 2002.
2) CARD and CCAD presented extensive comments including scientific testimony on the nature and
quality of important onsite wetlands. A hydrology report by Hydrologist Paul Rubin was presented
to demonstrate that a large centrally located wetland, thought to be non-jurisdictional, should, in
fact, be classified as jurisdictional.
(continued)

(Re: NYS DOT Cornwall Commons, Rte. 9W requests, etc., Dennison, July 1, 2003)
3) An FGEIS was accepted by the Town of Cornwall Planning Board acting as SEQRA Lead Agency
on March 10,2003.
4) A Findings Statement was approved on April 15th.
5) Rubin's duly submitted report was completely ignored—absolutely no response, comment or
statement related to Rubin's documentation.
6) As of a May 20, 2003 Lane and Tully revised Cornwall Commons site map the Wetland in
question, Wetland "E" disappears from the map.
7)
On June 2nd the Town of Cornwall Planning Board granted preliminary approval to a five-lot
subdivision of the Cornwall Commons Parcel—pending further approvals and input from
the NYS DOT.
8) Since these events, CARD has been contacting local, state, and federal officials pointing to the total
disregard for important scientific information on a pivotal, nationally significant, environmental
issue.
9) In numerous letters to public officials including a letter to Congresswoman Sue Kelly; several
letters to NYS DEC Region 3 Director Marc Moran; numerous letters to the Town of Cornwall
Planning Board and Town of Cornwall Supervisor Jim Sollami; and a letter to Town of New
Windsor Supervisor George Meyers
CARD has requested that no further actions, approvals, or
permits be granted until the matter of Wetland "E" and site hydrology are resolved.
We, therefor, hereby request, especially in light of the above and in particular point number
seven (7), that the NYS DOT take no further action with regard to actions, plans, proposals,
approvals, applications, etc. related to Cornwall Commons until such time as the issues
surrounding Wetland "E" and site hydrology are fully addressed and resolved.
For further information and/or documentation, please call 845-534-4884 or fax us at 845-534-2445.
Sincerely,
Mauro Parisi. Chairman, CARD
cc: Congresswoman Sue Kelly
Marc Moran, Region 3 Director, NYS DEC
* Neil Novesky, Chairman, Town of Cornwall Planning Board/ SEQRA Lead agency
Jim Sollami, Supervisor, Town of Cornwall
George Meyers, Supervisor, Town of New Windsor
Basil Seggos, Esq., Riverkeeper. Inc
Manna Jo Green, Environmental Directror, Hudson River Sloop Clearwater
Michael Edelstein, President, Orange Environment, Inc.
Paul Rubin, Hydrologist
J.G. Barbour, P.C.
Page 2 of2

Back to top


IMMEDIATE ATTENTION REQUESTED
Mauro Salvatore Parisi, Chairman
Cornwall Alliance for Responsible Development, CARD
22 Oak Street, Cornwall, New York 12518
June 29, 2003
Marc Moran, Regional Director
NYSDEC, Region 3
21 South Putt Corners Road
New Paltz, New York 12561
fb !? &
k
M
3 0 2003
¥-
Dear Mr. Moran:
Re: Cornwall Commons Wetlands, FGEIS & SEQRA: No Response
As you know, from recent letters, we have been paying very close attention to the handling of Wetland
"E" and the site hydrology at Cornwall Commons. We have delivered, mailed and faxed numerous
letters over the past several weeks. Unfortunately, we have yet to receive a single response to our
important questions and concerns. For the record, here is a list of our communications to date ('SR'
indicates 'stamped received'):
• Three (3) letters to: Planning Board Chairman Neil Novesky
- letter of June 6th (SR, June 6th);
letter of June 16th (SR, June 17th); cc in heading of June 20th Sollami letter cited below (SR, June
23rd)
Five (5) letters to: Town of Cornwall Supervisor Jim Sollami
- cc copy of June 6th Novesky
letter cited above—submitted under separate cover (SR, June 6th); letter of June 13th (SR, June
16th)*; letter of June 16th (SR, June 17th); letter of June 18th (SR, June 18th); letter of June 20th (SR,
June 23rd).
*As of this writing, the only "response " to any of these letters is a June 23r letter acknowledging
CARD's June 13th letter to Sollami cited above.
• One (1) letter to Town of New Windsor Supervisor George Meyers
- letter of June 13th (SR,
June 16th)
As of this writing, an acknowledgement letter, dated June ltfh', has been received.
• One (I) letter to: USACOE Western Permits Director George JVieves
- letter of June 10th (fax
transmission report dated June 10th)
• One (1) letter to: USACOE Agent Brian Orzel
- letter of June 9th (fax transmission report dated
June 9th)
fp
(continued)
A 1MB IS ." i? I
'Q
SUN 3 0 2003
Rr'lrC.-. .:

(Re: Cornwall Commons Wetlands, FGEIS & SEQRA: No Response, Moran, June 29, 2003)
Most of the above-listed letters have been forwarded to you as attachments.
In light of the seriousness of the issues being raised, and in light of the fact that the applicant/developer
is in the process of submitting requests to the NYSDOT relative to site plans, road designs, and traffic
safety, we would greatly appreciate a response from all involved parties on the issues of: Wetland "E,"
site hydrology, ACOE jurisdiction, Paul Rubin's hydrology report, and the lack of proper SEQRA
review.
We fully expect that no action(s) will be taken on the part of any involved agency until such time as
these matters have been fully resolved.
We look forward to your response.
Sincerely,
Mauro Parisi, Chairman, CARD
Attachment:
CARD letter to Town of Cornwall Planning Board Chairman Neil Novesky, Members of the Planning J
C/-
Board and SEQRA Lead Agency, dated June 27, 2003 (stamped 'received,' June 30, 2003)
&fi°[&
cc: Neil Novesky, Chairman, Town of Cornwall Planning Board
Jim Sollami, Supervisor, Town of Cornwall
George Meyers, Supervisor, Town of New Windsor
Dr. William Schuster, Chairman, Town of Cornwall Conservation Advisory Council
Basil Seggos, Esq., Riverkeeper. Inc
Manna Jo Green, Environmental Directror, Hudson River Sloop Clearwater
Michael Edelstein, President, Orange Environment, Inc.
Paul Rubin, Hydrologist
J.G. Barbour, P.C.
Page 2 of 2

IMMEDIATE ATTENTION REQUESTED
Mauro Salvatore Parisi, Chairman, CARD
22 Oak Street, Cornwall New York 12518
June 27, 2003
Town of Cornwall Planning Board Members
SEQRA Lead Agency for Cornwall Commons
183 Main Street, Cornwall, New York 12518
aura*
m i %
2003
'•
i OWN CLERK
J OWN OF CORNWALL

Back to top


-W W^
¥^^
Re: Cornwall Commons SEQRA & Wetland "E"~SEIS requested
Dear Chairman Novesky, Members of the Planning Board and SEQRA Lead Agency:
As Lead Agency for the Cornwall Commons Generic Environmental Impact Statement and SEQRA
review process, and whereas:
1)
your April 15, 2003 Findings Statement fails to either address or acknowledge the hydrology
data submitted by Hydrologist Paul Rubin in connection with Wetland "E," and site hydrology
2)
Rubin's information was essential in determining the significance of Wetland "E" and was made
available on October 7, 2002 (oral and written testimOny)~further confirmed on June 22, 2003
3)
Rubin's information represented data beyond anything provided by the U.S. Army Corp of
Engineers since Brian Orzel's site visit of June 26, 2001
4)
Generic Environmental Impact Statements that require updating in the light of new information
may be reopened by means of a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) and the
attendant review process
5)
Lead Agencies have the authority to call for an SEIS
we strongly recommend that the issues surrounding Wetland "E" be addressed in the context of an SEIS.
We look forward to your response.
Respectfully,
Mauro Parisi, Chairman, CARD
, . .
cc: Supervisor Jim Sollomi, Town of Cornwall.
George Meyers, Supervisor, Town of New Windsor
Marc Moran, Regional Director, NYSDEC, Region 3
Dr. William Schuster, Chairman, Town of Cornwall Conservation Advisory Council
Basil Seggos, Esq., Riverkeeper, Inc
Manna Jo Greene, Environmental Director, Hudson River Sloop Clearwater, Inc.
Michael Edelstein, President, Orange Environment, Inc
Paul Rubin, Hydrologist
J.G. Barbour, P.C.

IMMEDIATE ATTENTION REQUESTED
Mauro Salvatore Parisi, Chairman CARD
22 Oak Street
Cornwall, New York 12518
June 20, 2003
Jim Sollami, Supervisor
cc: Planning Board Chairman, Neil Novesky
Town of Cornwall
183 Main Street
Cornwall, New York 12518
^/\;;
*<^
&
5 pi
-•"5 3
2KB T^-fr.f*
Re: Cornwall Commons & Wetland 'E,' key concerns
Dear Mr. Sollami:
As mentioned in our recent letters to you, we have communicated with Town of New Windsor '
Supervisor George Meyers on the issues related to Wetland 'E' at the Cornwall Commons site and have
met with the finest example of administrative cooperation from his office. (June 16 letter from Meyers
attached.)
We have received no notification of the availability of minutes from either the Town Planning Board
meeting of July 2, 2003 or the Town Board meeting of June 9, 2003.
To date, we have not received a response to any of our stamped "received" letters, since June 6, 2003,
addressed to you and/or Planning Board Chairman Novesky. This is difficult to understand in light of
the gravity of these matters.
Please see Paul Rubin's e-mail to USACOE, Brian Orzel, re: Wetland
"E" Hydrology dated June 22, 2003 (attached).
It is clear, from SEQRA Law, that a "hard look" at substantive environmental issues and data presented
by government agencies and by the public is required. In the case of our Planning Board's SEQRA
review of Cornwall Commons: .
1)
There is no proof of a SEQRA-responsive "hard look" or, for that matter, of any look at all at
Paul Rubin's hydrology report in key documents including but not limited to the approved
FGEIS and Findings Statement, and Town Planning Board minutes since October of 2002.
2)
This procedural error culminates in a lack of response and consideration of the data presented in
Rubin's report, especially, by the USACOE, since the report should have triggered a tile review
by the USACOC with a timely response.
(continued)

(Re: Cornwall Commons & Wetland 'E,' key concerns, CARD, June 20, 2003)
For these two reasons alone, we hereby request that the SEQRA process be reopened to include a "hard
look" at Rubin's report regarding hydrology and Wetland 'E' at the Cornwall Commons site. (Also, see
attached letter to Chairman Novesky, with a cc to you, from Michael Edelstein, President of Orange
Environment, dated June 15, 2003.)
We will also be communicating directly with the NYSDEC on SEQRA.
We look forward to a speedy response to both this letter, and the several we have sent you and Chairman
Novesky over the past two weeks on the issue of Cornwall Commons, SEQRA, and Wetland "E."
Also, we hereby repeat our June 18th written request for a meeting with you and Chairman Novesky
regarding our issues and concerns.
Respectfully,
^
w*($
'f^->.,v ,••
Oj! ^
WOJV
J till1
o «.
20Gq ' ^
YcihMs-
Mauro Parisi, Chairman, CARD
*"" *'-"''
l"x,Vs>
^*
jf fr* W'
,.;
a?f#.

Back to top


:p;.f;::s:.
'
^
.
Attachment:
Paul Rubin's e-mail to USACOE, Brian Orzel, re: Wetland "E" Hydrology, June 22, 2003>^
Town of New Windsor Supervisor Meyers' letter to CARD, June 16, 2003
^fir-
\
Edelstein's Orange Environment letter to Novesky/Sollami, dated June 15, 2003
C2.
H^j^rJ
cc: Marc Moran, Regional Director, NYSDEC, Region 3
Neil Novesky, Chairman, Town of Cornwall Planning Board
George Meyers, Supervisor, Town of New Windsor
• Dr. William Schuste'r, Chairman, Town of Cornwall Conservation Advisory Council
Basil Seggos, Esq., Riverkeeper
Michael Edelstein, President, Orange Environment
Paul Ruben, hydrogeologist
J.G. Barbour, P.C.
Page 2 of2

IMMEDIATE ATTENTION REQUESTED
Mauro Salvatore Parisi, Chairman
. _.
Cornwall Alliance for Responsible Development, CARD
':-/ p j|] || ^ ,";
22 Oak Street, Cornwall, New York 12518
i.'
'•-—-— —

Back to top


Mill S8W232003 '";:
Marc Moran, Regional Director
NYSDEC, Region 3
21 South Putt Corners Road
New Paltz, New York 12561
Re: Cornwall Commons Wetlands, FGEIS & SEQRA Findings follow
up
Deai- Mr. Moran:
As you know from our June 16, 2003 letter addressed to you, we have been paying very close attention
to the proposed Cornwall Commons development project and its related FGEIS and Findings
Statement. The FGEIS was adopted by the Town of Cornwall Planning Board, as Lead Agency, on
March 3, 2003 and the Findings Statement was approved on April 15.
Our research and investigations indicate that there is in fact a serious defect in the Cornwall Commons
FGEIS and Findings Statement related to Paul Rubin's hydrology report of October 9, 2002. The
Town of Cornwall Planning Board, as SEQRA Lead Agency, did nothing to address Rubin's report,
and in the absence of any newly attached USACOE response (since the original September 25, 2001
letter addressing jurisdictional determination) they also, apparently, failed to forward it. It should be
noted that Rubin himself also sent a copy of his report directly to the USACOE.
Please also
see
Rubin's June 22, 2003 e-mail meassage to USACOE agent, Brian Orzel,
re:
Wetland "E"
Hydrology (attached).
Observations and questions:
1) Because of the environmental importance of Rubin's documentation, even if the planning board
had decided to defer to the ACOE's jurisdictional judgement, it was nevertheless their duty to
forward Rubin's findings for the mere fact that his information represented new data collected
fifteen months after Brian OrzePs documented site visit on June 6, 2001 to which said letter of
September 25, 2001 refers.
2) If SEQRA was established to provide a "hard look" at substantive environmental issues, then in
what way could it be argued that, in terms of Wetland "E" and general site hydrology, the planning
board, as Lead Agency, fulfilled its SEQRA charge?
3) Had Rubin's report been handled in accordance with standard SEQRA procedure, the Lead Agency
should have, at minimum, provided a rationale for not forwarding Rubin's report to the ACOE.
This, however, did not occur.
4) We are at a loss to understand how a duly submitted scientific document could have been handled
with such apparent disregard.
(continued)
June 20, 2003
DELIVERE
^i-uC,
^ -r-.

