Neighbor objects to 31 Saul Street plans, board keeps hearing open and refers applicant to ARB

The North Castle Planning Board kept a public hearing open on a proposed single-family residence at 31 Saul Street after an adjacent landowner raised procedural and substantive objections.

Jennifer Kimball McGreevey, an adjacent owner at 33 Sorrow Street, told the board she objected to the adequacy of the filing and the online plans. "I'd first like to object to the paperwork being in order. It wasn't," she said, noting the plans were not posted seven days before the hearing as required by town code and that many revised drawings lacked measurements for cut-line shifts and pool location.

McGreevey outlined several technical and neighborhood concerns: she said tree removals rose from 87 to 117 trees (8–30 inches DBH) and that the replacement planting—27 trees 8–10 feet tall—would not provide equivalent screening or drainage benefit. She also asked for gross land coverage numbers and basement floor plans, and raised alarm over a 3,000-gallon septic tank shown adjacent to proposed plantings.

Applicant engineer Ralph Haltonzetti said the clearing and grading limit had been moved back and that the house was shifted about 10 feet to improve the backyard. He told the board the package "moved the house back about 10 feet and the pool house about 25 feet," and that the drainage design includes infiltration systems; he also said the team would coordinate planting locations around septic infrastructure.

Town staff and the chair discussed notice requirements and confirmed that while the meeting notice and agenda must be posted in advance, backup plans may be posted as soon as practicable and applicants may bring documentation to the hearing. The board asked staff to review the recorded conservation easement the neighbors cited.

The board asked the applicant to provide clearer dimensioned plans and updated coverage calculations, asked staff to review the easement, and directed that the application proceed to the Architectural Review Board before final action. The chair said he would "keep the public hearing open," and the board voted to send the applicant to the ARB while retaining the hearing to allow submission of the additional information.

Next steps: the applicant will provide dimensioned plans and coverage figures, staff will examine the conservation easement, and the application will return to the board after ARB review.