Planning board designates itself lead agency for Flatbush redevelopment, then tables final action after traffic and design discussion

The City of Kingston Planning Board on Jan. 21 adopted a resolution naming itself lead agency under 6 NYCRR Part 617 (SEQRA) for a proposed Kingston Housing Authority redevelopment at 206 and 208 Flatbush Avenue and then voted to table further action after lengthy discussion of access, sight lines and alternative massing designs.

The nut graf: the action establishes the planning board as the environmental review lead for the project, clearing the way for a coordinated SEQRA review, but the board did not grant site‑plan approvals — it tabled the application pending additional information and follow‑up review.

Representatives for the Kingston Housing Authority and the project design team presented three massing alternatives for a proposed redevelopment that would replace an existing 32‑unit annex with a new mid‑rise building of roughly 74–80 one‑bedroom units depending on the chosen option. John Canning, a traffic engineer retained for the project, told the board the increase in units would not create more than 20 peak‑hour vehicle trips at any single intersection and that an outbound movement from an existing two‑way driveway onto Flatbush Avenue posed the principal safety concern because sight lines for drivers exiting the driveway are restricted by a bend and obstructions — a condition Canning said the proposed design change (making the driveway one‑way outbound eliminated) would improve in part by removing the outbound turning movement that contributed to the majority of recent crashes recorded in the study period.

Board members and staff also reviewed updated visual simulations. The applicant presented three alternatives: option 1 (80 units, four stories with stepbacks and additional windows), option 2 (4 story / 3 story step, ~75 units) and option 3 (stepped 4/3/2 story, ~74–75 units). Several board members said option 1 provides the best balance of density, solar rooftop area and a fuller façade treatment; others noted option 2 softens visibility from Flatbush and option 3 produced too many vertical breaks, with stair towers rising above adjacent volumes.

During the discussion the project team described stormwater and grading work, test borings and efforts to reduce the building footprint from an earlier four‑building proposal. The project team acknowledged outstanding technical items including final subdivision (lot line) mapping and some materials needed for the board’s technical review.

Formal actions: the board adopted a resolution asserting lead‑agency status for the Flatbush proposal under SEQRA (6 NYCRR Part 617) by recorded vote: Wayne Platt Jr., Charles Colaco, Robert Jacobson, Matt Gillis and Vince Archer voted yes. Following the SEQRA resolution, the board voted to table the item to allow time for additional materials and referral reviews; the motion to table carried unanimously among present members.

Why it matters: the redevelopment is a major affordable‑housing project in Ward 6 and will alter access and circulation near Flatbush, Colonial Terrace and adjoining streets. The traffic study’s recommendation to convert the existing two‑way driveway to a one‑way movement reduced the board’s principal safety concern but did not eliminate the need for design refinements and engineering sign‑offs.

Next steps: staff and the applicant agreed the project will return with refined plans, revised subdivision documents, final traffic and stormwater responses and any recommendations from the city engineer; the board will continue SEQRA coordination and site‑plan review once those materials are filed.