"(Re: Cornwall Commons Wetlands, FGEIS & SEQRA Findings follow up, CARD, June 20,
2003)
5) The importance of the environmental questions addressed by Rubin's report is indisputable in
terms of characterization, impacts, and mitigation-going straight to the heart of SEQRA, its
purposes, and its legislative intent.
We therefore, and hereby, formally request relief from the Lead Agency's irresponsible handling of
important environmental information related to Wetland "E," and the hydrology of the Cornwall
Commons site.
We ask that the SEQRA process be reopened to adequately address the issues of Wetland "E" and site
hydrology with the benefit of a response from the ACOE.
If there is any way to further expedite a response to this SEQRA-related request, please contact us by
phone at 845-534-4884 or by fax at 845-534-2445. We look forward to your responses.
Respectfully,
Mauro Parisi, Chairman, CARD
Attachments:
^Paul Rubin's e-mail to USACOE, Brian Orzel, re: Wetland "E" Hydrology, June 22, 2003
JcPaul Rubin's Hydrology Report, October 9, 2002
^c CARD'S letter to Town of Cornwall, Sollami, June 20,2003 (stamped "received")
^CARD'S letter to Town of Cornwall, Sollami, June 18,2003 (stamped "received")
^Town of New Windsor, Meyers letter to CARD, June 16, 2003
^CARD'S letter to Town of Cornwall, Sollami, June 16,2003 (stamped "received")
JaCARD's letter to Chairman Novesky and Planning Board, June 16, 2003 (stamped "received")
^cOrange Environment letter to No vesky and Planing Baord, June 16, 2003 (stamped "received")
^QCARD'S fax message to USACOE, George Neives, June 10, 2003 (w/ fax transmission report)
JCCARD's fax message to USACOE, Brian Orzel, June 9, 2003 (w/ fax. transmission report)
cc: Neil Novesky, Chairman, Town of Cornwall Planning Board
Jim Sollami, Supervisor, Town of Cornwall
George Meyers, Supervisor, Town of New Windsor
Dr. William Schuster, Chairman, Town of Cornwall Conservation Advisory Council
Basil Seggos, Esq., Riverkeeper. Inc
Michael Edelstein, President, Orange Environment, Inc.
Paul Rubin, Hydro lo gist
J.G. Barbour, P.C.
Page 2 of2

IMMEDIATE ATTENTION REQUESTED
Mauro Salvatore Parisi, Chairman
Cornwall Alliance for Responsible Development, CARD
22 Oak Street, Cornwall, New York 12518
June 18,2003
Jim Sollami, Town Supervisor
Town of Cornwall
183 Main Street
Cornwall, New York 12518
Re: meeting request, Cornwall Commons Wetlands, FGEIS
&
SEQRA
Dear Mr. Sollami:
We would like to meet with you and Planning Board Chairman Novesky regarding our recent letters
and concerns related to the Cornwall Commons SEQRA process, the current status of the Cornwall
Commons proposal in terms of approvals/requests/permits, etc., and our questions concerning the
disposition of Wetland 'E.'
We believe that, by jointly focusing on these matters, we may be able to resolve some of the questions
and issues in a more timely manner.
Your immediate attention is requested as time, as always, is of the essence.
Respectfully,
Mauro Parisi, Chairman, CARD
cc: George Meyers, Supervisor, New Windsor
Neil Novesky, Chairman, Town of Cornwall Planning Board
Marc Moran, Director, NYSDEC, Region 3
Dr. William Schuster, Chairman, Town of Cornwall Conservation Advisory Council
Basil Seggos, Esq., Riverkeeper. Inc
Michael Edelstein, Orange Environment, Inc.
Paul Rubin, Hydrologist
J.G. Barbour, P.C.
UPS
i<*
JUN18 2Q03

Back to top


TOWN SUPERVISOR

AS OF: 08/27/2003
FOR PROJECT NUMBER
NAME
APPLICANT
PLANNING BOARD
TOWN OF NEW WINDSOR
LISTING OF PLANNING BOARD
AGENCY APPROVALS
0-6
CORNWALL COMMONS LLC - SUBDIVISION
CORNWALL COMMONS, LLC
PAGE: 1
DATE-SENT
REV3 08/21/2003
REV3 08/21/2003
REV3 08/21/2003
REV3 08/21/2003
REV3 08/21/2003
REV1 04/28/2003
AGENCY-
DATE-RECD RESPONSE-
MUNICIPAL HIGHWAY
08/26/2003 UNDER REVIEW
. THIS PLAN IS UNDER REVIEW BUT PRELIMINARY APPROVAL HAS BEEN
. GIVEN
MUNICIPAL WATER
MUNICIPAL SEWER
MUNICIPAL FIRE
NYSDOT
/ /
/ /
/ /
/ /
MUNICIPAL HIGHWAY
05/14/2 003 DISAPPROVED
. FROM THE NORTH ENTRANCE ALL THE WAY THROUGH THE FIRST
. INTERSECTION MUST BE A TOWN OF NEW WINDSOR ROAD SO THAT THIS
. DEPARTMENT HAS ACCESS TO OUR ROADS.
REV1
REV1
REV1
REV1
ORIG
ORIG
ORIG
ORIG
04/28/2003
04/28/2003
04/28/2003
04/28/2003
03/16/2000
03/16/2000
03/16/2000
03/16/2000
04/28/2003 APPROVED
06/30/0303 SUPERSEDED BY REV2
04/28/2003 DISAPPROVED
06/30/0303 SUPERSEDED BY REV2
03/28/2000 DISAPPROVED
04/28/2003 SUPERSEDED BY REV1
04/28/2003 SUPERSEDED BY REV1
03/21/2000 DISAPPROVED
I APPROVE OF THE CONCEPTUAL CONCEPT OF THE PROJECT, HOWEVER,
I BELIEVE THERE SHOULD BE A SECONDARY ROADWAY FOR ACCESS TO
THE R-3 HOMES IN NEW WINDSOR. tHIS COULD BE ACHIEVED OFF
THE CUL-DE-SAC OR ANOTHER LOCATION IN THAT AREA
MUNICIPAL WATER
MUNICIPAL SEWER
MUNICIPAL FIRE
NYSDOT
MUNICIPAL HIGHWAY
. NEED ANOTHER ENTRANCE
MUNICIPAL WATER
MUNICIPAL SEWER
MUNICIPAL FIRE
ORIG 03/16/2000 NYSDOT
04/28/2003 SUPERSEDED BY REV1
REV2
06/30/0303 MUNICIPAL HIGHWAY
. PLAN UNCLEAR - MUST BE REDONE
07/09/2003 DISAPPROVED
- ROAD DETAILS MUST BE

AS OF: 08/27/2003
FOR PROJECT NUMBER
NAME
APPLICANT
PLANNING BOARD
TOWN OF NEW WINDSOR
LISTING OF PLANNING BOARD
AGENCY APPROVALS
0-6
CORNWALL COMMONS LLC - SUBDIVISION
CORNWALL COMMONS, LLC
PAGE: 2
REV2
REV2
REV2
DATE-SENT
AGENCY
, SUPPLIED
06/30/0303 MUNICIPAL WATER
06/30/0303 MUNICIPAL SEWER
DATE-RECD
RESPONSE-
08/21/2003 SUPERSEDED BY REV3
07/01/2003 APPROVED
06/30/0303 MUNICIPAL FIRE
07/07/2003 APPROVED
. HYDRANTS MUST BE SPACED NO MORE THAN 50 0 FEET APART
REV2 06/30/0303 NYSDOT
08/21/2003 SUPERSEDED BY REV3

AS OF: 08/27/2003
STAGE:
FOR PROJECT NUMBER
NAME
APPLICANT
PLANNING BOARD
TOWN OF NEW WINDSOR
LISTING OF PLANNING BOARDACTIONS
0-6
CORNWALL COMMONS LLC - SUBDIVISION
CORNWALL COMMONS, LLC
PAGE: 1
STATUS [Open, Withd]
O [Disap, Appr]
--DATE--
07/23/2003
07/09/2003
05/14/2003
04/24/2002
03/22/2000
MEETING-PURPOSE
ACTION-TAKEN -
P.B. APPEARANCE
ADOPT SEQRA FINDINGS
. ADOPTED SEQRA FINDINGS STATEMENT
P.B. APPEARANCE - PUB HEARIN CLOSED PH -RETURN
. DISCUSS ROADS WITH MARK & HENRY KROLL - NO PUBLIC COMMENT -
. ANDY KRIEGER, MARK & APPLICANT TO DISCUSS ADOPTING FINDINGS
. - POSSIBLY ON NEXT AGENDA
P.B. APPEARANCE
P.B. APPEARANCE
SCHED PH
ACCEPT DGEIS
P.B. APPEARANCE
DISCUSSED PROJECT
. REQUESTED AT LEAST AN EMERGENCY ACCESS TO COMMERCIAL AREA
03/08/2000 P.B. APPEARANCE - DISCUSSION SUBMIT APPLIC

AS OF: 08/27/2003
FOR PROJECT NUMBER
NAME
APPLICANT
PLANNING BOARD
TOWN OF NEW WINDSOR
LISTING OF PLANNING BOARD SEQRA ACTIONS
0-6
CORNWALL COMMONS LLC - SUBDIVISION
CORNWALL COMMONS, LLC
PAGE
ORIG
ORIG
ORIG
ORIG
ORIG
ORIG
ORIG
ORIG
DATE-SENT ACTION
DATE-RECD RESPONSE
03/16/2000 EAF SUBMITTED
03/16/2000 WITH APPLIC
03/16/2000 CIRCULATE TO INVOLVED AGENCIES / /
03/16/2000 LEAD AGENCY DECLARED
03/16/2000 DECLARATION (POS/NEG)
03/16/2000 SCHEDULE PUBLIC HEARING
03/16/2000 PUBLIC HEARING HELD
03/16/2000 WAIVE PUBLIC HEARING
03/16/2000 AGRICULTURAL NOTICES
/ /
/ /
05/14/2003 SCHED PH
07/09/2003 CLOSED PH
/ /
/ /

McGOEY, HAUSER and EDSALL
CONSULTING ENGINEERS P.C.
RICHARD D. McGOEY, P.E . (NY&PA)
WILLIAM J. HAUSER, P.E. (NY&NJ)
MARK J. EDSALL, P.E. (NY,NJ&PA)
JAMES M. FARR, P.E. (NY&PA)
11
Main Office
33 Airport Center Drive
Suite #202
New Windsor, New York 12553
(845)567-3100
e-mail: mheny@mhepc.com
II
Regional Office
507 Broad Street
Milford, Pennsylvania 18337
(570) 296-2765
e-mail: mhepa@mhepc.com
Writer's E-mail Address:
mje(cbpihepc. com
TOWN OF NEW WINDSOR
PLANNING BOARD
REVIEW COMMENTS
PROJECT NAME:
PROJECT LOCATION:
PROJECT NUMBER:
DATE:
DESCRIPTION:
CORNWALL COMMONS MAJOR SUBDIVISION
NYS ROUTE 9W
SECTION 37 - BLOCK 1 - LOT 45.1
00-06
23 JULY 2003
THE APPLICATION PROPOSES THE SUBDIVISION OF THE 52.8+/- ACRE
PARCEL INTO SIXTY-SIX (66) SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS.
THE APPLICATION WAS PREVIOUSLY REVIEWED AT THE 22 MARCH
2000, 24 APRIL 2002, 14 MAY 2003 AND 9 JULY 2003 PLANNING BOARD
MEETINGS.
1.
This application is part of an overall Cornwall Commons development, which spans the Town line
into the Town of Cornwall. The Town of Cornwall Planning Board is also considering a subdivision
application in their PIO zone for a subdivision.
Previously, the Town of Cornwall Planning Board assumed the role of Lead Agency under SEQRA.
The most recent action under SEQRA is the adoption (by the Cornwall board) of a Findings
Statement relative to the GEIS, which includes an environmental evaluation of the development of
the New Windsor lands.
2.
The only issue before the Board at this meeting is a proposed resolution of findings in connection
with the SEQRA process. Attached is a proposed resolution.
Respectfully Submitted,
1/Edsall, P.E., P.P.
Plarining Board Engineer
MJK/st
NW00-06-23Jul03.doc

Back to top


Town of New Windsor
555 Union Avenue
New Windsor, New York 12553
Telephone: (845) 563-4615
Fax: (845) 563-4693
OFFICE OF THE PLANNING BOARD
Notice of Adoption of and
Lead Agency Written SEQR Findings Statement
Cornwall Commons Land Development
WHEREAS, in March 2000, Cornwall Commons, LLC, submitted an application for a 66-lot
subdivision for a 52.8 +/- acre tract located in the Town of New Windsor located in the R-3,
Residential Zoning District; and
WHEREAS, the parcel is located on New York State Route 9W just south of its intersection
with Forge Hill Road designated on the Town of New Windsor tax map parcel as Section 37, Block 1,
Lot 45.1, and parcel adjoins a ± 143.68 parcel in the Town of Cornwall designated on the Town of
Cornwall tax map as Section 9, Block 1, Lot 25.2; and
WHEREAS, the Town of Cornwall Planning Board has granted preliminary approval for a five
(5) lot commercial subdivision of the Cornwall portion of the project; and
WHEREAS, since the loop access road to be constructed will serve both the Cornwall and New
Windsor projects and since the projects are owned by the same developer, the SEQR review conducted
examined the cumulative impacts of both the commercial development of the Cornwall parcel and the
residential development of the New Windsor parcel; and
WHEREAS, Town of New Windsor Planning Board consented to the Town of Cornwall
Planning Board being the lead agency under SEQR for this cumulative SEQR review in February
2000; and
WHEREAS, the Town of New Windsor Planning Board as an involved agency fully and
actively participated in the SEQRA proceedings which included issuance of a positive declaration,
preparation of a draft environmental impact statement, conduct of a public hearing and public
comment period, and preparation of a final environmental impact statement; and
WHEREAS, the Town of Cornwall Planning Board adopted lead agency written findings
statement on April 15, 2002, setting forth in detail design guidelines and mitigation measures for the
future development of the entire 198 acre parcel in a coordinated manner; and
WHEREAS, the Town of New Windsor Planning Board has reviewed said finding statement
and intends to adopt, join in and incorporate said finding statement into this finding statement as if
fully set forth herein.

NOW THEREFOR BE ©DETERMINED that Town of New vWisor Planning Board as an
involved agency finds that all requirements of 6 NYCRR 617 have been met and further joins with the
Town of Cornwall Planning Board as lead agency by adopting and incorporating the lead agency
written SEQR findings statement of said Board adopted on April 15, 2002, as if fully set forth herein;
and
NOW THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Town of New Windsor Planning
Board make the following additional findings based upon the SEQRA reference for certain issues
particularly affecting the Town of New Windsor:
I.
Traffic.
A.
The northerly access road immediately adjoining the New Windsor
parcel shall be owned and controlled by the Town of New Windsor to insure
control by the Town of New Windsor of the maintenance including snow
plowing of said road to serve said New Windsor residential subdivision. The
procedure and mechanism for consummating such transfer of ownership shall be
agreed to by the respective municipalities prior to the Town of New Windsor
Planning Board granting final approval for the residential subdivision.
B.
Both access roads from 9W shall be included in any final subdivision
plan approved by this Board and said loop road shall be bonded prior to filing
any final subdivision map. Said loop roadway shall be constructed in its entirety
(end to end) to a level of completion, as per established code or policy by the
Town of New Windsor Building Department, prior to the issuance of any
Certificates of Occupancies of any of the residential homes in New Windsor.
C.
So as to make available the necessary access to the New Windsor
Subdivision, the improvements to the Rt. 218 intersection which will permit "U-
turn" movements associated with access to the site must be constructed at the
same time the on site loop road is constructed and completed, as well as any
other related improvements deemed appropriate by the NYSDOT for adequate
and safe access. It is the Board's opinion that appropriate signs should be
requested on the State highway directing the motoring public of the new traffic
movements available/required.
II.
Storm Water. The project sponsor shall form a drainage district for the Town
of New Windsor portion of the parcel to insure that drainage from the facilities serving
the residential subdivision will be paid by the property owners within the Town of New
Windsor subdivision.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this notice of adoption of and written finding statement
shall be filed in the Town of New Windsor Planning Board with the Town Clerk's office in accordance
with 6 NYCRR 617.
On the motion of
Suia&tiuc
, seconded by
^JiJ^jyuMA^
, this notice
of adoption and written findings statement was adopted on a vote of ^ ayes
£
nays.

July 23, 2003
4
CORNWALL COMMONS MAJOR SUBDIVISION (00-06)
MR. PETRO: Cornwall Commons major subdivision, SEQRA
findings. Mark, you want to just walk us through this
please?
MR. EDSALL: As the board has been discussing the
Cornwall Commons project, you held and closed a public
hearing and there were some issues that were discussed
both at the last meeting and meetings previous as to
this board's specific concerns with regard to the
project which you wanted documented in your findings.
Attached to my comments you'll see a notice and
resolution that's meant to work in conjunction with the
findings of the Town of Cornwall Planning Board but on
page 2, it lists some of the specific concerns that
this board had identified and I will just quickly go
over those. The fact that number 1, the traffic is
such that the northerly access to the project is the
main access for the New Windsor subdivision and the
Highway Superintendent and Town Supervisor felt that
that road should be a New Windsor town road, thereby
making it possible for the Town to have the full
ability to provide maintenance and snow removal up to
the New Windsor lots. That's list as item 1A. IB, is
a comment, effectively it says that because of the
traffic circulation, this board feels it's necessary
that the loop road be constructed in its entirety
before the buildings on the New Windsor side, the
residences receive Certificates of Occupancy. So that
would require both Cornwall and New Windsor roads to be
completed. 1C is noting that for part of the traffic
movements to access the site, it's necessary that the
improvements at the 218 interchange which allows a
U-turn movement at that, it's not a cloverleaf, but at
that intersection, that that must be completed. That
was discussed with Phil Greely here at the last meeting
so that's included as item 1C. And comment 2 II just
an acknowledgement that the Town of New Windsor has a
requirement that a storm water drainage district must
be formed to cover those improvements that require
maintenance and that district would include all those

July 23, 2 003
5
properties within the Town of New Windsor that are
benefited by the storm water improvements. Those are
the only additions beyond the conclusions reached with
the Town of Cornwall Planning Board that this board
participated in. So it's my recommendation that the
board adopt this resolution and findings statement.
MR. PETRO: Okay, any comment from any of the members?
MR. ARGENIO: I think we discussed all three of those
issues at length at the last meeting, if my memory
serves me.
MR. EDSALL: One or two of them I had already and you
folks had me add the additional items.
MR. ARGENIO: I recall that as well. I don't have
anything.
MR. MASON: So they're not going to be putting in the
stop light or the turn signal, Mark?
MR. EDSALL: They eventually are looking to have for
the southerly access to Route 9W a full movement
intersection and there's an effort being made to have
that intersection meet warrants or find a way but
obviously, we don't have the ability to make that
determination as DOT.
MR. PETRO: Accept a motion to accept the resolution of
findings which is attached here.
MR. ARGENIO: I'll make that motion.
MR. SCHLESINGER: Second it.
MR. PETRO: For the Cornwall Commons major subdivision,
motion has been made and seconded that the New Windsor
Planning Board accept the proposed resolution and
findings in connection with the SEQRA process for the
Cornwall Commons Land Development and major subdivision
on New York State Route 9W. Any further comment from

July 23, 2003
any of the members? If not, roll call
ROLL CALL
MR. MASON
AYE
MR. SCHLESINGER AYE
MR. ARGENIO
AYE
MR. PETRO
AYE

RESULTS OF P.B. MEETING OF:
PROJECT:
&WMbu*JP£
LfrMynl^ixi y
tL
A3 a003
JP.B. #
00 ~Q(*
LEAD AGENCY:
AUTHORIZE COORD. LETTER: Y_
TAKE LEAD AGENCY:
Y
N
N
NEGATIVE DEC:
M)
S)
VOTE: A
N
CARRIED: Y
N
M)
S)
VOTE: A
N
CARRIED: Y
N
PUBLIC HEARING:
WAIVED:.
M)
S)
VOTE: A
N
CLOSED:
SCHEDULE P.H.: Y
N
SEND TO O.C. PLANNING: Y
SEND TO DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION: Y
REFERTOZ.B.A.: M)_
S).
V
0TE:
A
RETURN TO WORK SHOP: Y
N
N
APPROVAL:
M) S)
VOTE:A_
NEED NEW PLANS: Y N
N
APPROVED:
CONDITIONS - NOTES:
d%&J&^x£<ri£,
&.
(9>
A.
S
£J%
up.

July 9, 2003
5
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
CORNWALL COMMONS LLC r0 0-06)
John Cappello, Esq. appeared before the board for this
proposal.
MR. PETRO: Application proposes subdivision of 52.8
acre parcel into 69 single residential single family
lots. Application was reviewed at the 22 March, 2000
and 24 April, 2002 and 14 May, 2003 planning board
meetings.
MR. CAPPELLO: John Cappello, I'm an attorney with
Jacobowitz & Gubits, I'm here with Lorraine Potter from
Lane & Tully and Phil Greely from John Collins
Engineering to present the preliminary subdivision plan
for the Cornwall Commons New Windsor development
consisting of 66 single family dwelling unit lots. The
property is located on Route 9W just south of the
intersection with Forge Hill Road. We have been before
this board for, and the Town of Cornwall Planning Board
for probably about two years now. I'm going to go
through the SEQRA process, the project also consists of
five commercial lots in the Town of Cornwall. It will
have two access points off New York State Route 9W, the
access points have been submitted to the New York State
DOT and reviewed and preliminarily approved for concept
for the location. Procedurally, as I said, the Town of
Cornwall Planning Board since the larger portion of the
property over 140 acres is located in the Town of
Cornwall was lead agency on this matter and conducted a
full SEQRA review, it was a Generic Environmental
Impact Statement that examined all the potential
developments of the five lots for commercial and
various types of uses permitted in the Town of Cornwall
and also some potential possible zoning amendments and
also then examined the residential development in the
Town of New Windsor together with a couple other
alternatives, PAC zoning and senior citizen development
in New Windsor. The public hearing was conducted by
the Town of Cornwall on the DEIS, it was circulated to

July 9, 2003
6
all the involved agencies, including the Town of New
Windsor Planning Board and Town Board, the public
hearing was held, we received all the comments from the
involved agencies, prepared a Final Environmental
Impact Statement that was accepted back in March of
2003, that concluded then all the documentation that
the involved agencies would use to adopt each agency's
own finding. The Town of Cornwall Planning Board
adopted their findings on April 15, 2003 and Monday
night granted preliminary approval for the 5 lot
commercial subdivision. So where we are now then is to
review the actual design of the 66 lots in the Town of
New Windsor and the Town of New Windsor Planning Board
has a few choices on how you want to proceed on SEQRA.
We have the record of the EIS which is what the
information we have all agreed you'd base your decision
on and you can join in and adopt the Town of Cornwall.
MR. PETRO: Why don't I let Mark and Andy get together
on that, we're not going to sit there and figure this
out. When did you get this plan over to the Highway
Department in New Windsor?
MR. CAPPELLO: We've been meeting at the work sessions
with the Fire Department, Building Department, I don't
know particularly the Highway Department has been
submitted specifically to the—
MR. PETRO: Because I noticed he wanted the road
dedicated to the Town of New Windsor which I see you
have done on this plan but his comments here say that
he's got a disapproval, now I'm wondering maybe he
didn't see the plan because it certainly doesn't look
like he did.
MS. MASON: He did.
MR. PETRO: What's unclear about it?
MR. EDSALL: I think in speaking with Henry he had two
open issues, one was drainage, he needed some plans
that he had a little clearer understanding but the

July 9, 2003
7
dedication he knows the plan shows it but I'm not quite
sure if the mechanism has been straightened out.
MR. CAPPELLO: We have to go to the DOT, we have Phil
Greely, a traffic engineer to explain any questions you
have regarding the details but this is another one,
there's several different ways you can skin the cat.
We can dedicate the land that's in the Town of
Cornwall, there can be an agreement between the
municipalities regardless of who owns it because it's
on the boundary, there will have to be some type of
agreement as to maintenance or between preliminary and
final once we know that both municipalities have agreed
on the design and location and we know we have to go to
the DEC, to Health Department and all the various other
involved agencies for approval, we could actually
pursue and annexation to annex this portion into the
Town of New Windsor.
MR. PETRO: You know what, again, straighten out with
Mr. Kroll, Mark and Andy how you do it, I don't care as
long as you get to that point.
MR. CAPPELLO: Just so you know that's where we, we
have shown it going to New Windsor and ask to handle
the specifics of it between preliminary and final
because we have time and we did know then that the
board's have reviewed and approved the locations and
the layout then as with the 800 other different things
we'll have to do between preliminary and final we'd
accomplish that to everybody's satisfaction.
MR. PETRO: Let me hold you up there. This is a public
hearing. On the 25th day of June, 2003, eight
addressed envelopes with a notice of public hearing
were mailed out. If someone is here to speak for or
against this application, just make a comment, be
recognized by the Chair, come forward, state your name
and address. Anyone here who'd like to speak? Let the
minutes show there's nobody here who wants to speak so
I'll entertain a motion to close the public hearing.

July 9, 2003
8
MR. ARGENIO: So moved.
MR. LANDER: Second it.
MR. PETRO: Motion has been made and seconded that the
New Windsor Planning Board close the public hearing for
the Cornwall Commons major subdivision on New York
State Route 9W.
ROLL CALL
MR. LANDER
AYE
MR. MASON
AYE
MR. ARGENIO
AYE
MR. KARNAVEZOS
AYE
MR. PETRO
AYE
MR. PETRO: At this time, I reopen it up to the board
for further comment. Mark, you want to just go over
this quickly? I mean, there's not much for us to look
at, I think.
MR. EDSALL: No, I think at this point the next step
would be for the board to close out our end of SEQRA
which would be for the, this board to adopt findings
and we should work between this meeting and the next
meeting with Andy and the applicant to have that
available for your action next meeting.
MR. PETRO: A lot of the findings would overlap.
MR. EDSALL: Well, every agency has to adopt their own
findings, we can merely in effect concur with their
findings. So we should get prepared to do that. I
guess the other issue which I'd really like to hear
about tonight since it was a concern that we had and I
know Cornwall had raised was if the residential
subdivision goes forward prior to any other
development, how is the access to the site going to be
handled because the roadway access is the southbound 9W
lanes where there's no curb cut in the center median.
I think that's why Phil is here tonight to update us on

July 9, 2003
9
where the DOT is going to require improvements so that
there's adequate access to the site and we don't end up
having people making U-turns on 9W either at the bottom
of Moodna or other locations. So maybe we could get an
update on that.
MR. GREELY: I'm Phil Greely from John Collins
Engineers. We had prepared the traffic studies,
actually looked at a couple of different access
scenarios. We met with the DOT early in the process,
probably three years ago, to look at various schemes of
access to the property. At that time, when the
Department of Transportation was evaluating various
improvement projects along 9W, we had to have different
scenarios because it wasn't clear which way things were
going to go. The simplest plan dealt with a single
access point to the residential property that would be
constructed as a right turn in right turn out driveway
and the DOT because of the grade and other
considerations here did not want a median break on 9W
to allow left turns out. What that meant is in order
to get people that are destined back to the north or
coming from the south to the site, we had to look at a
couple of options. One option was, and this was in
conjunction with DOT which would require the widening
improvements at Forge Hill at the signal would allow a
U-turn scenario at that location. However, because of
the way that plan has developed and the things aren't
on the pace that we need to work with, we had looked at
another scenario which DOT was pretty comfortable with
and that enabled us to have this access, you would have
to build the road to connect out to 9W on the other
side of the interchange. And the way that it would
actually function is if I was coming from the south and
I wanted to get to the subdivision, we would actually
come through the 218 interchange in the area where and
in fact out there today you'll see there's an area
where there's not pavement but the cars drive through
there is about the location where an actual
intersection would be built and that's consistent with
some of the plans that DOT was looking at at the
interchange, in fact, one of the scenarios for this

July 9, 2003
10
area was to develop like more of a T intersection, one
was to build a small rotary area so what would happen
is you'd approach from the south and you would loop
like this to get into the project so there'd be no left
turns, there would be a signing package associated with
that to direct drivers to that access when traffic left
the site, if you're going south on 9W, it's just an
easy right turn out onto 9W and of course coming from
the north an easy right turn in. But if you were,
wanted to head back north on 9W, you would have to
leave here, come down through the interchange area and
back onto 9W northbound. So it would use the 218
interchange with some improvements that would be
consistent with the Department's concept there and it
would not require any turns crossing 9W which is what
their primary control was. In the development of the
commercial property, one other scenario which was
looked at was a full access on 9W, the DOT felt that if
a commercial subdivision was in here that they would
consider a median break at that intersection because
sight distance was okay and would probably warrant
enough traffic to have a signal but again that was tied
into the larger project. At this time where we are
with the DOT is we have submitted both plans to them
partly because they're still not sure what they're
going to do with 9W, we're waiting for their answer
which scenario, we can live with either scenario, the
initial reaction has been that they would like no
median break on 9W, they would like a signing and an
improvement at the 218 interchange that would
accommodate access to the property at least for the
residential component and that they would look at
depending on what comes in on the commercial piece.
That's the current plan. The alternate plan again goes
back to make more significant improvements that would
have to be tied to a DOT project at Forge Hill.
MR. EDSALL: One question, let's say later on if the
commercial goes in, if the warrants aren't met for the
signal, did the DOT give any indication if they'd still
permit the median break or are they unclear on that?

July 9, 2003
11
MR. GREELY: They really wanted the median break to be
tied into a signal. For the median break, this whole
section would have to be reconstructed because you have
to build a left turn lane and at that point, the median
isn't wide enough so you'd be widening the right-of-way
to get that. But they really didn't want without a
signal and a turn lane the median break to occur and,
you know, depending on what goes in here when we get a
better handle, they'd look at that, but they felt in
the interim that this plan would work by improving the
interchange area, get access to and from here and any
other uses that it would be limited, let's say there's
another, I think one other use here doesn't have a
median break that would be able to benefit from that.
MR. ARGENIO: So it's safe to say the original question
was how much do you construct before you do the
residential subdivision and the answer I guess is the
entire horseshoe?
MR. GREELY: You have to build a road.
MR. EDSALL: And the 218 improvement.
MR. ARGENIO: And the improvement at the intersection.
MR. GREELY: Correct, and the only way that that would
change is if the Forge Hill intersection moved forward
and we'd work with the DOT in designing it so that
U-turns could be made at the intersection, that would
only occur if you did the turn lane and widening.
Right now, it doesn't appear that it would be in the
timeframe we're looking at here.
MR. PETRO: Okay.
MR. EDSALL: That's fine and I think with the board's
permission once the minutes are available, I'll forward
a copy of this discussion to Cornwall's Planning Board
cause that was one of their concerns as well since it
does require some of the Cornwall town road to be--

July 9, 2003
12
MR. PETRO: I think you should put in that that our
opinion that the U-turns scenario I think should be out
of the question.
MR. EDSALL: I'm very uncomfortable with it myself.
MR. CAPPELLO: Cornwall's approval of this preliminary
plan, they did in their approval express their desire
to have this signalized and a full interchange and they
expressed acknowledgement that that's DOT'S call but
they would express their preference that it be
signalized and that will be sent forward to the DOT
while we're going through our process.
MR. PETRO: I realize this is late in the game but
again, one of the lots on Forge Hill Road, take one of
the lots out and tie into Forge Hill. Did you ever
really look at that? Not in the back there where the
topo's real bad but maybe up in the front area.
MR. EDSALL: I don't think the grades would work and
you really don't have, you have properties in between,
number of properties in between.
MR. BABCOCK: Down towards 9W that Canterbury Lane,
Jim, little loop.
MR. PETRO: Okay, all right, Phil, thank you. I want
to move along because we have 12 items, not that I want
to cut anybody short, but I don't want to be here until
1 o'clock. Do you have anything else for this
applicant?
MR. EDSALL: No. I would believe that the next two
steps and it's the board's choice as to when we act on
the two items would be a consideration for preliminary
approval, number one, so they can move forward with
their applications but prior to doing so, we need to I
believe reach our findings so I think we should work
with the applicants, look at getting it back on the
agenda with the next meeting and take care of those two
items.

July 9, 2003
13
MR. PETRO: Why don't you and Andy get together and
just advise the board on the manner in which we're
going to move forward. I would suggest that we, if
Cornwall was, felt they were comfortable with them the
way it was presented that we should maybe move in that
same direction as long as you review and concur with
that.
MR. EDSALL: We'll work with the applicant.
MR. PETRO: Do you have anything else for tonight?
MR. CAPPELLO: No, just when you're next work session
is and we'll try to get on board.
MR. PETRO: I think the preliminary layout we're passed
that point so basically now it's a matter of
procedural. You explained DOT, I think we can move
forward. Okay?
MR. CAPPELLO: Thank you very much.

McGOEY, HAUSER and EDSALL
CONSULTING ENGINEERS P.C.
RICHARD D. McGOEY, P.E . (NY&PAJ
WILLIAM J. HAUSER, P.E. (NY&NJ)
MARK J. EDSALL, P.E. (NY,NJ&PA)
JAMES M. FARR, P.E. (NY&PA)
1
1 Main Office
33 Airport Center Drive
Suite #202
New Windsor, New York 12553
(845)567-3100
e-mail:
mheny@mhepc.com
II
Regional Office
507 Broad Street
Milford, Pennsylvania 18337
(570) 296-2765
e-mail: mhepa@mhepc.com
Writer's E-mail Address:
mje@mhepc. com
TOWN OF NEW WINDSOR
PLANNING BOARD
REVIEW COMMENTS
PROJECT NAME:
PROJECT LOCATION:
PROJECT NUMBER:
DATE:
DESCRIPTION:
CORNWALL COMMONS MAJOR SUBDIVISION
NYS ROUTE 9W
SECTION 37 - BLOCK 1 - LOT 45.1
00-06
9 JULY 2003
THE APPLICATION PROPOSES THE SUBDIVISION OF THE 52.8+/- ACRE
PARCEL INTO SIXTY-NINE (69) SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS. THE
APPLICATION WAS PREVIOUSLY REVIEWED AT THE 22 MARCH 2000,
24 APRIL 2002 AND 14 MAY 2003 PLANNING BOARD MEETINGS.
This application is part of an overall Cornwall Commons development, which spans the Town line into the
Town of Cornwall. The Town of Cornwall Planning Board is also considering a subdivision application in
their PIO zone for a subdivision.
Previously, the Town of Cornwall Planning Board assumed the role of Lead Agency under SEQRA. The most
recent action under SEQRA is the adoption (by the Cornwall board) of a Findings Statement relative to the
GEIS, which includes an environmental evaluation of the development of the New Windsor lands.
Following this Public Hearing, it is necessary (and appropriate) that this board (NWPB) adopt its findings
at its earliest convenience. I suggest the Board authorize this writer and Andy Krieger to work with the
applicants in this regard.
2.
The only issues which I believe require further discussion (other than any items identified as part of the public
hearing) are the Highway Superintendent's requirement that the northerly access road from 9W to the New
Windsor subdivision be a New Windsor Town road, and a concern with regard to traffic access to the site
from Rt. 9W from both the north and the south, and what requirements the DOT will require initially in this
regard. I have previously asked that the applicant investigate this matter.
Respectfully Submitted
Isall, P.E.QVP.
ig Board Engineer
MJE/sl
NW00-06-14May03.doc

Back to top


Town of New Windsor
555 Union Avenue
New Windsor, New York 12553
Telephone: (845) 563-4615 Fax: (845) 563-4693
OFFICE OF THE PLANNING BOARD
WEDNESDAY, JULY 9, 2003 — 7:30 PM
TENTATIVE AGENDA
CALL TO ORDER & ROLL CALL
APPROVAL OF MINUTES DATED: MAY 28, 2003
ANNUAL MOBILE HOME PARK REVIEW:
a.
THOMPSON MOBILE HOME PARK - WALSH ROAD
b.
MT. AIRY MOBILE HOME PARK - RT. 207
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1. CORNWALL COMMONS LLC (00-06) RT. 9W & FORGE HILL ROAD (LANC &
TULLY)
Proposed 60-lot residential subdivision.
REGULAR ITEMS:
2. CLASSIC HOME BUILDERS SUBDIVISION & LOT LINE CHANGE (03-16)
KINGS ROAD (LYTLE)
Proposed 4-lot residential subdivision & lot line change.
3. WOODLAWN MANOR SENIOR PROJECT (03-17) FOREST HILLS DR.
(JAY SAMUELSON)
Proposed 95-unit senior housing project.
4. COVINGTON ESTATES (01-41) RT. 300 (NEW HORIZON)
Proposed condominium units.
5.
PLYMPTON HOUSE (02-23) PLYMPTON STREET (BROWN)
Proposed catering use for building formerly American Felt Offices.
6. MANDIARACINA SUBDIVISION (03-18) TOLEMAN ROAD (BROWN)
Proposed 2-lot residential subdivision.
7.
FIRST COLUMBIA (NEW YORK INTERNATIONAL PLAZA) 02-200 - RECEIVE
FEIS.
8. GALELLA SITE PLAN (03-06) RT. 9W (COPPOLA)
Proposed office building
9. DR. PRABHU (03-19) RT. 9W (SHAW)
Proposed addition to existing doctor's office.
DISCUSSION
ADJOURNMENT
(NEXT MEETING - JULY 23, 2003)

Back to top


Town of New Windsor
555 Union Avenue
New Windsor, New York 12553
Telephone: (845) 563-4615
Fax: (845) 563-4693
OFFICE OF THE PLANNING BOARD
Notice of Adoption of and
Lead Agency Written SEQR Findings Statement
Cornwall Commons Land Development
WHEREAS, in March 2000, Cornwall Commons, LLC, submitted an application for a 66-lot
subdivision for a 52.8 +/- acre tract located in the Town of New Windsor located in the R-3,
Residential Zoning District; and
WHEREAS, the parcel is located on New York State Route 9W just south of its intersection
with Forge Hill Road designated on the Town of New Windsor tax map parcel as Section 37, Block 1,
Lot 45.1, and parcel adjoins a +143.68 parcel in the Town of Cornwall designated on the Town of
Cornwall tax map as Section 9, Block 1, Lot 25.2; and
WHEREAS, the Town of Cornwall Planning Board has granted preliminary approval for a five
(5) lot commercial subdivision of the Cornwall portion of the project; and
WHEREAS, since the loop access road to be constructed will serve both the Cornwall and New
Windsor projects and since the projects are owned by the same developer, the SEQR review conducted
examined the cumulative impacts of both the commercial development of the Cornwall parcel and the
residential development of the New Windsor parcel; and
WHEREAS, Town of New Windsor Planning Board consented to the Town of Cornwall
Planning Board being the lead agency under SEQR for this cumulative SEQR review in February
2000; and
WHEREAS, the Town of New Windsor Planning Board as an involved agency fully and
actively participated in the SEQRA proceedings which included issuance of a positive declaration,
preparation of a draft environmental impact statement, conduct of a public hearing and public
comment period, and preparation of a final environmental impact statement; and
WHEREAS, the Town of Cornwall Planning Board adopted lead agency written findings
statement on April 15, 2002, setting forth in detail design guidelines and mitigation measures for the
future development of the entire 198 acre parcel in a coordinated manner; and
WHEREAS, the Town of New Windsor Planning Board has reviewed said finding statement
and intends to adopt, join in and incorporate said finding statement into this finding statement as if
fully set forth herein.

NOW THEREFOR BE UbETERMINED that Town of New wWsor Planning Board as an
involved agency finds that all requirements of 6 NYCRR 617 have been met and further joins with the
Town of Cornwall Planning Board as lead agency by adopting and incorporating the lead agency
written SEQR findings statement of said Board adopted on April 15, 2002, as if fully set forth herein;
and
NOW THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Town of New Windsor Planning
Board make the following additional findings based upon the SEQRA reference for certain issues
particularly affecting the Town of New Windsor:
I.
Traffic.
A.
The northerly access road immediately adjoining the New Windsor
parcel shall be owned and controlled by the Town of New Windsor to insure
control by the Town of New Windsor of the maintenance including snow
plowing of said road to serve said New Windsor residential subdivision. The
procedure and mechanism for consummating such transfer of ownership shall be
agreed to by the respective municipalities prior to the Town of New Windsor
Planning Board granting final approval for the residential subdivision.
B.
Both access roads from 9W shall be included in any final subdivision
plan approved by this Board and said loop road shall be bonded prior to filing
any final subdivision map. Said loop roadway shall be constructed in its entirety
(end to end) to a level of completion, as per established code or policy by the
Town of New Windsor Building Department, prior to the issuance of any_
Certificates of Occupancies of any of the residential homes in New Windsor.
C.
So as to make available the necessary access to the New Windsor
Subdivision, the improvements to the Rt. 218 intersection which will permit "U-
turn" movements associated with access to the site must be constructed at the
same time the on site loop road is constructed and completed, as well as any
other related improvements deemed appropriate by the NYSDOT for adequate
and safe access. It is the Board's opinion that appropriate signs should be
requested on the State highway directing the motoring public of the new traffic
movements available/required.
II.
Storm Water. The project sponsor shall form a drainage district for the Town
of New Windsor portion of the parcel to insure that drainage from the facilities serving
the residential subdivision will be paid by the property owners within the Town of New
Windsor subdivision.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this notice of adoption of and written finding statement
shall be filed in the Town of New Windsor Planning Board with the Town Clerk's office in accordance
with 6 NYCRR 617.
On the motion of
, seconded by
, this notice
of adoption and written findings statement was adopted on a vote of
ayes
nays.

IMMEDIATfcATTENTION REQUESTED
©
J
s
0
u
;..
; u 2oa3
TOWN Q
TOWN o ^5
Mauro Parisi. Chairman
Cornwall Alliance for Responsible Development
22 Oak Street. Cornwall, NY 12518
July 16, 2003
Chairman Novesky and Planning Board Members
183 Main Street Cornwall NY 12518
Dear Chairman Novesky and Planning Board Members:
We would a!so like to draw your attention to our 1992
^^$^Hg ^
other onsite wetlands is irrelevant to Barbour's biological review.
our Master Plan. Why was this authority not cited by your board?
-
.
nf h„ffer ^as is discussed elsewhere in the Master Plan under wetlands and reference
The issue of buffer
~
s
UKCUS
.
^ ^ ^. ^
fc
,,
Se"Ster P an' e—ndat n applied. If the habitat is important and the hab.at ,s wetland
basel ttn it follows that a 50 to 100 foot buffer is called^ per our Master Plan.
Sincerely/
^
Mauro-Parisi, Chairman, CARD
cc: Jim Sollami, Supervisor, Town of Cornwall
^r*f\A
t/ll
(CD
GeoraeMevers, Supervisor, Town of New Windsor-T
[<CU
«
O
Marc Moran, Region 3 Director, NYS DEC
mmmittee
Thomas DiNapoli, NYS Assemblyman Chairman, EnCon Committee
Rndl Sesaos Esq., Riverkeeper, Inc.
• "
Manna JoVeen, Director, Hudson River Sloop Clearwater
Michael Edelstien, President. Grange Environment, Inc.
Paul Rubin, Hydrologist
James G. Barbour, P.C
Page 1 of I
TOWN OF NEW WINDSOR
SUPERVISOR'S OFFICE

McGOEY, HAUSER and EDSALL
CONSULTING ENGINEERS P.C.
RICHARD D. McGOEY, P.E . (NY&PA)
WILLIAM J. HAUSER, P.E. (NY&NJJ
MARK J. EDSALL, P.E. (NY.NJ&PA)
JAMES M. FARR, P.E. (NY&PA)
0
Main Office
33 Airport Center Drive
Suite #202
New Windsor, New York 12553
(845)567-3100
e-mail: mheny@mhepc.com
0
Regional Office
507 Broad Street
Milford, Pennsylvania 18337
(570) 296-2765
e-mail:
mhepa@mhepc.com
Writer's E-mail Address:
mje@mhepc. com
PLANNING BOARD WORK SESSION
RECORD OF APPEARANCE
(\JlbJ \J\AJ
[sos
SESSION DATE:
\(o
flA Tfl>3
P/BAPP.NO.:
PROJECT: NEW

Back to top


Go. OG
OLD
)xO
REAPPEARANCE AT W/S REQUESTED:
^
RESUB. REO'D:
rdlcJ (<^gli^
{(&
-v
PROJECT NAME:
REPRESENTATIVES PRESENT:
MUNICIPAL REPS PRESENT:
ITEMS DISCUSSED:
J$k~
C/L
JTG.;^
BLDGINSP.
ENGINEER
P/BCHMN
~>c
•3aL
ZX.
a
g//f
cfA fJU^
0
FIREINSP.
PLANNER
OTHER
fwU^y^.
STND
PROJECT
DRAINAGE
DUMPSTER
SCREENING
LIGHTING
(Streetlights)
LANDSCAPING
BLACKTOP
ROADWAYS
APPROVAL BOX
PROJECT STATUS:
ZBA Referral:
Ready For Meeting
_Y
Y
N
WorksessionForm.doc 9-02 MJE
Recommended Mtg Date
if
N
,

RESULTS OF P.B. MEETING OF:
PROJECT:
^isyui/rtfJ1
tbw/H&MJ
-
rtdU tfa
1/ ?, Am
/MdLZ
P.B. #
go-06
LEAD AGENCY:
AUTHORIZE COORD. LETTER: Y_
TAKE LEAD AGENCY:
Y
N
N
NEGATIVE DEC
M)
S)
VOTE: A
N
CARRIED: Y
N
SEND TO O.C. PLANNING: Y
SEND TO DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION: Y
REFERTOZ.B.A.: M)_
S).
V
0TE:
A
N
RETURN TO WORK SHOP: Y
N
M)
S)
VOTE: A
N
CARRIED: Y
N
PUBLIC HEARING:
WAIVED:
M) A
S) L-
VOTE: A,( N
/0
CLOSED:
^
SCHEDULE P.H.: Y
N
APPROVAL:
M)
S)
VOTE:A
N
NEED NEW PLANS: Y
N
CONDITIONS - NOTES:
APPROVED:
% W
&
J^jMLfc*.
/J/
_/?J$S?J<? y^xM
W/MbW >f-77kfJ^
~??x? ftuMc& 6T?K/MJ^".
7ht/j
ij> adtoaJ- jfjukk*?
- /Zxdu ;
ffltvtjt
t~
&a^Ubid*/'
J-"
r/sMujdu
i/jMfJ- /yAcxjUs

PLANNING BOARD: TOWN OF NEW WINDSOR
COUNTY OF ORANGE: STATE OF NEW YORK
X
In the Matter of the Application for Subdivision for:
CORNWALL COMMONS
P. B #00-06
Applicant
AFFIDAVIT OF
SERVICE
BY MAIL
STATE OF NEW YORK )
) SS:
COUNTY OF ORANGE)
MYRA L. MASON, being duly sworn, deposes and says:
That I am not a party to the action, am over 18 years of age and reside at 67
Bethlehem Road, New Windsor, NY 12553.
That on the
25TH
day of JUNE, 2003, I compared the 8 addressed
envelopes containing the Public Hearing Notice pertinent to this case with the
certified list provided by the Assessor's Office regarding the above application for
site plan/subdivision/special permit/lot line change approval and I find that the
addresses are identical to the list received. I then placed the envelopes in a U.S.
Depository within the Town of New Windsor.
Sworn to before me this
olJ
day of
7AfC^/
A
/MJULO-T^
yra L. Mason, Secretary
JENNIFER MEAD
Notary
Public, State Of New
York
No.
01ME6050024
Qualified In Orange
County
Commission Expires 10/30/^c^-

T*C
LEGAL NOTICE
JC
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the PLANNING BOARD of the TOWN OF
NEW WINDSOR, County of Orange, State of New York will hold a PUBLIC
HEARING at Town Hall, 555 Union Avenue, New Windsor, New York on
JULY 9TH, 2003
at 7:30 P.M. on the approval of the proposed Subdivision for
CORNWALL COMMONS LLC
Located at
RT. 9W
&
FORGE HILL ROAD
(Tax Map #Section 37 , Block 1
, Lot
45.1
) . Map of the proposed
project is on file and may be inspected at the
"lanmng Board Oiiice
Town
Hall, 555 Union Avenue, New Windsor, NY prior to the Public Hearing.
Date: JUNE 12, 2003
By Order of
TOWN OF NEW WINDSOR PLANNING BOARD
James R. Petro, Jr., Chairman

Back to top


Town of New W^idsor
555 Union Avenue
New Windsor, New York 12553
Telephone: (914) 563-4631
Fax:(914)563-4693
Assessors Office
June 12,2003
Cornwall Commons LLC
Joseph Amato, President
Woodbury Professional Building
Route 32
Highland Mills, NY 10930
Re: 37-1-45.1 PB#00-06
Dear Mr. Amato:
According to our records, the attached list of property owners are abutting and across the street
to the above referenced property. Please be advised that the Town of Cornwall is also abutting to
the above referenced parcel.
The charge for this service is $25.00, minus your deposit of $25.00.
There is no futher balance due.
Sincerely
J.Todd Wiley
/
Sole Assessor
JTW/baw
CC: Myra Mason,ZBA

37-1-44.2
Mid-Hudson II Hldg Co Inc.
P.O. Box 298
NewPaltz, NY 12561
37-1-45.2
New York Military Academy
Academy Ave
Cornwall on Hudson, NY 12520
83-1-1.-32
Moodna Creek Dev.,LTD
Mr. Isac Landau, Sr II Inc.
Unit 2 of Millpond Condo
P.O. Box 322
Cornwall, NY 12518
George J. Meyers, Supervisor
Town of New Windsor
555 Union Ave
New Windsor, NY 12553
Deborah Green, Town Clerk
Town of New Windsor
555 Union Ave
New Windsor, NY 12553
Andrew Krieger, ESQ
219 Quassaick Ave
New Windsor, NY 12553
James Petro, Chairman
Planning Board
555 Union Ave
New Windsor, NY 12553
Mark J. Edsall, P.E.
McGoey and Hauser
Consulting Engineers, P.C.
33 Airport Center Drive, Suite 202
New Windsor, NY 12553

37-1-44.2
Mid-Hudson II Hldg Co Inc.
P.O. Box 298
New Paltz, NY 12561
37-1-45.2
New York Military Academy
Academy Ave
Cornwall on Hudson, NY 12520
83-1-1.-32
Moodna Creek Dev.,LTD
Mr. Isac Landau, Sr II Inc.
Unit 2 of Millpond Condo
P.O. Box 322
Cornwall, NY 12518
George J. Meyers, Supervisor
Town of New Windsor
555 Union Ave
New Windsor, NY 12553
Deborah Green, Town Clerk
Town of New Windsor
555 Union Ave
New Windsor, NY 12553
Andrew Krieger, ESQ
219 Quassaick Ave
New Windsor, NY 12553
James Petro, Chairman
Planning Board
555 Union Ave
New Windsor, NY 12553
Mark J. Edsall, P.E.
McGoey and Hauser
Consulting Engineers, P.C.
33 Airport Center Drive, Suite 202
New Windsor, NY 12553
j w

1763

Back to top


{own of New V^jndsor
555 Union Avenue
New Windsor, New York 12553
Telephone: (845) 563-4631
Fax: (845) 563-4693

Back to top


Assessor's Office
May 20, 2003
Cornwall Commons LLC
Joseph Amato, President
Woodbury Professional Building
Route 32
Highland Mills, NY 10930
Dear Mr. Amato:
According to our records, the attached list of property owners are within five hundred (500) feet
of the above referenced property.
The charge for this service is $35.00, minus your deposit of $25.00.
Please remit the balance of $10.00 to the Town Clerk's Office.
Sincerely,
Todd Wiley, IAO
Sole Assessor
JTW/lrd
Attachments
CC: Myra Mason, ZBA
kfeo
'(yurn

37-1-11
Frank Cowan
14 Sloop Hill Road
New Windsor, NY 12553
37-1-12
Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corpi
284 South Avenue
Poughkeepsie, NY 12602
37-1-40.21 c& 37-1-42.12
Cactus Resort Properties Inc.
C/o Finova Capital
115 West Century Road
Paramus, NJ 07652
37-1-42.11
Slumber Shops Inc.
POBox 1853
Poughkeepsie, NY 12601
37-1-42.22
Ayda Argueta Hussain
169 Forge Hill Road
New Windsor, NY 12553
37-1-44.2
Mid Hudson II Holding Co. Inc.
PO Box 298
NewPaltz, NY 12561
37-1-45.2
New York Military Academy
Academy Avenue
Cornwall on Hudson, NY 12520
37-1-47
Palisades Interstate Park Commission
Attn: Barbara Lynch
Administrative Building
Bear Mountain, NY 10911
50-1-3
Miriam Staples
C/o Elaine Spaulding
67 Forge Hill Road
New Windsor, NY 12553
50-1-28.1
Brenden & Renee Feenaghty
18 Canterbury Lane
New Windsor, NY 12553
^83-1-1.-32
Moodna Creek Development, LTD.
Attn: Mr. Issac Landau, SRII, Inc.
Unit 2 of Millpond Condominium
PO Box 322
Cornwall, NY 12518

CHECKED BY MYRA:
Q/<
&
TOWN OF NEW WINDSOR
REQUEST FOR NOTIFICATION LIST
DATE:
JUNE 12,2003
PROJECT NUMBER: ZBA#
P.B. #
00-06
APPLICANT NAME:
CORNWALL COMMONS, LLC
PERSON TO NOTIFY TO PICK UP LIST:
LORRAINE (LANC & TULLY)
P.O. BOX 687
GOSHEN, NY 10924
TELEPHONE:
294-3700
TAX MAP NUMBER:
SEC. 37
BLOCK 1 LOT
45.1
SEC. ~~
BLOCK ~
TUT
SEC.
BLOCK
LOT
PROPERTY LOCATION:
RT. 9W
&
FORGE HILL ROAD
THIS LIST IS BEING REQUESTED BY:
NEW WINDSOR PLANNING BOARD:
XX
SITE PLAN OR SUBDIVISION:
(ABUTTING AND ACROSS ANY STREET
XX
SPECIAL PERMIT ONLY:
(ANYONE WITHIN 500 FEET)
AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT:
(ANYONE WITHIN THE AG DISTRICT WHICH IS WITHIN 500'
OF SITE PLAN OR SUBDIVISION PROJECT)
*•*
*•*
*•*
*•*
V
V
V
V
V
V
*•*
V
%*
*•*
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
V
*•*
V
NEW WINDSOR ZONING BOARD
LIST WILL CONSIST OF ALL PROPERTY WITHIN 500 FEET OF PROJECT
•*•
•*•
•*•
•*•
•*•
•*•
•*•
•*•
•*•
•$•
•$»
•$•
•$»
•*•
•*•
•*•
•$»
•*•
•*•
•*•
«$»
•$•
•*•
•*•
AMOUNT OF DEPOSIT:
CHECK NUMBER:
TOTAL CHARGES:

Mauro Salvatore Parisi, Ch^nan
Cornwall Alliance for
RespWsible
Development, CARD
£i
Oak Street, Cornwall, New York 12518
June 16,2003
W
JUN 1 7 2003
DJrl-ljJJJ Q
62003
'
TOWN OF NEW WINDSOR
SUPERVISOR'S OFFICE
!i ;M
--
•••-•:,..o-.,\'ivLfV)n7
Marc Moran, Regional Director
NYSDEC, Region 3
21 South Putt Corners Road
New Paltz, New York 12561
•z^^™*n*7n*'
nf\ ^V\f\ ^
Dear Mr. Moran:
**
Corn ™XX
Commons Wetlands, FGEIS & SEQRA Findings
We are writing to you in reference to the proposed Comwnll r„™
A
.
related FGEIS and Findings Statement The FCFTQ
f
C°^nons
development project and its
livin
BO,
g the
,

Back to top


statu
as Lea

Back to top


s ofth
d Agency
e wetlan^K^swX
>
*
^^s^:cs^rs
d
'E°™S
$g £
^
St ™
?

