A new, powerful Citizen Portal experience is ready. Switch now

Planning board hears amended plan for 17A warehouse, flags road, floodplain and screening concerns

April 08, 2026 | Goshen, Orange County, New York


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Planning board hears amended plan for 17A warehouse, flags road, floodplain and screening concerns
A Goshen Planning Board meeting on April 8 opened with a review of an amended site plan for the 17A warehouse campus, where board members said the applicant now has a tenant that will perform final assembly of cleaning products.

A planning board member summarized the tenant’s operations: "they're going to be assembling cleaning products. It'll be a final assembly. There's no manufacturing, no plastic extrusion, no chemicals." The board noted the project remains in a floodplain and that the applicant reduced estimated imported fill from about 30,000 cubic yards to roughly 16,000–18,000 cubic yards.

Why it matters: planners said the amount of fill, how and where it is sourced and whether existing on‑site material was added previously are essential to floodplain management and to downstream water quality. The board asked for documentation that any imported material would be tested at source and certified clean before delivery.

Board members flagged access and traffic as a key obstacle. The applicant’s trucks are expected to enter via Jessup Switch and Pumpkin Swamp roads, prompting staff to say the road will need widening and improvement. The board also noted the project proposes two entrances that would be less than the town code’s 600‑foot spacing requirement; the applicant intends to seek a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals.

Members asked for conditions that would link approval to road improvements and sequencing. One member suggested making road upgrades a condition of any variance: if the town doesn’t see a road plan and proof that the roadway, bridge load limits and turning radii can support the anticipated trucks, the variance should not be granted.

Planners also pressed for landscaping and visual screening where the development abuts nearby houses and for clarity about on‑site fire protection. Board discussion included the adequacy of water supply for sprinkler systems, whether fire tanks and pumps would be required, and whether the applicant’s planned storage tank(s) and sprinkler design meet town standards. Several members said those systems must be resolved once full building plans are filed.

Next steps: the planning board expects the applicant to supply detailed plans — including engineered road mitigation, source testing for fill material, and fire‑protection design — before the board advances final approvals or supports any ZBA variance.

View the Full Meeting & All Its Details

This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.

Watch full, unedited meeting videos
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
Permanent access to expanding government content
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee