Lingering concerns delay Woodbury Common hotel project
Woodbury. Meanwhile, the Avalon hotel project moves forward.
Woodbury /
| 08 Mar 2024 | 12:07
The March 6 Woodbury Village Planning Board meeting.
On March 6, the Woodbury Village Planning Board heard from representatives of two large-scale shopping and tourism projects.
The board discussed the proposed plans to expand Woodbury Common Premium Outlets to include a hotel, additional retail space and the development of a second parking garage. After representatives for the project addressed the board and planning board counsel spoke about issues that still needed to be addressed, the board determined that the application was not adequate for public review.
Planning Board Chairperson Christopher Gerver encouraged the applicant to address the issues in a timely manner so that the proposed project could be added to the agenda of the April 3 public scoping session.
Another applicant already scheduled to be on the April 3 agenda is the Avalon Hotel project. Representatives for the proposed four-story hotel on Turner Road in Central Valley came before the board to share their excitement about moving the project forward.
Planning Board attorney Kelly Naughton read out the anticipated impacts of the proposed development, including the project’s potential to impact ground water, create additional demand on transportation infrastructure and lead to the need for increased police, fire and school resources.
Ahead of the April 3 scoping session, the draft scope for the Avalon Hotel will be available online on the village website for public review.
Among matters of residential development, the board heard from a representative of the proposed Timber Trail project. The applicant is looking to build single-family dwellings in an area of Highland Mills located within a previously approved subdivision. The applicant returned before the board to address prior concerns about housing sizes. Comparing the proposed housing to a neighboring cul-de-sac, the applicant claimed there was not much difference between the two.
The board contended that there were still issues with the proposed housing size as well as design. They agreed to extend their deadline for acting on the project until May 15 so that the applicant has sufficient time to address the board’s concerns.