Back to top


pe~h ^
Supervisor Jim Soilami, anda letter ald^sed to
fhe
T ^
* ^
^f ^
t0 the Town of
C "
Meyers, both
dated June
,3,
2003
(s^n^^^ ^
«™C^^^ ^
*e
wetland hydrology issues
Engineers (ACOE) jurisdtaSKS
f^ Z
,
^
*
^ ^
'E' md its
**"*
CorP of
Cornwall
Vl^LlT^ullT^Z t
rf ' IT * " ^ by Rubi"t0 both the T°™ of
Octobe7
, 2003
r
SEQR16
, 200A 3
Publialong c Hea^hwith
ofheg
andTectttilr
co—,ln H
e
,
E'
^T"„^
T"
aS
SEQRby
CARA D
pran
°CeSd
CCAS
at thD e
°
0ctobe
n
r
office to be added to EQRAreco T R ,h ^
"^ t0 "" ToWn of Cornwa» Town Clerks
presented data showing ,h«™tetwee n w T H^! f JTediate Federal attentionas »
WeUand *• should i/fac, be SE^S^SS!£££ * *" * *" * ^
&,"lS^^af»Srdtot e imPOrtanCe'thC T0W1 °f NeW Wind->« »
that, accorlngto Rubh" ep0rt SKZT T °° ** f ^ °f the C°mWa11 Co ™
P^ y
^-Wtland. ^

Back to top


^d-4and^^^^ ^
(continued)

(Re: Cornwall CommonMretlands, FGEIS
&
SEQRA Finding^ARD, June 13, 2003)
We urge you to investigate the matter ofWetland 'E' and the apparent lack of SEQRA response by
either the Town of Cornwall Planning Board or the ACOE to Paul Rubin's documentation showing
that, under current Federal Law, Wetland 'E' should be classified as jurisdictional.
Your immediate attention to this matter is requested because the Town of Cornwall Town Board
voted on Monday June 9, 2003 to "concur" with the SEQRA Findings of the Planning Board.
Also, on June 2, 2003 the Town of Cornwall Planning Board voted to grant "preliminary"
approval to a five-lot subdivision of the Cornwall Commons parcel located within the Town of
Cornwall.
We also strongly urge that no further action be taken by any involved or regulatory agency on
any approvals related to the Cornwall Commons development proposal until such time as the
issues of Wetland 'E' and its status have been resolved.
We ask that provisions be made for opening the FGEIS to revisions if and when this becomes
necessary based on pending
responses.
If you have any further information on the issue ofWetland 'E' or if you have any questions, please
contact us at 534-4884. Our FOIL to your office, stamped "received" today, for any documents related
to
the matter ofWetland *E' is also attached.
If there are any relevant administrative issues related to reopening the Cornwall Commons FGEIS and
Findings Statement, please let us know.
Respectfully,
Mauro Parisi, Chairman, CARD
Attachments:
CARD'S letter to Town of Cornwall, Sollami, June 13,2003 (stamped "received")
'±.\<
CARD's letter to Town of New Windsor, Meyers, June 13, 2003 (stamped "received")
"^
CARD's letter to Chairman Novesky and Planning Board, June 6, 2003 (stamped "received")^
cc of June 6, 2003, Novesky/Planning Board letter to Sollami (stamped "received") V1^
Paul Rubin's map related to Wetland *E' and site hydrology (Figure 1)^
cc: Neil Novesky, Chairman, Town of Cornwall Planning Board
Jim Sollami, Supervisor, Town of Cornwall
George Meyers, Supervisor, Town of New Windsor -""^
Dr. William Schuster, Chairman, Town of Cornwall Conservation Advisory Council
Basil Seggos, Esq., Riverkeeper. Inc
Paul Rubin, Hydrologist
J.G. Barbour, P.C.
Page 2 of2

IMMEDIAT
&
E ATTENTION REQUESTED
Mauro Salvatore Parisi, Chairman CARD
22 Oak Street
Cornwall, New York 12518
June 16,2003
Town of Cornwall
Planning Board Members
183 Main Street
Cornwall, New York 12518
TOWN OF NEW WINDSOR
SUPERVISOR'S OFFICE
£
Siiiffi
JUM 17 2003
FOWM CL£RK
OWN OF CORNWALL
OC'-i^rvi
"^ftw ^
VT^CLO^
\OM ^
Re: Cornwall Commons SEQRA & Wetland 'E' CARD June 6, 2003 letter to
Novesky
Dear Chairman Novesky and Members of the Planning Board:
We have not yet received a response to our letter to you dated June 6, 2003 captioned:
"Re: Cornwall
Commons Wetlands and SEQRA Findings."
We have attached a stamped "received" copy of that
letter for your convenience. It is urgent that we receive an immediate response to the listed questions.
We are also attaching cc copies of three letters delivered today to Town of Cornwall Supervisor Jim
Sollami, Town of New Windsor Supervisor George Meyers, and DEC Regional Director Marc Moran.
These letters pertain to our request to you for information regarding the Cornwall Commons SEQRA
process as it relates to Paul Rubin's submitted hydrology report addressing Wetland 'E' and its
hydrology, as well as the hydrology of other on-site wetlands, and that of the entire Cornwall Commons
site. The letters also question follow through on the ACOE jurisdictional status for Wetland 'E' in light
of Rubin's documentation.
A
main concern at this point is the "preliminary" approval that was granted the Cornwall
Commons five-lot subdivision request on June 2, 2003, and whatever other business and/or
approvals are pending in the Town of New Windsor relative to the New Windsor subdivision and
site plan. The June 2, 2003 Town of Cornwall Planning Board minutes have been unavailable
through FOIL requests.
We hope to hear from you as soon as possible. To expedite matters, we would be glad to meet with
you and Supervisor Sollami in order to quickly identify and address the relevant issues and
questions. But, most of all, in the interim, we strongly urge you to insure that Wetland 'E' and all
other wetland and natural resources of the Cornwall Commons site remain protected until the
issues of Wetland 'E,' and its Federal status have been fully addressed.
Questions in addition to our June 6th questions:
1)
Why
was preliminary
approval granted the five-lot subdivision request? What,, jf any were the
conditions for final approval.
(continued)

(Re: Cornwall Commons SEQRA
&
Wetland 'E' CARD June 6, 2003 letter to
Novesky)
2)
Since the October 7, 2003 SEQRA Cornwall Commons Public Hearing, have any documents
been exchanged between the Planning Board and the ACOE. If so, please identify.
3)
To your knowledge, Since the October 7, 2003 SEQRA Cornwall Commons Public Hearing,
have any documents been exchanged between the applicant and the ACOE. If so, please
identify.
Respectfully,
Mauro Parisi, Chairman, CARD
Attachments:
CARD'S letter to Town of Cornwall, Sollami, June 13,2003 (stamped "received")
^
• ':
P
;]
CARD'S letter to Town of New Windsor, Meyers, June 13, 2003 (stamped "received")
"
J \
CARD'S letter to DEC Region 3 Regional Director, Marc Moran, June 16, 2003 (stamped "received")
cc: Supervisor Jim Sollomi, Town of Cornwall
George Meyers, Supervisor, Town of New Windsor
^^
Dr. William Schuster, Chairman, Town of Cornwall Conservation Advisory Council
Basil Seggos, Esq., Riverkeeper
Paul Ruben, hydro geologist
J.G. Barbour, P.C.
Page 2'of 2

IMMEDIATE ATTENTION REQUESTED
Mauro Salvatore Parisi, Chairman CARD
22 Oak Street
Cornwall, New York 12518
June 16, 2003
Jim Sollami, Supervisor
Town of Cornwall
183 Main Street
Cornwall, New York 12518
Re: Cornwall Commons & Wetland 'E' Update and Sollami cc copies
Dear Mr. Sollami:
As mentioned in our letter to you dated June 13, 2003, stamped "received" on June 16, 2003, we have
communicated with Town of New Windsor Supervisor George Meyers on the issues related to Wetland
'E' at the Cornwall Commons site. (See attached cc copy to you.)
Another letter was delivered to DEC Region 3 Regional Director Marc Moran and a cc copy to you of
that letter is also attached.
Today, a letter to Planning Board Chairman Novesky, along with a set of cc copies to him, was also
delivered . (See attached cc copy of that letter to you.)
As mentioned to Mr. Novesky in our June 16th letter to him and the Planning Board:
A main concern at this point is the "preliminary" approval that was granted the Cornwall
Commons five-lot subdivision request on June 2,2003, and whatever other business and/or
approvals are pending in the Town of New Windsor relative to the New Windsor subdivision and
site plan. The June 2, 2003 Town of Cornwall Planning Board minutes have been unavailable
through FOIL requests.
We hope to hear from you as soon as possible. To expedite matters, we would be glad to meet with
you and Supervisor Sollami in order to quickly identify and address the relevant issues and
questions. But, most of all, in the interim, we strongly urge you to insure that Wetland 'E' and all
other wetland and natural resources of the Cornwall Commons site remain protected until the
issues of Wetland 'E,' and its Federal status have been fully addressed.
And...
Questions in addition to our June 6th questions:
1)
Why was
preliminary
approval granted the five-lot subdivision request? What, if any were the
conditions for final approval.
(continued)
W
JUN 1 7 2003
iomi
i:-;^?<"
"OWN OF NEW WINDSOR
- "T2 ' ' , ~J -<•-)• - -'
*£2rj-
W ' •
SUPERVISOR'S OFFICE
I T^CLexUuJ ^TUMM
Y\\&U^J
\jOhM^
(r.--Jrrn\

Re: Cornwall Commons & Wetland 'E' Update and Sollami cc copies
2)
Since the October 7, 2003 SEQRA Cornwall Commons Public Hearing, have any documents
been exchanged between the Planning Board and the ACOE. If so, please identity.
3)
To your knowledge, Since the October 7, 2003 SEQRA Cornwall Commons Public Hearing,
have any documents been exchanged between the applicant and the ACOE. If so, please
identify.
We request that you look into this matter immediately and hope to hear from you as soon as possible.
Respectfully,
Mauro Parisi, Chairman, CARD
Attachments:
CARD'S letter to Town of New Windsor, Meyers, June 13, 2003 (stamped "received")
CARD'S letter to DEC Region 3 Regional Director, Marc Moran, June 16, 2003 (stamped "received")
CARD'S letter to Planning Board Chairman Neil Novesky, June 16, 2003 (stamped "received")
cc: Neil Novesky, Chairman, Town of Cornwall Planning Board
George Meyers, Supervisor, Town of New Windsor -^""""^
Dr. William Schuster, Chairman, Town of Cornwall Conservation Advisory Council
Basil Seggos, Esq., Riverkeeper
Paul Ruben, hydrogeologist
J.G. Barbour, P.C.
Page 2 of2

Back to top


Cornwall Alliance for Responsible Development, CARD
22 Oak Street, Cornwall, New York 12518
Phone: 845-534-4884, FAX: 845-534-2445
TO:

Back to top


FOIL REQUEST
^hsgfc\ \&\
DATE:
June 18,2003
Town Clerk/FOILS
Town of New Windsor
555 Union Avenue
New Windsor, New York 12518

Back to top


RECEIVED
JUN 2 0 2003
TOWN CLERK'S OFF

Back to top


CE
Re: Cornwall Commons proposed development project
Please provide all documents related to "Cornwall Commons," including but not limited
to documents related to its SEQRA review process, the wetland known as Wetland 'E'
(including its hydrology and its Army Corp of Engineers jurisdictional status), all Town
of New Windsor approvals/requests, etc. to date—for our review.
Sincerely,
Mauro Parisi, Chairman, CARD

Back to top


e EI w
JUN 1 6 2003
)WN OF NEW WINDSOR
JPERVISOR'S OFFICE
Mauro Salvatorc Parisi, Chairman
Cornwall Alliance for Responsible Development, CARD
22 Oak Street, Cornwall, New York 12518
June 13,2003
George Meyers, Town Supervisor
Town of New Windsor
555 Union Avenue
New Windsor, New York 12518
R^rnwall Comm> Wetla^s, F*JS & SEQRA Findings
Dear Mr. Meyers:
within New Windsor.
Cornwall Al.iance forResponsib,
*^<^$££^
EfflSS d
in
S consenting on the sevcra. DGEIS documents that have been submttted.
A
••! T «, nf romwall PlanninK Board Chairman Neil Novesky in a letter to
"ofJun e 6 2003 letter and cc copy stamped "received" on June 6, 2002).
0„r research to date indicates thatthere
^^^^££2^ "
" "
by Hydrologist Paul Rubin related to Wetland E andrts> A™yxP
J>
d
Lead A
jurisdictional status, in his report subm.tted to the
^^ZTsBQ^Mi e
Hearing, as well as
lor the Cornwall Commons SEQRA process *£j^iS 2
by CARD and CCAD. The
0 „ October 16, 2003 along wtth other comments and mater mis ubm*ed by
^
^ ^
of said Wetland 'E,' located in the middle of the larger Cornwall parcel.
(Minutes for that meeting were unavailable as of today, June 13 .)
(continued)
CO-

