Planning board names itself lead agency for 'Knoll' SEQR review, schedules Feb. 6 public hearing and asks for expanded environmental analysis

The Planning Board declared itself lead agency under New York State’s State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQR) and scheduled a public hearing for the proposed Knoll (Hillside Street) subdivision and site-plan application for Feb. 6, 2025, with a 6:00 p.m. start time and a three‑minute public‑comment limit.

The meeting included more than an hour of technical review and discussion of the applicant’s Part 1 and the board’s draft Part 2 of the environmental assessment form (EAF). Village planning staff and the applicant’s team identified several topics that warrant expanded analysis in a Part 3 submission, and the board asked the applicant to provide more information on construction impacts, site phasing, erosion control, stormwater, tree removal and visual impacts to the nearby estate and public vantage points.

Key technical points discussed - Excavation and earth-moving: The applicant estimated removal of 1,364 cubic yards of material (exceeding common 1,000‑ton thresholds cited in environmental guidance), which staff flagged as a potential moderate-to-large impact and asked for a fuller description of haul routes and truck trips during construction. - Steep slopes and erosion: Staff identified portions of the site with slopes exceeding 15 percent as a potential moderate-to-large impact and requested more detail on slope stabilization, retaining walls and erosion and sediment controls. - Vegetation and habitat: Tree removal and loss of vegetation were classified tentatively as moderate-to-large impacts. The board asked for a robust tree‑replacement and restoration plan, including native plantings and habitat mitigation where feasible. - Visual impacts: Planning staff recommended a visual-impact analysis from the nearby estate referenced in the record (referred to in the meeting transcript as the “During Estate”), and from public roadway vantage points; the board asked the applicant to provide viewpoints and simulations and to consider additional screening in their landscaping plan. - Groundwater, wells and stormwater: The applicant reported wells had been eliminated from the proposal per an engineer memo; the board asked the applicant to align the Part 3 submittal with the SWPPP (stormwater pollution-prevention plan) already filed and to show how runoff from the proposed road and lots will be handled.

The applicant’s legal counsel, David Steinmetz of Zarin & Steinmetz, told the board the team would provide an expanded Part 3 addressing the items raised. The applicant’s consultants said the submission already assumes site work and utilities related to four flagged lots on the subdivision plat and that the bulk of the impacts will be related to construction of the private roadway and stormwater infrastructure.

Board action and public‑hearing logistics The board voted to set a public hearing on Feb. 6 and to begin the regular meeting at 6:00 p.m. to accommodate the expected length of public comment. The board agreed to hold the Knoll item toward the end of the agenda, limit public comment to three minutes per speaker and accept written comments in advance. Village staff asked the applicant to submit the expanded Part 3 by the posted resubmission deadline so engineering and planning consultants have adequate time to review materials prior to the hearing.

Why it matters: The proposed work includes constructing a new private roadway, stormwater controls and preparing lots for single‑family development on a wooded knoll near a locally valued estate and trail network. The volume of excavation, potential tree removal, steep slopes and the proximity to the estate prompted the board to require a more detailed environmental review before any final determination under SEQR.

Next steps: The applicant will file an expanded Part 3 and supporting studies (visual-impact analysis, construction phasing/truck-trip estimates, erosion-control and stormwater details, tree‑replacement plans and any required archaeological/historic reviews). Planning staff and the village engineer will review the materials and return findings to the board ahead of the Feb. 6 public hearing.