Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Noise And Landscape topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Pawling board hears neighbor noise complaints about ASPCA facility; landscape and lighting reviewed
Summary
Board members discussed multiple emails from neighbors reporting noise at an ASPCA facility and urged the applicant to resolve escrow and return with a noise study and updated landscape/ screening plans; members also debated whether exterior lighting hours are governed by code or board policy.
The Pawling Planning Board discussed neighbor complaints about noise from an ASPCA facility and related landscape and lighting concerns during the same meeting that considered the Ruffler subdivision.
A board member said the planning office had received a series of emails from neighbors reporting noise and that the ASPCA must "straighten out their escrow" before the town will schedule further consideration. The board said it expects the ASPCA to return with additional materials, including a noise study; Greg Bolner and James Caress were named as contacts who would work on noise‑mitigation options.
Members also raised aesthetic and lighting concerns at nearby sites. One member said he visited the site at night and that, with missing trees and the lighting as configured, "it looked like Stewart Airport," describing the visual impact of bright, upward lighting and gaps in screening. The board discussed whether turning off non‑security exterior lights at a specified hour was included in the municipal code or only a planning‑board policy. Several members asked staff to check the approved materials and, if no specific time was set, to add a clear requirement for when parking‑lot and exterior lighting must be turned off.
Separately, the board received an easement related to Maggie Lane (referred to in the record) and noted several local road‑maintenance concerns — including potholes on Maggie Lane and particularly poor conditions on Bundy Hill Road — that the board asked be communicated to the highway superintendent.
No formal action on the ASPCA noise complaints was taken at the meeting; the matter will return to the board after escrow and documentation issues are resolved and any required studies are submitted.
