Speaker numbers apply only to this recording. Names come from transcript evidence. “Possibly” marks uncertain attribution.
The North Salem Planning Board met on July 23, 2025, at 7:30 PM in person and via Zoom. The meeting included a continuation of a public hearing for a Chapter 89 fill permit at 26 Whittier Hills Drive (Lorusso), followed by discussion and a vote on the Little Mountain project, and initial discussion on the Taverner proposal. The board also reported on a site visit and plans for an educational session on stormwater management.
The board continued the public hearing for Julia Lorusso’s fill permit. The board had received multiple emails from Tom DeMeo and one from Patty Horvitz. The town engineer, William, indicated satisfaction with soil testing responses from the applicant’s engineer, deeming the testing representative of the site.
Public Comment:
Tom DeMeo raised several concerns, including that the soil lost chain of custody (removed from site, taken to Westwood Organic Recycling, and brought back), that soil testing was less restrictive than previously approved, and that Area J was not tested. He presented a letter from Westwood indicating the removed soil was kept separate and returned. He argued the board should not close the hearing without addressing these issues.
The board explained that compliance issues such as stone walls and tree roots are handled by the building inspector, not the planning board. The board closed the public hearing, stating they have sufficient information to proceed to a draft resolution. The resolution will be considered at the August 6 meeting.
The board received an email from the Croton Falls Fire Commissioners, confirming the plans are acceptable. The board unanimously adopted a resolution of approval (motion by a member, second by Nick, all in favor). The resolution will reflect the July 21 email.
Brian Hildebrand, representing the applicant, discussed the memos from the planning consultant (MDRA Review Memo 071925) and town engineer (Hahn Review Memo 071825). The board instructed him to address all comments in both memos, including slopes greater than 15%, proximity to a stream requiring a wetlands permit, and soil testing protocol. The board required a revised plan and a presentation from a qualified soil testing firm on the proposed protocol before any testing proceeds.
A board member reported on a July 22 site visit to a property (McGings?) with engineer William and others. The area is now full sun with invasive Japanese stiltgrass. A planting restoration plan will be requested. The board also requested William to provide an educational session (about one hour) on stormwater management, SWPPP reviews, and terminology, to be scheduled for a work session in September or October and open to the public.
Thank you everyone for your patience. I will now open the North Salem Planning Board meeting of July 23rd. The first item on the agenda is a continuation of the public hearing for the LaRusso Chapter 89 fill permit. Since the last public hearing, we did receive on July 14th email emails and photos from Mr. Tom DeMeo. On July 22nd, emails from Tom DeMeo asking about additional correspondence. And on July 22, an email from a Patty Horvitz, who we told her that the public hearing is continuing. And did I miss anybody, Don? One last email. And a third, yes, and a Tom DeMeo correspondence today. So all the board members should have copies of all of that as well as our consultants. Julia, do you have anyone here besides yourself tonight? My attorney have the excellent. Since the last meeting, I know we wanted to know about the some particulars about the fill, etc. And we did receive correspondence from you and from your engineer, which was circulated to our consultants and our board members. At this point, not at this point. Okay. Does anyone from the public wish to speak? Julia. I'll be brief. Julie LaRusso, 26 Woodier Hills. I just want to reiterate I'm here tonight seeking a final resolution for the Chapter 189 fill permit. I said nothing has changed with the exception of the fill not being exported. There should be a very simple process in theory. But the town has allowed Mr. DeMeyo to continue on his quest here to harass me and my family and make this a public spectacle. Mr. DeMeo feels this is in my belief a court of law or a trial. This is the planning board meeting. He is not remotely close to any kind of experts on trees or soil as he claims. And really at this point, I'm just asking that we can move forward. It's our full intention to comply with everything in the current or in the new resolution. So I would just ask the board to consider a draft resolution this evening to be on for the August meeting. Thank you. One thing I did do is I contacted our engineer, town engineer William, and based upon the previous comments that we received and the responses from her engineer, Julia's engineer, I wanted to know if their office is satisfied with the extent of the soil testing that was done, that it represented enough of the site as to and whether or not any further testing might be required. And it was the opinion given to me by William that they were satisfied with the responses from the applicant's engineer as to the soil testing. So I don't know if anyone has any further questions on that. As far as the questions that we received today from Mr. DeMeo, I just want to make one general comment, which I have made in the past. At that point, everything is in the hands of the building inspector. So any questions about how something was being done in a whether or not it's in accordance with an approved site plan, all of those questions or complaints need to be directed to the building inspector. And when he has finished and the project is finished and he gets the final as built, that's when he deals with anything that deviates from the approved site plan. If something comes up during the build out of a site plan, the building inspector on his own doesn't approve field changes, they get referred back to the planning board. We have not heard about anything that needed to be referred back to us, except in this instance as part of the reapplication. We have not heard about anything that needed to be referred back to us, except in this instance as part of the reapplication, it is a leaving of the soil on site rather than the removal of a soil, which is what we're dealing with.