Cascade Road subdivision

Warwick — Here is the dilemma: Jay Jason has property on Cascade Road in the Town of Warwick that he would like to subdivide into three lots. The Village of Warwick has an easement over the creek on that land to protect its nearby reservoirs. The easement is very restrictive — it allows only one house on the entire parcel, and that already exists. Jason, an attorney, knows that he would need to get approval from both the town and the village in order to continue with his plan. Which should come first? If he goes through the town process and gets approval, he may be shot down by the village. If he shoots for the village’s approval first, he may have to go through the State Environmental Quality Review (SEQR) process twice — once for the village and once for the town — quite a costly endeavor. Jason came to the Village Board Monday night to talk about how open the village might be to amending that easement if the town approves his plan. “This is purely town zoning,” said Jason. “I will have to file SEQR with the town. But I can’t go to the town until you say this is acceptable.” Which has not been the case for other Cascade Road residents, who made changes to their land without notifying the village. Jason said the restrictions were written a century ago when only one farm populated the property. In the 1940s, he said, someone broke all of the covenants and installed a cesspool and built a bridge over the stream. He moved there in 1995 and removed all of it. And while the village may not have been aware of those infractions, they were fully aware seven years ago when another neighbor built a concrete culvert over the stream and never came for the village’s approval. “So, at a time when you did know about it, nothing was done,” said Jason. “You have an obligation to inspect your own property.” The village’s attorney, Michael Meth, stated that the board is comfortable exploring changing the restrictive covenant as long as it is not detrimental to the village’s water supply. Slow down, said Village Trustee Eileen Patterson. That’s not exactly how she feels necessarily. Nor is it how Trustees Roger Metzger and George McManus feel, either. “I would like to review it,” said Metzger. “Why would we accept three houses when it says just one?” “I’m not looking to fight a 12-year-old battle,” said McManus. “I’m looking to prevent it from happening again.” No one on the board felt they could give a blanket approval based on the town’s decision. Neither did they want Jason to go through two SEQRs — one for them and one for the town. Instead, they decided to review the town’s SEQR, when it is completed, and make their decision from there. “What if the SEQR shows this would have a detrimental effect on our reservoir?” asked Patterson. “Then you say no,” Meth advised. “Then what do we do with the neighbor?” she asked. “Say no to this gentleman and let the other one continue?” If the statute of limitations has not run out, Meth said, the village certainly could go after the neighbor to correct that problem. With no definite answer from the Village Board, Jason was looking philosophically at his project. “If someone says ‘no you can never do that,’ then I’m out of luck I guess.”