Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Science Of The Soul Seqr topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Goshen leaves Science of the Soul site plan hearing open after adopting Part Two EAF

Town of Goshen Town Board · April 9, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

After public concerns about floodplain filling, truck noise and wetlands, the town board adopted the SEQR Part Two for the Science of the Soul parking/site‑plan application and left the public hearing open to June 11 for the applicant to complete a Part Three study.

The Town of Goshen on April 9 adopted the Part Two Environmental Assessment Form (EAF) for the Science of the Soul parking/site‑plan application and voted to leave the public hearing open until June 11 to allow the applicant to prepare an expanded Part Three study addressing identified impacts.

Resident and Environmental Review Board member Chris Healy told the board the project would require ‘‘hundreds of dump truck loads of fill’’ to raise ground out of the floodway and urged noise mitigation for construction, limits on truck hours and a fine for noncompliance. Neil Halpern, another resident, cited onsite wetlands, flood‑plain extent up to Harley Road and the potential downstream effects of filling.

The applicant’s counsel, Jason, said the project would use a portion of the site, minimize impacts through pervious materials and landscaping, and estimated the use would be infrequent (about two events per year). “We intend to comply with the regulations regarding the entrances and the walking path along the frontage,” Jason said, and said the applicant would review ERB comments and prepare Part Three to address traffic, noise and other potential impacts.

Town planning staff circulated a Part Two EAF that identified potential impacts and recommended steps toward an expanded study. The board debated whether to close the hearing now; after discussion the board adopted Part Two and set an adjourned hearing date of June 11 so the applicant could submit Part Three and give the public additional opportunity to comment.

The board asked the applicant to ensure project materials are posted to the town website so residents can review them before the continued hearing. No final site‑plan approval was granted on April 9; the action was limited to adoption of the Part Two EAF and scheduling of the follow‑up review and hearing.