Pawling planning board keeps written public comment open on Ruffler two‑lot subdivision after tied vote

The Pawling Planning Board on a recent meeting reviewed responses from the applicant for a proposed two‑lot subdivision at 270 North Quaker Hill Road and voted to keep the written public‑comment period open until Feb. 2, 2026.

Staff member Ron told the board the project had completed a SEQR Type II determination, a site inspection was conducted and the verbal portion of the public hearing had been closed previously; written comments remained open. Applicant John Ruffler presented revised plans and a response letter after a resident, Patrick Clary, submitted concerns about drainage onto his property. "There is no apartment on this project," Ruffler said, explaining a typo had been corrected and that the application is for a single‑family residence on two lots.

Ruffler told the board the county road drains into a roadside swale west of the project and said the proposed driveway and lot layout direct the project's runoff in a different direction. He described a roof runoff plan that routes water through an infiltrator system and said the design and limited grading should prevent any increase in runoff intensity: "post development probably improved because we're capturing the area of the roof in all storm events," he said. He also provided stormwater calculations to staff for review.

Board members asked technical questions about pipe routing, driveway pitch and how concentrated vs. sheet flow would be managed. Ruffler reiterated that the driveway is designed to avoid concentrating flow and that retaining walls and limited grading will minimize disturbance on steeper slopes.

After discussion, a motion to close the written portion of the public hearing resulted in a tie vote and failed, leaving the written record open for additional submissions and responses. Board member Britney then moved to keep the written comment period open until Feb. 2, 2026; the motion was seconded and the board approved it. The board directed staff to provide the applicant's response by the end of the week and scheduled the item for the planning board meeting in February.

The board also approved routine minutes from prior meetings during the same session.

What happens next: Staff said it will visit the site to confirm the matters raised in the adjoining resident's letter; the item will return to the planning board in February for further deliberation with the revised materials and staff memo.