(Re: Cornwall Commons Wctmnds
Xds ,
,
FGEIFGEIS
S
&
&
SEQRSEQRA
A
FindingsFindings,
, C/5KDcJm>
,
, June 13, 2003)
Since wc have not yet received a response to our June 6, 2002 letter to the Town of Cornwall Planning
Board, we thought it wise to inform you of the current concerns regarding the status of Wetland 'E,' its
related hydrology, and the apparent lack of follow through on a response from the ACOE. We are also
attaching a copy of our most recent communication with Mr. Sollami (letter dated, June 13, 2003,
stamped "received" on June 16, 2003).
We urge you to investigate the matter of Wetland 'E7 and the apparent lack of response by either the
Town of Cornwall Planning Board or the ACOE to Rubin's documentation which shows that under
current federal law it qualities as a Federally protected wetland.
Your immediate attention to this matter is requested because the Town of Cornwall Town Board voted
on Monday June 9, 2003 to "concur" with the SEQRA Findings of the Planning Board.
We strongly urge that no further action be taken regarding the Cornwall Commons development
proposal until the issues of Wetland 'E' and its status have been resolved.
If you have any further information on the issue of Wetland 'E' or if you have further questions, please
contact us at 534-4884.
Respectfully,
Mauro Parisi, Chairman, CARD
Attachments:
CARD's letter to Town of Cornwall, Sollami, June 13, 2003 (stamped "received")
^
vv>>
/^\
CARD's letter to Chairman Novesky and Planning Board, June 6, 2003 (stamped "received")-^^
cc of June 6, 2003, Novesky/Planning Board letter to Sollami (stamped "received")
^\£y
Paul Rubin's map related to Wetland 'E' and site hydrology (Figure 1) -Y\T^
cc: Jim Sollami, Supervisor, Town of Cornwall
Neil Novesky, Chairman, Town of Cornwall Planning Board
Marc Moran, Director, NYSDEC, Region 3
Dr. William Schuster, Chairman, Town of Cornwall Conservation Advisory Council
Basil Seggos, Esq., Riverkeeper. lnc
Paul Rubin, Hydrologist
J.G. Barbour, P.C.
Page 2 of2

Mauro Salvatore Parisi, Chairman
Cornwall Alliance for Responsible
22 Oak Street, Cornwall, New York 12518
; j\|
June 13, 2003
Mauro Salvatore Parisi, Chairman
,0, r^V^J
•'^••r^-.r
-,.-,>-•,
Cornwall Alliance for Responsible Development, CARD
/
KJ
I ^'sj^riJ J3
\i-J
I:h •'
i]j
Jim Sollami, Town Supervisor
To wn of Cornwall
183 Main Street
Cornwall, New York 12518
Re: Cornwall Commons Wetlands, FGEIS & SEQRA Findings
Dear Mr. Sollami:
As mentioned in our letter to Planning Board Chairman Novesky and members of the Planning
Board of June 6, 2003, delivered to our Town Clerk along with a cc copy to you (both the original and
cc stamped "received" on that day) there were, and still are, very serious concerns about the handling
of the Planning Board-approved FGEIS and Findings Statement with regard to the status of Wetland
*E.' In particular, the apparent lack of official response on the jurisdictional status of Wetland 'E' by
the Army Corp of Engineers (ACOE), especially in light of Paul Rubin's data regarding the
hydrological connection between Wetland 'E' and Moodna Creek. For your convenience, we have
attached a copy of our June 6th letter, a copy of our cc to you (both marked 'received' on June 6th) and
a copy of Rubin's hydrology map for Wetland 'E' (Figure 1).
Unfortunately, and notwithstanding our effort to communicate this apparent deficiency, you
and our Town Board voted to "concur" with the FGEIS and Finding Statements adopted by our
Planning Board. Since we have yet to receive a response, written or otherwise, to our June 6th letter,
we are repeating the content of that letter here with additional comments on page two:
It has been brought to our attention that, as of June 6, 2003, site plans for the Cornwall
Commons proposed development project for 200 acres on 9W, available for public viewing at the
Town Clerks office, indicate that Wetland 'E' is no longer being mapped.
Questions:
1) Why is Wetland 'E' no longer shown on the Lane and Tully site map for Cornwall Commons dated
(revised) May 20, 2003?
2) Has the planning board generated a finding statement addressing the citizen comments submitted at
or after the SEQRA public hearing held on October 7, 2002—especially addressing the substantial
comments of CARD and CCAD as well as the hydrology report, submitted by hydrologist, Paul
Rubin, and the wildlife report submitted by J.G. Barbour?
3) Has the planning board received a final judgment from the US Army Corp of Engineers on the
matter of their jurisdiction over Wetland 'E' in response to Mr. Rubin's hydrology report and
specific comments regarding the nature of Wetland 'E' as a no n-isolated wetland? (The US ACE
was also sent a copy of the report in early October.)
(continued)

Mauro Salvatorc Parisi, Chairman CARD
22 Oak Street
Cornwall, New York 12518
June 6, 2003
Town of Cornwall
Planning Board Members
183 Main Street
Cornwall, New York 12518
Re: Cornwall Commons Wetlands and SEQRA Findings
Dear Chairman Novesky and Members of the Planning Board:
It has been brought to our attention that, as of June 6, 2003, site plans for the Cornwall
Commons proposed development project for 200 acres on 9W, available for public viewing at the Town
Clerks office, indicate that Wetland 'E' is no longer being mapped.
Questions:
1) Why is Wetland 'E' no longer shown on the Lane and Tully site map for Cornwall Commons dated
(revised) May 20, 2003?
2) Has the planning board generated a finding statement addressing the citizen comments submitted at
or after the SEQRA public hearing held on October 7, 2002—especially addressing the substantial
comments of CARD and CCAD as well as the hydrology report submitted by hydrologist, Paul
Ruben, and the wildlife report submitted by J.G. Barbour?
3) Has the planning board received a final judgment from the US Army Corp of Engineers on the
matter of their jurisdiction over Wetland 'E' in response to Mr. Ruben's hydrology report and
specific comments regarding the nature of Wetland 'E' as a non-isolated wetland? (The US ACE
was also sent a copy of the report in early October.)
4) What is the current status of the Cornwall Commons SEQRA process and what specific SEQRA
documents have been generated since the October 7, 2002 public hearing?
Please provide the names and dates of specific documents responding to the above questions. We are
looking forward to your speedy response as time, as always, is of the essence.
Respectfully,
Mauro Parisi, Chairman, CARD
cc: Supervisor Jim Sollomi, Town of Cornwall
Paul Ruben, hydrogeologisl
J.G. Barbour, P.C.
i\
l'%

Mauro Salvatorc Parisi, Chairman CARD
22 Oak Street
Cornwall, New York 12518
June 6, 2003
Town of Cornwall
Planning Board Members
183 Main Street
Cornwall, New York 12518
Dear Chairman Novesky and Members of the Planning Board:
It has been brought to our attention that, as of June 6, 2003, site plans for the Cornwall
Commons proposed development project for 200 acres on 9W, available for public viewing at the Town
Clerks office, indicate that Wetland 'E' is no longer being mapped.
Questions:
1) Why is Wetland 'E' no longer shown on the Lane and Tully site map for Cornwall Commons dated
(revised) May 20, 2003?
2) Has the planning board generated a finding statement addressing the citizen comments submitted at
or after the SEQRA public hearing held on October 7, 2002—especially addressing the substantial
comments of CAJID and CCAD as well as the hydrology report submitted by hydrologist, Paul
Ruben, and the wildlife report submitted by J.G. Barbour?
3) Has the planning board received a final judgment from the US Army Corp of Engineers on the
matter of their jurisdiction over Wetland 'E' in response to Mr. Ruben's hydrology report and
specific comments regarding the nature of Wetland 'E' as a non-isolated wetland? (The US ACE
was also sent a copy of the report in early October.)
4) What is the current status of the Cornwall Commons SEQRA process and what specific SEQRA
documents have been generated since the October 7, 2002 public hearing?
Please provide the names and dates of specific documents responding to the above questions. We are
looking forward to your speedy response as time, as always, is of the essence.
Respectfully,
Mauro Parisi, Chairman, CARD
cc: Supervisor Jim Sollomi, Town of Cornwall
*S
Paul Ruben, hydrogeologist
).G.
Barbour, P.C.
"W
Re: Cornwall Commons Wetlands and SEQRA Findings

Cornwall Commons
Delinea,ed"«£*,Drainage
Figure 1

(Re: Cornwall Commons Wetlands, FGEIS & £EQRA Findings, CARD, June 13, 2003)
4) What is the current status of the Cornwall Commons SEQRA process and what specific SEQRA
documents have been generated since the October 7, 2002 public hearing?
Please provide the names and dates of specific documents responding to the above questions. We are
looking forward to your speedy response as time, as always, is of the essence.
(end of content of June 6" letter)
It seems clear, from our inspection of the relevant documents and records including but not limited to,
the FGEIS, the Findings Statement, and planning board minutes from September of 2002 to May of
2003 (according to the Town Clerk's office, minutes for the June 2, 2003 Planning Board meeting are
as of today unavailable), that neither the applicant nor our Planning Board addressed the specific
findings and claims made by hydrologist, Paul Rubin, in connection with the non-isolated character of
Wetland 'E' and its relationship to Moodna Creek. This information required immediate Federal
attention and was submitted to our Planning Board as Lead Agency at both the October 7, 2002
SEQRA Public Hearing, and on October 16, 2002 with other comments and documents under
a
single
cover. For your convenience, we have also attached the cover page of that submission (stamped
"received") with contents checked off by our Town Clerk.
The consequences of this apparent lack of official response to a key issue regarding the proposed
development of the Cornwall Commons site are very troubling indeed from the standpoint of SEQRA
and Federal Law. As mentioned at our June 13, 2003 meeting, in your office, on the issue of Cornwall
Commons wetlands and Wetland 'E,' answers are needed and care taken to protect all of the wetland
resources at the proposed Cornwall Commons site-in particular Wetland 'E,' at least until such time as
an official ruling is received from the ACOE.
We urge you to meet with Planning Board Chairman Novesky regarding this issue and to revisit
the record yourself in light of our concerns and findings.
We would also strongly urge tjiat, in the interim, you do everything in your power to protect all
the wetland resources at the proposed Cornwall Commons site—including Wetland 'E'--until
such time as this matter is fully resolved.
We are sending separate letter to Town of New Windsor Supervisor George Meyers with a cc to you
regarding these matters since both the Town of New Windsor Town Board and Planning Board are
involved agencies and since the hydrology of the larger Cornwall parcel directly affects any proposed
development or approvals for the New Windsor parcel.
Among other relevant issues, and of immediate importance, the Town of New Windsor, as an involved
agency, is overseeing a subdivision request on its portion of the Cornwall Commons property that,
according to Rubin's report and plotted map (see attached map "Figure 1") receives the stream outflow
of said Wetland 'E' which is located in the middle of the larger Cornwall parcel.
Page 2 of3

(Re: Cornwall Commons Wetlands, FGEIS & SEQRA Findings, CARD, June 13, 2003)
Also, our Town of Cornwall Planning board has, as of their June 2, 2003 meeting, voted to grant
"preliminary" approval to a five lot subdivision of the Cornwall Commons parcel located in Cornwall.
(Minutes of that meeting were unavailable as of today, June 13th.)
We look forward to a speedy response as time, as always, is of the essence.
Respectfully,
Mauro Parisi, Chairman, CARD
Attachments:
CARD'S letter to Chairman Novesky and Planning Board, June 6, 2003 (stamped "received")
&*-£ *&~' &/"-*/°3
cc of June 6, 2003, Novesky/Planning Board letter to Sollami (stamped "received")
(l<Lt£
&/lH
° ^
^2 ?
PauCARD'l Rubin'S
Octobes
mar p
7relate
, 200d 3
tDGEIo WetlanS
commentd
*E' ans d
covesite r
hydrologsheet
(stampey
(Figured
"received"
. 1)
*$&-
)
KB*-*-*"***—
> W
6 ('
^
^
(
OJ
l &I
^
cc: George Meyers, Supervisor, New Windsor
Neil Novesky, Chairman, Town of Cornwall Planning Board
Marc Moran, Director, NYSDEC, Region 3
Dr. William Schuster, Chairman, Town of Cornwall Conservation Advisory Council
Basil Seggos, Esq., Riverkeeper. Inc
Paul Rubin, Hydrologist
J.G. Barbour, P.C.
Page 3 of3

May 14, 2003
41
CORNWALL COMMONS SUBDIVISION f00-06)
Robert DiNardo, Esq. and Ms. Lorraine Potter from Lane
& Tully appeared before the board for this proposal.
MR. PETRO: Application proposes subdivision of 52.8
acres into 69 single family residential lots. Plan was
reviewed at the 22 March, 2000 and 24 April, 2002
planning board meeting. So you're grandfathered in
under the old zoning?
MS. POTTER: Yes.
MR. PETRO: This is going to be, this is down by?
MR. EDSALL: This is the Cornwall Commons project at
the top of Moodna hill.
MR. PETRO: Where is the water coming from?
MR. EDSALL: Village of Cornwall has already executed
an intermunicipal agreement with New Windsor to provide
water to this site.
MR. PETRO: You're not affected by the water moratorium
on this application?
MS. POTTER: No.
MR. PETRO: Cornwall Planning Board assumed the role of
lead agency, they received and they adopted the
findings statement relative to the GEIS which includes
the environmental evaluation and the development of the
New Windsor lands, how many houses in New Windsor?
MS. POTTER: Sixty-nine.
MR. PETRO: Now there was some comments that came from
Mr. Kroll, I guess you're aware of that, the dedication
of the roads?
MS. POTTER: Yes, we're in the process of working with
the Town attorneys on an agreement on how to handle
dedicating this portion or ownership of this portion of
the road which is in the Town of Cornwall to the Town

May 14, 2003
42
of New Windsor.
MR. PETRO: You realize why he's doing that so if
there's a storm, the road would be under our control,
he can manage it, he doesn't have to tell anybody else,
we can get in there.
MS. POTTER: My name is Lorraine Potter, I'm with Lane
& Tully Engineering. As you've mentioned before, SEQRA
review has been completed. This is Route 9W, we're
proposing 69 lot residential individual home ownership.
There's a main road coming off of 9W on the north side
which will eventually loop around and come out on the
southerly portion of the property. Main access to the
site would be from this portion, we would have interior
roads with a cul-de-sac at the end for the residential
subdivision. We have talked with Mr. Edsall in regard
to possibly developing a certain portion of the roads
with the number of lots at the beginning phase and then
for the remainder of the roads to be completed as the
subdivision goes on. The sewer is Town of Cornwall
through a pump station, all the sewage will be coming
down here and the forced main will be crossing 9W going
to the Town of Cornwall sewage treatment plant. That's
basically it. Do you have any questions?
MR. PETRO: I have been, not that I'm trying to, I'm
certainly not ignoring you, I'm concerned because we
have a disapproval from the fire and there was two
reasons he has or three or four new reasons, but one of
the original comments and I think this goes back to
2000 when you first came in is that we had asked that
the road have another access point in New Windsor
somewhere.
MR. EDSALL: It's been looped, Jim, they did modify the
plan to create that second loop into the project.
MR. PETRO: Not down to Forge Hill. Originally, we
looked at off the cul-de-sac eliminating the lot and
getting down to the road but the topo was a problem.
MR. EDSALL: That was sewer but you'd never get a road
down, that's a cliff, there's really no accessible way
over that, off that portion of the property.

May 14, 2003
43
MR. PETRO: Anything can be done.
MR. EDSALL: That would be a tough one.
MR. BABCOCK: They added Road D, Mark?
MR. EDSALL: They added Road D as a loop at your
request that was added to the Cornwall plan and
explained to Cornwall's planning board that you
required it.
MR. PETRO: We do have some comments, I am unable to
locate fire hydrants.
MS. POTTER: We'll be adding those.
MR. PETRO: You can get a copy of this, I'm just going
to do this quick. So now please explain the reason
there are two different water main sizes, 8 and 12
inch.
MS. POTTER: The 8, the 12 inch is for servicing the
whole entire parcel, including the Town of Cornwall,
we'll be coming in with the main line connecting to
Cornwall, looping through coming to this portion and
future connection crossing 9W. The 8 inch line which
goes through the residential area is all that's
required for the residential services.
MR. PETRO: And road names needed for all roadways in
the Town of New Windsor, we have time for that yet.
Why are you here tonight?
MR. DINARDO: Public hearing.
MS. POTTER: To request a public hearing.
MR. PETRO: I think you're ready for a public hearing
on this one.
MR. DINARDO: I thought if I stayed long enough, you'd
say that, Mr. Chairman.
MR. PETRO: Something's going right. Mark?

May 14, 2003
44
MR. EDSALL: I do think it's important we get the
public hearing moving because they are ready but
secondly because Cornwall has adopted their findings
and Bob, correct me if I describe the procedure
incorrectly, but we need to since it was a Type I
action and because it had an EIS prepared, we need to
do our on findings and obviously, we should do that
upon the conclusion of public hearing. So I'd like to
not have that drag on and really our conclusions are
solely based on I believe our portion of the project.
MR. PETRO: Motion for a public hearing.
MR. LANDER: So moved.
MR. BRESNAN: Second it.
MR. PETRO: Motion has been made and seconded that the
New Windsor Planning Board schedule a public hearing
for the Cornwall Commons major subdivision, New York
State Route 9W. Is there any further discussion from
the board members? If not, roll call.
ROLL CALL
MR. LANDER
AYE
MR. BRESNAN
AYE
MR. KARNAVEZOS
AYE
MR. SCHLESINGER AYE
MR. PETRO
AYE
MR. PETRO: Anything else? I think that's good.
MR. DINARDO: Right, thank you.

McGOEY, HAUSER and EDSALL
CONSULTING ENGINEERS P.C.
RICHARD D. McGOEY, P.E . (NY&PA)
WILLIAM J. HAUSER, P.E. (NY&NJ)
MARK J. EDSALL, P.E. (NY.NJ&PAJ
JAMES M. FARR, P.E. (NY&PA)
II
Main Office
33 Airport Center Drive
Suite #202
New Windsor, New York 12553
(845)567-3100
e-mail: mheny@mhepc.com
n
Regional Office
507 Broad Street
Milford, Pennsylvania 18337
(570) 296-2765
e-mail: mhepa@mhepc.com
Writer's E-mail Address:
mje@mhepc. com
TOWN OF NEW WINDSOR
PLANNING BOARD
REVIEW COMMENTS
PROJECT NAME:
PROJECT LOCATION:
PROJECT NUMBER:
DATE:
DESCRIPTION:
CORNWALL COMMONS MAJOR SUBDIVISION
NYS ROUTE 9W
SECTION 37 - BLOCK 1 - LOT 45.1
00-06
14 MAY 2003
THE APPLICATION PROPOSES THE SUBDIVISION OF THE 52.8+/- ACRE
PARCEL INTO SIXTY-NINE (69) SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS. THE
APPLICATION WAS PREVIOUSLY REVIEWED AT THE 22 MARCH 2000 AND
24 APRIL 2002 PLANNING BOARD MEETINGS.
This application is part of an overall Cornwall Commons development, which spans the Town line into the
Town of Cornwall. The Town of Cornwall Planning Board is also considering a subdivision application in
their PIO zone for a subdivision.
Previously, the Town of Cornwall Planning Board assumed the role of Lead Agency under SEQRA. The most
recent action under SEQRA is the adoption (by the Cornwall board) of a Findings Statement relative to the
GEIS, which includes an environmental evaluation of the development of the New Windsor lands. It is
necessary (and appropriate) that this board (NWPB) adopt its findings at its earliest convenience. I suggest the
Board authorize this writer and Andy Krieger to work with the applicants in this regard.
The only "new" issue I am aware of is the requirement of the Highway Superintendent that the northerly
access road from 9W to the New Windsor subdivision be a New Windsor Town road. This would seem to
require a minor annexation of a 50' wide strip from Cornwall to New Windsor. The Board may wish to
discuss this aspect, and the supporting reasons and conclusions could be included in this board's findings.
Respectfully/Submitted,
Maryj/ Edsall, P.E>, P.P.
Placffung Board Engineer
MJl%t
NW00-06-14May03.doc

Back to top


^"OON
./TV
New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation
Historic Preservation Field Services Bureau
o NEWYOBKSTATE S Peebles Island, PO Box 189, Waterford, New York 12188-0189
518-237-8643
Bernadette Castro
Commissioner
May 8, 2003
Neil Novesky
Town of Cornwall Planning Department
Town Hall
183 Main Street
Cornwall, NY 12518
Dear Mr. Novesky:
Re: SEQRA
Adoption of SEQRA Findings
Cornwall Commons Subdivision
Town of Cornwall, Orange County, NY
00PR00557
Thank you for requesting the comments of the Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic
Preservation (OPRHP) with regard to the potential for this project to affect significant
historical/cultural resources. OPRHP has received your Notice of Adoption of Lead Agency
Written SEQRA Findings for this project. After reviewing the findings statement, OPRHP feels it is
important to point out an error in the statement.
On page 23, under "H. Cultural Resource" it is indicated that "The Cultural Resources
analysis was referred to the NYS Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation in February
of 2002; no objections have been received by the Lead Agency to date". In fact ORPHP has
responded to that survey. On March 29, 2002 we responded to the submission of the report with
a letter to the archaeological consultant, Stephen Oberon, that was also copied to Cornwall
Commons, LLC. In this letter is was indicated that while the report covered the northern portion
of the project area, it did not address the entire project, and that OPRHP would need to review
the entire project before providing a final determination. Since this has not been done and we
do not know if there are historic properties in the un-surveyed portion of the project, it is
premature for the Finding Statement to indicate that there are no Mitigation Measures needed.
We would also like to note that after receiving the DEIS, we wrote directly to you on
September 27, 2002 to indicate that our March 29, 2002 response was not included in the DEIS.
A copy of the March 29 letter was included in our September 27 letter.
Additionally, our concern for the need for additional survey was clearly outlined in the
FGEIS in which Mr. Cappella acknowledged that prior to any development in the Town of
Cornwall portions...additional testing may be necessary before SHPO has signed off..."(Section 2-
page 10). Based on this our office concluded that you understood the need for additional testing
and did not see a need to respond to the FGEIS. However, the Findings Statement indicates that
this need has not been fully recognized. By way of this letter ORPHP is once again informing the
Town that we have not completed our review, and that it is premature to indicate that no
historic/cultural resources will be impacted by this project.
__ .
MAY i , ?003
.V.;KI> .
....
.• .-.•.»
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Agency
i
printed on recycled paper

Finally, ORPHP feels it is important to point out several items in the FGEIS that were
originally accepted as without concern. This document identifies Mr. Oberon as having a Ph.D. in
archaeology. This is not the case. While Mr. Oberon has been a professional in the field for
many years, we do not believe that he has a Ph.D. Second, Mr. Cappella's statement that "the
likelihood of any other significant cultural resources being located on the entire parcel is very
low" (page 10) does not reflect the opinion of ORPHP and is not indicated in our response to this
report.
At this point, ORPHP continues to recommend that the additional survey be completed
and we continue to indicate that it is premature to provide an impact determination for this
project. We are concerned that our comments appear to have not been considered on several
occasions and that although they did seem to be introduced into the FGEIS, they have now been
disregarded again.
Please contact me at extension 3291 if you have any questions regarding these
comments.
Douglas P. Mackey
Historic Preservation Program Analyst
Archaeology
Cc:
(^own of New Windsor Planning Board
Village of Cornwall-on-Hudson
NYSDEC Region 3
NYSDOT Region 8
NYS DOH

RESULTS OF P.B. MEETING OF:
PROJECT:
(M/YtoA*tM
C^m^rt^t^
/y ,
£603
P.B. #
00 -o6>
<u
LEAD AGENCY:
AUTHORIZE COORD. LETTER: Y_
TAKE LEAD AGENCY:
Y
N
NEGATIVE DEC:
N
M)
S)
CARRIED: Y
VOTE: A_
N
N
M)
S)
CARRIED: Y
VOTE: A
N
N
b-
PUBLIC HEARING:
WAIVED:
[Qo
CLOSED:
J\\
M) L.
S) 6
VOTE: A£~
SCHEDULE P.H.: Y
N
SEND TO O.C. PLANNING: Y
SEND TO DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION: Y
REFER TO Z.B.A.: M)_
S).
'0TE:
A
RETURN TO WORK SHOP: Y
N
N
APPROVAL:
M)
S)
VOTE: A
N
NEED NEW PLANS: Y
N
APPROVED:
CONDITIONS - NOTES:

RESULTS OF P.XyiEETING OF :
(J/MJI
^
,onp^
PROJECT:
(JMSVUIOM (kitAX/ru U-
P.B.#
O0-/)(>
LEAD AGENCY:
NEGATIVE DEC:
1. AUTHORIZE COORD LETTER: Y
N
M)
S)
VOTE: A
N
2. TAKE LEAD AGENCY: Y
N
CARRIED: YES
NO
"
M)
S)
VOTE: A
N
CARRIED: YES NO.
WAIVE PUBLIC HEARING:
M)
S)
VOTE: A
N
WAIVED: Y
N
SCHEDULE P.H. Y
N
C3to<3»-
SEND TO O.C. PLANNING: Y_
SEND TO DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION: Y__
REFER TO Z.B.A: M)
S)
VOTE: A
N
RETURN TO WORK SHOP: YES
NO
APPROVAL:
M)
S)
VOTE: A
N
APPROVED:
M)
S)
VOTE: A N
APPROVED CONDITIONALLY
NEED NEW PLANS: Y
N
DISCUSSION/APPROVAL CONDITIONS:
&MjJft
/)
6~£JT^

April 24, 2002
19
CORNWALL COMMONS LAND DEVELOPMENT (00-06)
John Cappello, Esq. appeared before the board for this
proposal.
MR. CAPPELLO: I'm John Cappello here on behalf of
Cornwall Commons project. The map you see before me is
pretty much the similar one that's been before this
board over the course of the last at least two years.
What's different now is we have submitted our draft
environmental impact statement both to the Town of
Cornwall Planning Board and to the Town of New Windsor
Planning Board. As you recall, this project fronts on
9W, Forge Hill Road is probably about here 53 acres or
so in the Town of New Windsor and 143 in the Town of
Cornwall. The DGEIS is set up to look at impacts of
the commercially zoned portion of the project in the
Town of Cornwall and to do a little bit of a more site
specific on the permit, the uses in the H-3 zoning
district in the Town of New Windsor portion. We have
shown and have an application pending before the board
for 69 single family lots, the DGEIS also examines the
potential impacts from a senior citizen development or
a PUD development which are both special permits in
this zoning district and what we have done is we have
compared and contrasted the potential impacts as they
relate to water, sewer, drainage, traffic from the
various different types of permitted uses, so when the
site specific plan is pursued, we'll be able to use
this impact statement as the support for any future
development. But we do have an application pending for
these 69 lots.
MR. PETRO: What are the sizes of the lots?
MR. CAPPELLO: 20,000 square feet.
MR. PETRO: How did you sneak that passed me? I don't
remember how you could have done that. March 2000, I
know.
MR. CAPPELLO: We show I think when we were before the
board, we discussed the access roads. As you can see,
the Town of New Windsor line runs along here. There
are two separate accesses and both will be constructed.

April 24, 2002
20
We have been in front of the DOT and had initial
discussions with them, both access roads would be built
so you would have a loop road with two entrances. This
would go through the commercial development. This
would basically service the residential development.
It starts in Cornwall, runs along the town line and
then it would be some sort of a demarcation here for
the residential development to separate it off from the
commercially zoned portion. I believe the Town of
Cornwall and Town of New Windsor have similar
arrangements where there's road crossing boundaries and
so they make an agreement as to who will maintain the
roads. I know there was a question that was raised in
Cornwall, we have been pursuing water service, we have
agreements between the Village of Cornwall-on-Hudson,
Town of Cornwall and Town of New Windsor to provide
water to the site. We have two options for sewer that
we have been exploring, one would be servicing the
whole development in the Town of Cornwall plant which
does have the capacity and the other one was
alternative would be serving the whole development in
the Town of New Windsor plant. We have had draft
agreements in front of both towns and wil