Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA-05/06/2021 Hearing Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 Efficient TOWN OF SOUTHOLD ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS COUNTY OF SUFFOLK: STATE OF NEW YORK --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TOWN OF SOUTHOLD ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS ------------------------------------------------------------7-------------------------- Zoom Webinar Video Conferencing Southold, New York May 6, 2021 10:27 A.M. Board Members Present: LESLIE KANES WEISMAN - Chairperson/Member PATRICIA ACAMPORA—Member ERIC DANTES—Member ROBERT LEHNERT—Member NICHOLAS PLANAMENTO—Member KIM FUENTES—Board Assistant WILLIAM DUFFY—Town Attorney ELIZABETH SAKARELLOS—Office Assistant DONNA WESTERMANN —Office Assistant 1 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 INDEX OF HEARINGS Hearing Page Konstantinos Diakovasilis #7465SE 7-11 Charles Schwab and Tammy Schwab #7486 11- 15 Petra and Vincent Benic#7487SE 15 - 19 William A. Prydatko,Jane Marie Prydatko, Et Al #7488 19- 30 Argyris Dellaportas#7489SE 30- 35 Joseph and Barbara Orlando#7490 35 - 37 Catherine and Peter Melly#7491 37 -40 Sticks &Stones Outdoors- Ian Zuhoski #7492 41-46 Leon Petroleum LLC (BP Mattituck) #7493 46-52, 57 Leon Petroleum LLC (BP Peconic) #7494 52- 57 Harvest Inn B & B—Stacy and Steven Isaacs#7504SE 57- 60 2 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I'm going to open up the public portion of the Zoning Board of Appeals Regular Meeting for Thursday, May 611. Due to public health and safety concerns related to COVID-19 the Zoning Board of Appeals will not be meeting in person. In accordance with the Governor's Executive Order 202.1 the May 6, 2021 Zoning Board of Appeals Regular Meeting with public hearings will be held via video conferencing, and a transcript will be provided at a later date. The public will have an opportunity to see and hear the meeting live and will be permitted to speak. Liz would you please review for us the way in which attendees will be allowed to participate. OFFICE ASSISTANT SAKARELLOS : Thank you Leslie, if anyone wished to comment on a particular application we ask you to send us a note via the Q&A tool at the bottom of your screen or click the raise hand button and we will allow you to unmute and then you can let us know which application you are here for.Thank you. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay let's get this started. Let me introduce the new applications by resolution declaring applications that are setback/dimensional/lot waiver/accessory apartment/bed and breakfast requests as Type II Actions and not subject to environmental review pursuant to State Environmental Quality Review (SEAR) 6 NYCRR, Part 617.5 (c) including the following: Charles Schwab and Tammy Schwab, Petra and Vincent Benic, William A. Prydatko and Jane Marie Prydatko, Argyris Dellaportas,Joseph and Barbara Orlando, Catherine and Peter Melly, Sticks & Stones Outdoors-Ian Zuhoski, Leon Petroleum LLC in Mattituck, Leon Petroleum LLC in Peconic and Harvest Inn-Stacey and Steven Isaacs so moved. Is there a second? MEMBER DANTES : Second. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Seconded by Member Dantes. Kim would you call the roll please. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Acampora how do you vote. MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Acampora votes aye. Member Dantes how do you vote? MEMBER DANTES :Aye. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Dantes votes aye. Member Lehnert how do you vote? MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Lehnert votes aye. Member Planamento how do you vote? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Just so people know what's going on who are in attendance, one of our.Board Members is having Nick Planamento a lot of trouble with his Wi-Fi connection so we're 3 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 trying to get him back. He was here earlier but he's now somehow disappeared into the ether so we're trying to get him back. BOARD SECRETARY : Chairperson Weisman how do you vote? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye. BOARD SECRETARY : Chairperson Weisman votes aye. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Before we get started with the first hearing, we have a draft decision in front of us for Suffolk County Energy Storage II LLC on Main Rd. in Greenport. This is for a battery energy storage system. Let me just review what's in this very, very lengthy draft. Let me begin by saying that this took two public hearings and lots and lots of written submissions by the public, by various local groups and organizations and the project itself has been determined to be a green energy project so the concerns were not with the utility and use of this sort of facility but rather the cause it will strengthen the grid and get rid of some very polluting peaker plants. However there were concerns by many people about the potential impacts to the surrounding preserved land and wetlands and what this Board did was determined that those impacts in issuing a negative declaration were potential we could not determine the specificity of them because what the applicant submitted was not a final design in any way but rather just a conceptual survey or layout. So the negative declaration that was issued indicated there were potential impacts but they did not rise to the level of moderate to large and so this draft and I'm not going to go through all of it it's way too long but the Board reviewed all of the general standards for Special Exception. This is a permitted use by Special Exception in an LI zone and basically we made a decision to approve this use but not the design submitted. However based upon a whole series of conditions of approval that were designed to mitigate potential impacts which will be determined throughout a whole series of steps that the applicant will have to gain approvals from. We're going to be looking at I'm going to review a few of them, this is the first step and then there's Planning Board approval, likely Trustees approval possibly variance relief from the Zoning Board, D.O.T. approval, D.E.C. approval so this is step one and we have much you know more to look at when these designs are finalized. These conditions are there to give the Planning Board the opportunity to really make sure that when they consider design any possible impacts can be mitigated. It begins with a whole series of measures to protect the freshwater wetland system and the significant coastal fish and wildlife habitat including a minimum and that doesn't mean that's final,that means what this Board is requiring as minimum 30 foot wide vegetated non-disturbance buffer area consisting of natural and existing vegetation landward of and along the entire length of the freshwater wetland boundary, areas (inaudible) beneficial vegetation will be supplemented with native (inaudible) tolerant planting and continuously maintained as specified by the Planning Board. Then all wetlands within 100 feet of the property line have to be delineated and inspected by the Planning Board and by the Trustees. 4 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 Covenants and Restrictions will have to be filed creating this non-disturbance buffer in a perpetuity. Project limiting fence on the landward side of this buffer, obtaining and submitting to the Planning Board an on-site survey from a qualified wildlife biologist to access the presence of any protected species on and on. Of course site plan approval from the Planning Board. There will have to be screening from the scenic trails and from Route 25, there will have to be conformance with the town's Storm Water Management. The applicant will have to make sure that there's accurate soil borings taken during the month of May with the seasonal groundwater fluctuates and there will be a removal of existing sanitary system and cistern that's on the subject property which is a very good benefit for reduction of nitrogen. No application of fertilizers and herbicides unless specified by Planning to establish vegetation. The structures will have to be designed to be flood tolerant. There will be acoustical treatment to reduce any possible noise and filtration.There will be an indication about how to keep the skies dark at night and to provide minimal security lining so as to not disturb any nocturnal species. A decommissioning plan and decommissioning bond and construction of let me see what else, well I think that basically I think that's most of it. So having indicated that there are a whole series of mitigating measures that will address a lot of the comments that are summarized in this draft that came from the LWRP Coordinator,that came from Land Preservation,the Planning Board,from the Trustees and from our paying very close attention to the concerns of the public as well as the benefits to the public of installing such a project. So I think unless the Board does anybody here have anything you'd like to add that I might have skipped? It's a very long decision. I will go once we vote on it I'll go in and sign it tomorrow so that then it becomes a legal document then sent to the Town Clerk the applicant will receive a copy immediately and that will be that. MEMBER ACAMPORA : I don't think we can stress enough that this is just only a first step. I think you know that everybody has to understand that, it's only a first step. MEMBER LEHNERT :Yeah this gives them the opportunity to go in front of everyone else. MEMBER ACAMPORA : Right. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I just saw something in chat, I don't know who it's from but they want oh, Jason Funk am I representing MEMBER DANTES : It's just asking why he's here. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : No I'm not representing the applicant. What we have first on the agenda is not an application. The first thing on our agenda is a possible decision and that is for Suffolk County Energy Storage II LLC and that is what I have been presenting. I'm not representing the applicant I'm representing the Board in our discussion as colleagues about a draft that is in front of all of us that we are now about to vote on. Hope that makes it clear. 5 Regular Meeting May 6,2021 BOARD SECRETARY : I asked some of the attendees if they're there to represent this way I can assign them and I know who they are that's what I did. OFFICE ASSISTANT SAKARELLOS : He'is for the BESS for the Battery Jason Funk. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay so we have a motion before the Board to approve subject to many different conditions of approval and let me just read this. This is a motion to grant Special Exception for the proposed Battery Energy Storage System use without approval of the conceptual survey undated and stamped received by the ZBA on January 15, 2021. So moved, is there a second on this motion? MEMBER ACAMPORA : I'll second. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Seconded by Member Acampora. Kim would you call the roll please. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Acampora how do you vote? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Acampora votes aye. Member Dantes how do you vote? MEMBER DANTES : Aye. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Dantes votes aye. Member Lehnert how do you vote? MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Lehnert votes aye. Did we get (Vick back yet? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I don't see him. BOARD SECRETARY : Chairperson Weisman how do you vote? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Before I cast my vote I will say that this was one of the most challenging applications this Board has had to deal with. It was a matter of looking at a relatively benign project on a potentially difficult piece of property that was zoned correctly and I'm confident with the conditions that are imposed herein with this approval that this Board has given other Boards the opportunity and all of the tools they need 'to ensure that the investment the town has made in the surrounding trails and preserved space and wetlands for preservation can be sufficiently mitigated to allow us to say that this can turn out to be a win, win situation. It's an important thing to do to preserve and protect the environment from polluting peaker plants and the likes. It's inevitable, it's happening all over the Long Island and it would appear that almost every site given one way or another has significant challenges with this kind of project. So having 6 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 said all of that I'm going to cast my vote affirmatively. I say aye. So the motion carries unanimously. Member Planamento being absent still unfortunately. BOARD SECRETARY : I asked him to call me, I guess and we can try to get his voice on but I don't know if he's MEMBER ACAMPORA : Kim just as a matter of cleanup, on "J" there should be therefore the "e" is missing on therefore. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Where are you Pat on the draft? MEMBER ACAMPORA : On the draft, yes. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : On the one that was sent'last night? MEMBER ACAMPORA : It was the same error on the both of them. BOARD SECRETARY : You said "J", was it the use or the structures to be used therefore MEMBER ACAMPORA : Yes. MEMBER LEHNERT : Nick's back. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I don't know if you can hear me. MEMBER LEHNERT :Yes we can. BOARD SECRETARY : Take the therefore out okay. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : We already voted on it, it's closed its approved unanimously. Thank you Pat. Kim I'll do that on the final one and email it later and staff can print it out tomorrow. I'll come in and sign it. HEARING#7465SE—KONSTANTINOS DIAKOVASILIS CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The first application before the Board is for Konstantinos Diakovasilis #7465SE. This was adjourned from April 1St. I see Anthony Portillo is here, hi Anthony. ANTHONY PORTILLO : Hi Board how are you today? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay. BOARD SECRETARY : Is there anyone else here you would like me to promote Anthony? 7 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 ANTHONY PORTILLO : I think the owner might be on but I'm n'ot sure if she is making it or not. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I don't see her in the attendees list. ANTHONY PORTILLO : Okay she probably figured I would take care of it. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : We received your new plans,there are a number of issues of concern still. First of all we made it very clear previously that nothing was going to happen until the Building Inspector John Jarski was scheduled for an interior inspection of the basement of the principle dwelling.That has not happened.,It's been months and we've been waiting he can't the house is not before us. What is before us is the accessory structure and the dilemma here is that only one accessory apartment is permitted on any property I'm sure you know that. There was reason to believe there was an accessory apartment in the, basement. He's going to have to inspect it and sign off on that before any decision by us can be rendered. So that's the first thing we need to take care of. Secondly,the ceiling height you've now extended the size of the garage and included a full staircase in the garage accessing the second floor,that's not acceptable to this Board. The reason being and number one we don't want to enlarge the structure any, number two as soon as you put a finished stair in there up to the second floor with the ceiling height being 8 feet instead of the required maximum 7 feet by code you have a second habitable story. The apartment can only be on one floor and it's proposed on the ground floor. So what's going to have to happen is a return to the dimension that was originally proposed of the one car garage with the first floor apartment. We will now be needing a pull down staircase and a lowering of the ceiling height of the second floor so that it becomes attic storage. We also had concerns that the dormer that's on the rear of the accessory structure that overlooks a neighbor's back yard we believe that that is because this is so high this structure that that is really an unnecessary and an invasion of privacy. For storage you do not need you can keep the one on the front of it for light and you know aesthetics and all that, you can keep the one on the back but you're going to have to remove the glass, just board it up put shingles on it do whatever you want. I mean the only reason we know all this is because the Board has spent so'much time laboring over this again and again and again with delay after delay. Our goal here is to complete this for the property owner but that property owner is going to have to do a few things to make sure that it meets the code. Did I miss anything Board Members? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Did you discuss the removal of the sheds and those other roof structures that go right to the property lines? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I did with the dormer the glass in the dormer. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : No I'm not talking about the structure I'm talking about the accessory sheds. 8 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I didn't mention that, it's in the previous hearing but yes they will have MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Those need to go. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :The little sheds that are up against the rear of the property. ANTHONY PORTILLO : Sure. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :The applicant has been told this they know it. We're just trying to get everything back into the current record.Anthony for your benefit. You can see where ANTHONY PORTILLO : I appreciate that you're repeating it so that I'm aware. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Good. ANTHONLY PORTILLO : If I could just comment on a few of the things that you mentioned, I think the original proposal was putting in a staircase from the accessory apartment into the storage area and that's where I you know I considered that and I understand why you wouldn't want a staircase cause that's an easy way that you create another apartment or create a duplex apartment is essentially and I figured that was the Board's concern so that's why I put it in the unfinished unheated garage area thinking that maybe that was a good way to propose access to the attic. I mean just so we're clear, the occupant is the mother of the daughter that owns the home and she is an elderly lady you know her concern is she really does need to be able to go into that that's where she's going to store the stuff that she has you know from the house that she lived in that she sold so that's the reason for this staircase. I mean and I'm not trying to you know go against anything you guys are requesting but I thought that it being in the garage would be really you know looking at it in a way that's going to be hard to create any other you know second floor because there really is no access from the proposed apartment but it allows her to be able to carry stuff up the stairs instead of a pull down staircase. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Anthony what you probably weren't a part of in maybe the first or I can't remember which hearing at this point, we did offer the possibility of putting a full staircase on the outside accessing the attic storage because we do understand that it's not easy to you know use a pull down staircase. That clearly was not taken advantage of and also there will have to be a lowering of the ceiling height to non-habitable storage height. ANTHONY PORTILLO : You mean putting collar ties getting it down to the 7 foot? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yeah. You need to reduce that height so that it's, it can be sheet rocked, it's okay but as soon as you have 8 foot high and then sheet rocked and insulated and you have a full staircase that's a second story and according to the Building Department. ANTHONY PORTILLO : Right I understand. 9 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : A pull down staircase from the inside or an exterior staircase not in the garage just outside and you know if it's storage it's storage instead you go in and out from the outside. I don't know how the Board feels at this point about it because we've been discussing this for so long and have offered so many clear instructions and options that (inaudible) ANTHONY PORTILLO : You guys can allow I'm here now if you guys will allow me to fix this situation and the next time we come here this will not be a problem. I think that there was some unknown things from the previous architect, he also wasn't really involved it seemed like he was passing it along to owner so if you guys would bear with me I'll take care of everything you're saying and make sure that this won't happen again on the next submission. I wasn't aware that putting it in the garage would have been an issue so I'll speak to her about putting it outside or no staircase at all. We'll remove the extension on the garage, the reason for that I was trying to allow for it and still having a parking space with the stair in the garage but obviously I'll remove that. No problem on the shed dormer removing the windows, understood and just so you know I did file for a recreational space in the basement and I believe it's in review now and I'm just waiting for that to get approved and I'll call up John and I'll make sure that we have the final inspection. If it's not done prior to the next Board meeting then we'll have to wait till the following one. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :The next meeting is the Special Meeting and what we can do is adjourn this to the Special Meeting. If you can have everything resolved by then fine and if not we'll adjourn it to the next Public Hearing. ANTHONY PORTILLO : Is that in two weeks? BOARD SECRETARY : May 201h Anthony. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I would just add Leslie, if the option is to put the stairs outside in situations where people have done that that it be an open stairwell that you know it's just a landing enough for the door swing. It's not a deck, it's not a second you know roof terrace it's just a stairwell. ANTHONY PORTILLO :Sure. In regards to the sheds,the plan there maybe I should have I'll specify the plan is to remove the one that's too large that requires a permit so that's going to be removed and the other one that was under 100 sq. ft. will be moved to a proper location. So I'll indicate that on a site plan to the Board so that you can see that that's being proposed. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay good. ANTHONY PORTILLO :Thank you Board I appreciate it and I'll make sure when we come back this won't be a problem. 10 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Alright so there's going to be a motion to adjourn to the May 20th Special Meeting, so moved. MEMBER LEHNERT : Second. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Kim call the roll please. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Acampora how do you vote? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Acampora votes aye. Member Dantes how do you vote? MEMBER DANTES : Aye. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Dantes votes aye. Member Lehnert how do you vote? MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Lehnert votes aye. Member Planamento how do you vote? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Planamento votes aye. Chairperson Weisman how do you vote? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye. BOARD SECREATARY : Chairperson Weisman votes aye. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :The motion carries unanimously. HEARING #7486—CHARLES SCHWAB and TAMMY SCHWAB CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next application before the Board is for Charles Schwab and Tammy Schwab, this is application #7486. Request for a variance from Article III Section 280-15 and the Building Inspector's February 16, 2021 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for a permit to construct an accessory garage at 1) located in other than the code permitted rear yard located at 4370 No. Bayview Rd. in Southold. I think Mr. Schwab is here is that correct? BOARD SECRETARY : Yes I brought in Charles Schwab. 11 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : This is an accessory garage in a front yard where the code requires a rear yard. It's a 17 foot high by 25 X 28 foot two car garage. Am I correct in saying that this front yard setback is proposed at 50 feet is that correct? MEMBER LEHNERT :That's what it says on the survey. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I'm just double checking that's what it looks like. Well the first question the Board wants to know is why not put this in a conforming rear yard?You have a very big open it's fenced but you certainly have access MEMBER LEHNERT : There's plenty of room. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : have more than enough space along the lower side yard what is where's north? The one that does not have the stoop on it, that one is more than wide enough to get a driveway in and put it in the back yard. Why do you want to have it in the front yard? CHARLES SCHWAB : This is Charles Schwab, can I am I okay to speak? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yes please. CHALRES SCHWAB : So on the left side there that you just referred to, it slopes off it's not supported it's actually quite tight. We also have there are two Petro tanks on the side of the house as well the propane tanks on the side there. So it's actually kind of narrow it would need major reinforcement near my neighbor's side. Unfortunately this lot is narrower than wide and it would consume the entire backyard a good portion of the backyard and really take away from the aesthetics of the property and actually it would be more impacting to my neighbor's property. Where we tried to place it was in an area where it's far away from my neighbor's property with no visual on the I guess that would be on the south side there's no visual impact to them and obviously very far away from my other neighbor and it ties into the driveway without creating any major reconstructing of the property. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Mr. Schwab how many deciduous trees would have to be cut down from that vegetated area?You have a lot of rhododendrons and some evergreen, you also have some deciduous trees it looks like they would have to be cut. CHARLES SCHWAB : I want to move some of the dogwoods the smaller ones. I mean this is property you've been to the front I'm not sure but there's a lot of competitive growth in the environment and my wife by the way (inaudible) master gardener so she's really picky about making sure we do this right in terms of the plantings. Our rhododendrons that we have there they're not indigenous to the area we like them but they've been let go. We bought the house roughly four years ago I mean these things I got them falling over every season where we've had to remove them because they've been so (inaudible) and so overgrown so we're keeping a lot 12 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 and I've actually been starting to try to trim back a lot of the bushes so that they can get stronger what we have so I think it's about three trees.There's an oak and two pines I think if I'm counting it right I have to take a look at it and I want to see if I can move the smaller dog wood that's there to another location. If it's something small I can move we've been replanting the back yard, I've put several trees back into the property after it was cleared out. Can I ask a question, this may be a dumb question and I apologize but if I had no garage is there any concern over like if I was to trim if someone took a rhododendron out is that prohibited in any way? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : No not at all. What we're concerned about is how you mitigate a non- conforming front yard location. We do that by landscaped screening that's one way. CHARLES SCHWAB : Yes got you and completely and again we've been in the process of redoing this property and replanting like I said we put several trees in last year this would be planted very professionally and nicely aesthetically tying into the neighborhood. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : We did receive some written submission from the neighbor whose concern was the visual impact on the street and on her property of the proposed location so we would need you to be sure I mean any possible condition of approval would have to be based upon evergreen and you know screening to the extent that this was really not seen from the street or minimal or very minimally seen from the street. CHARLES SCHWAB : Absolutely. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Eric got any questions? MEMBER DANTES : No I don't have any questions. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : If I may Leslie, you asked Mr. Schwab a question about placing the garage in a conforming location but why not attaching the garage to the.house.There's plenty of room in the front yard on either side, you can meet conforming side yard setbacks a front yard setback of course you know it still set greater than 50 feet. CHARLES SCHWAB : The problem Mr. Planamento was that we looked you can stick one garage on the right side potentially and we did look at that. You're butting up against the variance on the side there and actually I think it would be imposing to my neighbor's property.The entry way would be through what is now a family room as a single garage only and that is we looked at that potential. It actually would feel kludgy from an architectural standpoint but the left side you're against two bedrooms we would be entering through a bathroom and a bedroom so that would be really problematic. I looked at the side yards I really did. I wanted to see if I could do it but to have a decent enough garage that you can pull a car into on the right side I would say would be looking at the house it would be on the right hand side. 13 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 MEMBER PLANAMENTO : But what I was suggesting is just the existing building which is a two car garage just placed in front of that I guess it would be the northeast corner where you're calling it the den area and if there is any question about light etc. into the den you could always connect it with a breezeway. I mean it would seem in that parking area is the natural spot for a garage addition. CHARLES SCHWAB : I looked at that spot we did actually consider that. It kind of jams things I don't think it's quite frankly aesthetically attractive all around. We went back and forth on that. If I put that in there I have to come in we're going to have to cut in a little bit into the you have the other side of the growth there by the driveway of the rhododendrons you know could it be done there potentially is it going to be as attractive absolutely not and I think it's going to be more actually impactful to my neighbor. I'm not sure who had the concern about the visual the neighbor across the street some folks thought the information you provided was actually misdirected to them and they came to me to give it to me. I said no, no this is yours to voice your opinion if you have one and I think that would be yeah we looked at that pretty hard and I just don't think it's going to be attractive quite frankly. I mean could I do it the answer is yes.-Is it going to be (inaudible) position is farthest from all the neighbors the biggest setback. We went beyond the line to try to make sure we did not impose and we created something architecturally attractive. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :Anything else, Pat do you have any questions? MEMBER ACAMPORA : No questions. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Rob. MEMBER LEHNERT : I have no questions. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I think Eric asked whatever he wanted to ask.Anything from any other Board Members, is there anyone in the audience who wants to address the application?You can raise your hand and we will allow you to speak. BOARD SECRETARY : I don't see any raised hands. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I don't either. Hearing no further questions or comments I'm going to make a motion to close the hearing reserve decision to a later, date. Is there a second? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Second. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Seconded by Member Acampora. Kim call the roll please. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Acampora how do you vote? 14 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Acampora votes aye. Member Dantes how do you vote? MEMBER DANTES : Aye. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Dantes votes aye. Member Lehnert how do you vote? MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Lehnert votes aye. Member Planamento how do you vote? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Planamento votes aye. Chairperson Weisman how do you vote? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye. BOARD SECREATARY : Chairperson Weisman votes aye. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :The motion carries unanimously. We'll have a decision Mr. Schwab on May 20th at our Special Meeting which is held about 5 o'clock in the evening. It's open for you to listen in on if you'd like. We'll be discussing the draft decisions that we have in front of us and I'm sure we'll be able to have one prepared for your application by then and you'll get a copy the next day I mean I have to go in and sign it. CHARLES SCHWAB : Is there anything you need from me in between now and then? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I don't think so. Any Board Member want anything? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Nope. HEARING#7487 SE—PETRA and VINCENT BENIC CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next application before the Board is for Petra and Vincent Benic #7487SE. The applicant requests a Special Exception under Article III Section 280-13B(13). The applicant is owner of subject property requesting authorization to establish an accessory apartment in an existing accessory storage structure at 1375 Pine Neck Rd. in Southold. Is there someone here for this application? BOARD SECRETARY : Yes I promoted Pat Moore. 15 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 PAT MOORE : Hello. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : So this is converting well actually I did do an interior inspection and it really is a dwelling it's set up as a dwelling. I think this was a previously permitted habitable PAT MOORE : Yes you're correct. Yes going way back from the seventies this had been granted a variance for two parcels. It was an existing dwelling at the time and then when the Benic's prior owner Weisman I think it was they were told they had to remove the kitchen in order to get to legalize it to get a Pre CO cause it pre dated zoning but never had a Pre CO.We went to the Zoning Board,the Board affirmed the Pre CO as an accessory building not as a dwelling because the code it had language the code was different than it is today so this essentially is another dwelling it just at this point doesn't have a kitchen and the bathroom is just a half bathroom right.Yeah right now it's just a toilet and sink oh it has I apologize it does have a shower. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It's a full bathroom and I believe there is a kitchen. PAT MOORE :There's no stove right the kitchen is still there from its original design it just doesn't have a stove and no refrigerator. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well we have a confirmation from;the Building Department of livable floor area at 635 sq. ft. so it's conforming. We have information submitted by the owners that they are in fact they are residing in the principle dwelling as their principle dwelling. We have voter registration, son's birth certificate this is proposed to be used by their son. PAT MOORE : Yes their son I actually have Vincent and Petra here in the office with me so if anything I can't answer I'll defer to them but yes it's their son and was fiancee now daughter-in- law. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay congratulations. What we probably do need to have in the record that we don't have is some sort of rental agreement with the son and the parents. PAT MOORE : Okay I thought that had to be issued to the Building Department but we can get one for you it's not a problem. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay it's really like an affidavit of tenancy. MEMBER LEHNERT : It's just a simple lease. PAT MOORE : I can just use a standard one. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : That's fine and you know just an affidavit of tenancy that they're 16 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 PAT MOORE : We'll get a lease drawn up that upon approval we'll start.-I don't want to create a lease with an illegal condition so. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I don't really have any questions, does any other Board Member have any questions? MEMBER DANTES : Yes. What happened to that old variance from the seventies? Is that being rescinded now? PAT MOORE : It's got an interesting I actually before I made this application I went to the Building I wrote to the Building Department and wrote to Bill Duffy and said here the law no is that the lots are grandfathered because they got variances or because they're (inaudible) by a variance, I never got an answer. Ultimately my clients we stopped waiting for an answer and we decided you know what we'll do it as an accessory apartment since the son needs the space and the real estate taxes would be less impactful with an accessory apartment rather than two separate lots but that remains as a possibility. It hasn't been eliminated but we haven't asked for it and the Building Department just don't answer us and they refer to the-Town Attorney and we never get an answer so what can you do? You can't put a gun to somebodies head and say please answer us so here we are. MEMBER DANTES : Would your clients accept a condition of approval that the variance is on? PAT MOORE : I don't think that's a fair request because I mean right now the property is one property. You want to keep it as one property you're okay? Okay well even though I thought it was an unfair condition they're saying that they oh okay they're here they need the apartment they need the place for their son. We don't want to create a situation where you deny it because we refuse to make it as a condition. I think I'd rather just keep it silent on that issue, give us the request that we've asked for cause you don't know what the law is going to be two days from now let alone you know if and when they ever come back but they will accept it if it's the only way they can get an accessory apartment for their son. I think personally you know you're a lawyer I think that's not a reasonable condition to impose. MEMBER DANTES : That was my only question. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : So what we were talking about was apparently some variance in the past. Was that for a subdivision of the property? PAT MOORE : Let me go back to my letter to the Building Department and I had the whole history I mean I can share it with you if you'd like my letter of November 4th that I wrote to Bill Duffy at the request of Mike. The history of it was that September of 1970 the Zoning Board granted the variance for the two lots, then the exceptions to merger did not exist at the time, the code was 17 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 not in effect. Then in 1999 nobody knew that there was this prior variance and the Building Department required the prior owner to remove the kitchen in order to get a Pre Co. They got the Pre Co but they also appealed that condition and the Zoning Board in decision I don't see the date of the decision but it is attached. The Zoning Board ratified the Pre Co with the condition that it be a non-habitable structure, non-habitable being sleeping quarters not non-habitable usable. So that's the condition that's existing today, it's usable by the family but it can't be used as sleeping quarters. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :Well here's the thing, I mean if it was I guess it would be for insufficient lot size or width or something the PAT MOORE : In 1970 yes. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yeah but the bottom line is it had to have gone before the Planning Board for subdivision and they never did. PAT MOORE : Well in 1970 I'll remind the Board, there was the setoffs or two lot subdivisions didn't go to the Planning Board they were created by the Zoning Board and that continued to be the case for quite some time not until it was corrected I want to say maybe the eighties when the law was clarified that the Zoning Board didn't have authority for two lot subdivisions.The Zoning Board granted the variances and created the lots. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Right okay. Well I can see why Eric was kind of going in the direction he was suggesting because it's much, much better to just you know just really clean up all these odds and ends going forward and obviously they're treating this as one piece of property and they're not going to be barred from subdivision in the future should they decide to but I think even though variances ran with the land at the time in perpetuity I don't see the utility in that variance being implemented. Then they don't need the accessory apartment it's two separate lots with two dwellings. T. A. DUFFY : You can't have an accessory structure on a lot different lot than the primary structure. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Right exactly so that's why they want to use it that way as an accessory structure and it's go the Pre CO for an accessory structure so I think we just leave it as an accessory building on the one lot and just submit you know a simple form for a lease for the son. PAT MOORE : Okay, my clients are fine with that. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay sounds good. Anybody in the audience wanting to address the application? If so can you raise your hand or put something in the chat room. I'm not seeing anything. 18 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 BOARD SECRETARY : I don't see any raised hands. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Alright, I'm going to make a motion to close the hearing subject to receipt of a lease for the son. Is there a second? MEMBER LEHNERT : Second. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Seconded by Member Lehnert. Kim call the roll please. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Acampora how do you vote? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Acampora votes aye. Member Dantes how do you vote? MEMBER DANTES :Aye. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Dantes votes aye. Member Lehnert how do you vote? MEMBER LEHNERT :Aye. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Lehnert votes aye. Member Planamento how do you vote? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Planamento votes aye. Chairperson Weisman how do you vote? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :Aye. BOARD SECREATARY : Chairperson Weisman votes aye. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The motion carries unanimously. Thank you we'll have a decision on the 20th HEARING#7488—WILLIAM A. PRYDATKO,JANE MARIE PRYDATKO, ET AL CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :The next application before the Board is for William A. Prydatko,Jane Marie Prydatko, Et AI#7488.This is a request for variances from Article III Section 280-15, Article XXIII Section 280-124 and the Building Inspector's December 22, 2020 Amended January 19, 2021 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for a permit to construct a single family dwelling and an accessory in-ground swimming pool at 1) proposed dwelling is located less than the code required front yard setback of 40 feet, 2) proposed swimming pool located in other than the code 19 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 permitted rear yard located at 230 Wiggins Lane in Greenport. So this was proposed with a front yard setback at 35 feet and I guess the code requires 40 here and is there anything else. It needs D.E.C. and Trustees approval it looks like. Okay Pat why don't you take over from here. PAT MOORE : Yes thank you. Yes this is somewhat of a straightforward application and it's obvious why it's necessary. The lot is a subdivision of lot of Fordham Acres Section 2 and unfortunately when all the homes were developed before all these regulations environmental regulations came in you could push your house,your pool anythingyou wanted close to the water and now that is not the case obviously so we need to maximize the distance to the now it's a bulkhead. There's a bulkhead there that was constructed with permits a couple of years ago. My clients own this property for a while but he wanted to make sure the lot was stable so he did apply for the bulkhead first then now the application for the house we've proposed at 35 feet which based on the size of the lot a 35 foot would be a reasonable setback on a lot of this size. The location of the pool again we want to keep away from the waterfront side of the house. In addition we want to limit the amount of structure so we have we want to make sure the D.E.C. is very adamant in keeping permeable, impermeable coverage to no more than 20% so you can see that the pool is an in-ground pool but it is surrounded by echo permeable pavers on grade. That is generally accepted by the D.E.C., we have to provide details of the pavers but as long as they're at least 40% 1 believe permeability it's not an issue. Ideally sometimes you come in with an attached pool, it's attached to the main structure with decking or some form of above grade structure but in this case you don't want to increase too much`the impervious structures so that's why it's proposed as it is. We can't really avoid a variance here in that the pool cannot be on the waterfront side of the house it is not aesthetically pleasing to put it on the front yard there's no room for the front yard either and we do have the sanitary system in the front yard and the driveway on the other side so this is the best design with all the regulations in mind. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Pat do you have any questions? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Yeah, why can't you conform to the 40 foot setback in the front? PAT MOORE :That pushes our house towards the water. It doesn't sound like a lot but the D.E.C. ordinarily they will encourage applicants to move away from the water as much as possible even if it requires the applicant to submit a variance application. So we come in with a 35 feet. If you recall when the lot was created that was the legal setbacks at the time. I went looking in the subdivision map, some subdivision maps actually have setbacks that are reduced setbacks. Unfortunately Fordham Acres didn't say what setbacks were so we had to apply whatever the setbacks are currently to this lot. So primarily it's just to keep it away from the water. MEMBER ACAMPORA : Could you reduce the size of the deck? PAT MOORE : Well the deck is not very large it's just 10 feet 20 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 MEMBER ACAMPORA : or 12 PAT MOORE :Well 12 where the balcony is but 10 feet in the other so between 10 and 12. 1 mean this as a second home people live outside primarily that is their living space so the applicant tried to put in a reasonable size house. It's actually smaller than many of the houses in this neighborhood. If you look at the homes within this area they're lovely sprawling homes they're quite large and they also have pools in their yards. We're stuck with the limitations that the lot with the lot dimensions. Again you've granted on numerous occasion for front yard setbacks particularly when you're dealing with waterfront properties that the D.E.C. tries to push you away. You can see that he owns the under in front of Fordham Canal there is quite an extensive area, he's lost let's see it looks to be about MEMBER LEHNERT : We lost Pat. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I don't know if she can even hear us to know that she is no longer audible. MEMBER DANTES : I think there's space to conform to the front yard setback. I understand they need the pool variance in the side yard location but MEMBER ACAMPORA : Yeah definitely that yes but I think MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I was going to chime in and Eric thank you for saying that but Pat to your point you know pushing the house back they certainly can. The deck I understand is maybe a necessity but Pat just stated that second home owners live outdoors. Therefore based on that rational they've got a covered front porch that is 5 feet wide that they can lose.Take away 5 feet from the three car garage and they still have a three car garage. Additionally they make one out of five bedrooms a little smaller but that room can also be shaved down by 5 feet and make it compliant. It's an architectural house it's not you know a modular, it's not limited in its design. They can completely conform to the front yard setback. MEMBER LEHNERT : Again it's a blank slate you know and they can make it work. MEMBER ACAMPORA : Exactly. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : (inaudible) three car garage. It's not living space. MEMBER ACAMPORA : No. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I have a question I mean it says that the house has four bathrooms and is labeled five bedrooms and I only see four bedrooms. Am I missing something? 21 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I was going to ask that question. The fifth bedroom is mislabeled I believe. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I think it is. MEMBER DANTES : It might just be they're getting a five bedroom septic system in case they want to convert it later on it's one less step it's not uncommon. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well unless we can get Pat back I don't is there anybody in the audience who wants to address the application? BOARD SECRETARY : I do have somebody raising their hand. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :Jordan Arnold and Maryann Reardon also has their hand up. BOARD SECRETARY : Yes Maryann Reardon raised first so I'll bring her in. RANDALL FAIRHURST:This is not Maryann,this is Randall Fairhurst. I'm using my assistant's Zoom account, 360 Wiggins Lane I'm on the south side of the property being discussed. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay and what would you like us to know sir? RANDALL FAIRHURST : Well just two things, one you know I don't have a problem with the 5 foot setback. I mean if you're driving by or whatever 5 feet is on,a property this size I don't think is discernable to the naked eye. I think it's asking for 5 feet is not going like I said it's not discernable to the naked eye. On the proposed pool, I have a side pool in my yard and my pool is closer to the fence of my neighbor's property than mine but in order to you know not have anybody oppose my variance I agreed to screen in the east and the south side of their proposed pool with arborvitae and other trees etc. so it's not visible as a pool from the street and it also provides privacy you know so I'm not looking into you know people swimming in their pool and they're not worried I'm going to be a peeping tom ,looking into their,pool. The last thing, there appears if you look at the south side of the property I have a fence which is shown on the diagram, it's a picket fence and I see that there's also on the drawing you know another fence right up it's as if it's built as proposed our fences will be on top of each other and I don't get that. It doesn't make sense you know it would look ugly having two fences right on top of each other side by side. So I don't want a fence that's going to be like that. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Are you saying you're the neighbor you're the adjacent neighbor? RANDALL FAIRHURST : Adjacent neighbor on the waterfront on the south side yes. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay and your pool is also on the south side? 22 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 RANDALL FAIRHURST : Yes it is. My pool is not against his property line, my pool is on the south side of my property and it's adjacent to my neighbor who is also on the water. I'm just saying I don't have a problem with that as long as that the you know privacy and screening on the east and south side of his pool because you know I don't want to be looking into his pool he doesn't want to be and I have screening on mine. BOARD SECRETARY : I have a message regarding Pat Moore. She lost power in her office. I have a phone number here that I'm going to try and call it's a cell number and see if I can get her on her cell. OFFICE ASSISTANT SAKARELLOS : She's on the attendees list,the phone number allow her to talk from the attendees list. BOARD SECRETARY : Thank you. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : If you can hear us Pat just unmute yourself. From a phone call Liz when someone calls in they have to in order to unmute themselves they have to hit something. OFFICE ASSISTANT SAKARELLOS : *6. She's gone. MEMBER DANTES : Should we close reserve decision. OFFICE ASSISTANT SAKARELLOS : You have another hand up. BOARD SECRETARY : I thought Pat would want to hear this that's why I'm trying to get her on. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I agree but let's bring in Jordan Arnold. JORDAN ARNOLD : Good morning, can you all hear me? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yes we can. JORDAN ARNOLD : Hi, good morning. So I am actually the neighbor on the other side of the waterfront so I am on the north side of the property at 70 Wiggins Lane. I echo Randy's comments about the setback. I'm not terribly troubled by the 5 foot that's being requested. I would just say that with the pool being placed where it is and the driveway now being adjacent or on the line of my property I would just ask that the property owner also provide landscape screening along that driveway. In particular the driveway is now going to essentially be adjacent to our master bedroom window and I know that it's a three car garage so I don't know how many cars are coming in and out of that on a daily basis and what hours of the day.Again I want us to (inaudible) request that they're making regarding the pool and the setback but I would ask that that landscaping be put in place and that it be put in place certainly prior to the commencement of construction. 23 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay do we have Pat yet? OFFICE ASSISTANT : Leslie we have Pat on the phone. She tried connecting with her cell phone but she's saying she's getting every third word. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Can you put her on speaker phone? OFFICE ASSISTANT SAKARELLOS : Okay let's try this. See if you can hear each other. JORDAN ARNOLD : The other question I just wanted to ask before I go muted is regarding the landscaping, I assume that there would be no landscaping obviously at least within 10 feet of the bulkhead is that correct? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well if there's it looks like there's a non-disturbance buffer already in place. JORDAN ARNOLD : Right. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Plus this is going to require both D.E.C. and Trustees Southold Town Trustees approval, wetland setback and all that. JORDAN ARNOLD : Understood. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I don't know how far along the applicant is with those approvals but they will have to be put in place. I don't know Liz are you talking to Pat or is she there? OFFICE ASSISTANT SAKARELLOS : She's here. PAT MOORE : I'm connected by their phone because I couldn't hear any of the comments made by anybody after I lost power here. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :Well let me just summarize,there were two neighbors that spoke one on one side one on the other of the property, neither one objects to the 35 foot setback as proposed. Both of them want to have some assurance that evergreen screening on both side yards will be planted because for one neighbor the impact is the three car garage and driveway is going to affect their actual bedroom and the other neighbor wants to make sure that there's screening from the swimming pool in the side yard. So that's really all that was talked about. MEMBER ACAMPORA :The neighbor to the south was concerned about there's a picket fence he has a picket fence and the drawings are showing that they're putting a fence up so he was afraid of a fence on a fence. PAT MOORE : Well unfortunately the Building Department is going to mandate a fence for the pool so they do require even if your neighbor has a fence right on the property line and if the 24 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 building code requires the owners to maintain their own fence so unfortunately that is the requirement of the state code. (inaudible) evergreens you know they're going to up the evergreens on one side or the other I don't know if they're going to do that I do know that they need to put up their own fence. RANDALL FAIRHURST : I'd like to speak. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Go ahead. RANDALL FAIRHURST : This is Randall Fairhurst. The code'for the pool is that the pool must be enclosed with a fence not the property. So I have a fence around my pool and there is plenty of room to put in a fence around the pool. If you come over to my property you will see that I have two gates to my fence around my pool. One is to the house and one is on the street side.So there doesn't need to be a fence on fence situation here. The code is that the pool itself must be enclosed so you can put a fence around the pool. MEMBER DANTES : Right but he's allowed to put a fence around his property as long as he meets the height restrictions. I mean that's permitted by code. RANDALL FAIRHURST :That's fine but it's fence on fence. Do you realize what that looks like? MEMBER DANTES : Right but we're not an ARB we're a Zoning Board. He's not doing anything that's not permitted by code. RANDALL FAIRHURST: He said it was required by code to have the fence because of the pool.The fence can go around the pool it doesn't have to go on the property line that is code check it out. PAT MOORE : I honestly don't know what the final decision is where fences are going to go. Quite frankly sometimes the surveyor designs a fence around the property just you know because the client said put up a fence so because we technically have to show a fence. The Trustees in order as part of the permitting process so where the final decision of the fence is going to go I don't have an answer. I apologize for that. JORDAN FAIRHURST:All I'm saying is I oppose a fence on my fence. It's not required by any code. The fence that is required is around the pool. PAT MOORE : No, no I absolutely I understand, I understand your point. The one thing I would note here is as a real estate attorney I know that if the surveyor is correct your picket fence is off the property line. Having that fence on the property line actually cleans up what would potentially be a title issue when you go to sell. MEMBER DANTES : That isn't before us. 25 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 MEMBER LEHNERT : Why are we talking about fences? MEMBER DANTES : Yes we don't (inaudible) fences unless they exceed or violate a code requirement and there's no proposed variance for fences. JORDAN FAIRHURST : So you're basically saying they can put a fence right up against my fence as ugly as that is going to look. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Look if the Building Department writes a Notice of Disapproval because of the height or the location then this Board has the jurisdiction to act. If we don't have a Notice of Disapproval it means it is permitted by code and we have no authority to do anything about it. We only act upon things that are written in a Notice of Disapproval that's the only place we have jurisdiction. I would suggest that you try and resolve this with your new neighbor. JORDAN FAIRHURST : Okay I'm just saying I have no opposition to the pool. I have no opposition to the (inaudible) CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I understand. JORDAN FAIRHURST : Let's trade and say okay put the fence around the pool not on the property line. MEMBER LEHNERT : But we're not talking about the fence here. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : They don't have a fence shown on the survey around the pool. The Building Department will require it they will require it. What they do with their side yard depends entirely upon it looks like they want and try to fence in the whole property. In a front yard they can't be any higher than 4 feet. MEMBER LEHNERT :The fence shown on the survey on this property is silt fence. PAT MOORE : Yes it's a silt fence not a MEMBER LEHNERT : So it's going to go away after construction. PAT MOORE : This is a silt fence during construction not the location of the permanent fence. Thank you Member Lehnert. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yeah I was just looking it's right on the survey MEMBER LEHNERT : Yeah upper left hand corner of the property line. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It's just for construction. JORDAN FAIRHURST : I'm just looking at the diagram that was given. 26 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well the diagram is for a silt fence sir it's not like a permanent fence. JORDAN FAIRHURST : Okay that's fine. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Is there anyone else who wants to address this application? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : So Leslie if I may. Pat can you hear me? PAT MOORE : Yes. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I'm glad you got connectivity again. When you cut off I was about to ask you a question playing off of what Member Acampora discussed about placing the house in a conforming location and you had stated that it's a second home and that the property owner wishes to use the outdoor pool/deck at the rear of the house which I can completely understand. However they proposed building a house that looks like it's designed by an architect, it's not a modular home, they have freedom of design in this vacant lot and that they could potentially conform. They have a covered front porch that's approximately 5 feet wide, they have a three car garage that by shaving off you know the 5 feet there I think they would still have certainly two and a half maybe still a three car garage and the fourth bedroom the front bedroom on the first floor would be reduced by that 5 foot length. Is that something that and I know that the two neighbors discussed that they have no issue with the front yard setback I just wanted to follow up on what Pat was discussing relative to conformance to meet your you know 40 front yard setback as required by code. PAT MOORE : Right well, I respect your question and (inaudible) question. I know that is a question you always or the Board always asks the applicant, I did raise the question with the client because obviously we prefer not to have to get a variance if at all possible but the client really had carefully thought through this design and had asked for the variance for the 35 feet and (inaudible) reasonable request even though it basically doesn't meet code it is a reasonable setback as a setback that would have been authorized when the subdivision JORDAN ARNOLD : Before I drop can you hear me? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yes we can. JORDAN ARNOLD : Just so I understand cause I've never been through this process and I also wanted to note that not only is the garage against my property line and master bedroom but the proposed staging area for construction is also of course up against my property line. I just wanted to ask and again I'm reiterating my non-objection to the two requests variances I guess, with respect to that evergreen screen how do I understand what the Board decides with respect to that request in this process? 27 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : We will write a draft decision and we will deliberate on that before the public on May 20tf' and that will be a 5 o'clock meeting and the public it's not a hearing it's just you listening to what we're discussing but you will be able to understand what the Board has decided to do by listening in. The other option is when I go in the next day to sign the decision after it's been voted on a copy gets sent to the applicant, goes to the Building Department, goes to the Town Clerk and then it's legal. You have the right to FOIL that decision you know once it is a public document and you can read word for word what the Board has decided. It is not at all uncommon when homes are under construction or additions or swimming pools and so on for the Board to require some privacy screening.That is a fairly common kind of thing that the Board often does as a courtesy to other neighbors and often as a requirement of the applicant themselves who want privacy too. JORDAN ARNOLD : Perfect, well I'm trying to be a good neighbor and be reasonable. I just want to make sure that there aren't car lights in our bedroom window at all hours of the day and night and that construction vehicles aren't kicking dust all over our place and other than that I would like to be a good neighbor so I thank you all for listening to me. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : No problem, no problem. Okay anything from anybody else? Pat PAT MOORE : Hi yes I apologize my systems came back up so I was getting a double one on the phone and one on video so I don't know if I finished commenting to your satisfaction I got cut off again so CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I think so, I think you explained what's necessary. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : One other question if I may. The elevations illustrate that the new structure will be built one and half feet above grade, will there be fill brought in?The terrain as I observed it from Wiggins Lane is kind of low and hollow and it seems like we've had a couple of homes built recently especially where we grant relief where we haven't discussed elevations,will this house be built virtually on a mole hill or something raised above the street level grade? PAT MOORE : Well it does have to be 10% finished floor elevation. I believe there is going to be some fillingthat's necessary to the extent that you can because rememberwe have some existing trees along the water side that are going to remain so we don't want to bury those trees with fill. To a certain extent I'm sure there has to be some grading just to be sure that you one you don't flood your own property from the street so aside from that I mean I don't have a grading plan I have some pitch of the driveway to make sure we meet storm water drainage code. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : It shows that the properties elevation is 7 feet so then the foundation on the elevation it shows 1% feet that makes it 8% feet so you're suggesting roughly the fill will consist of a maximum of 1 % feet approximately. 28 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 PAT MOORE: I'm not a construction expert, Rob you might be able to understand the terminology better than I do but it appears that way that if you got an elevation now of 8 % if in fact that's yeah I see an elevation of 7 that is where the like it cuts through the pool area and then it goes up to it appears to be around 7 anywhere between 7 and then the corner the southeasterly corner shows an elevation of 9.3 so this whole property is somewhat banked I think. You have your highest elevation over on the easterly side of the parcel and probably the lowest elevation down at the northwesterly point because that shows elevation 6.5 so there definitely has to be some grading here to and fill. Whether fill has to come in or not I think by the time you start excavating for sanitary,the pool, the house most of the MEMBER LEHNERT : They're going to be shipping fill out of the site between the pool and the house and septic. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : You understand what I'm getting after? The concern of just building the house and it illustrates one and half feet above grade. We've had properties where people have developed them where you've got five or seven feet and the thing ends up being much more elevated. PAT MOORE : I understand your point I do. I think that if we brought in significant material we'd have to describe it forthe D.E.C. and the Trustees. I don't believe I just given where the elevations are presently versus where the finished floor elevation and the corner foundation elevation which shows 81 think 8 1/2, 8 that's not a significant rise. MEMBER LEHNERT : No that's the standard construction this isn't raised. PAT MOORE :Okay good. I mean if you want to put it if you want it as a condition on your approval as long as it doesn't prevent us from meeting FEMA standards which I would be we want to make sure the house isn't subject to flooding. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Look in the interest of time we are way behind schedule now and I want to ask the Board to please ask questions only when you fee is absolutely necessary. I don't want to curtail anybody from inquiring and commenting but we really do have to be mindful of the time. There are other applications waiting and we're quite behind schedule. I'm ready to close this, is there any issue from any Board Member? Any reason why we can't close this and reserve decision? Yes, no you ready to close? Alright I'm going to make a motion to close the hearing reserve decision to a later date. Is there a 'second? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Second. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Kim call the roll. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Acampora how do you vote? 29 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 MEMBER ACAMPORA :Aye. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Acampora votes aye. Member Dantes how do you vote? MEMBER DANTES : Aye. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Dantes votes aye. Member Lehnert how do you vote? MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Lehnert votes aye. Member Planamento how do you vote? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Planamento votes aye. Chairperson Weisman how do you vote? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye. BOARD SECREATARY : Chairperson Weisman votes aye. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The motion carries unanimously. HEARING# 7489SE—ARGYRIS DELLAPORTAS CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next application before the Board is for Argyris Dellaportas #7489SE. Applicant requests a Special Exception under Article III Section 280-13B(14). The applicant is the owner requesting authorization to establish an accessory bed and breakfast, accessory and incidental to the residential occupancy in this single family dwelling with four (4) bedrooms for lodging and serving of breakfast to the B&B casual, transient roomers located at 9625 Route 25 in East Marion. Pat I believe we did send you comments from the Fire Marshall. There are a whole series of questions and concerns I guess regarding the number of bedrooms that are legally allowed based on the layout and access to a bathroom which is not to building code safety code. There's also questions about the pool house and what's going on there. So we need to clean up what's here. I'm going to let Nick take over because as you know we've all been out to the property but Nick was asked to do the interior inspection. Normally all of us would go out and inspect the interiors of everything we needed but because of COVID we're just asking one person at a time to go at this point. PAT MOORE : I have my client here just in case. Mrs. Dellaportas had surgery so she's not available but Mr. Dellaportas is here. 30 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay good. So Nick why don't you take the lead on this. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Absolutely, Pat if you can maybe before I ask a couple of questions based on observations when we were together during the interior inspection, apparently you didn't know about the Fire Marshall's comments and Kim delivered those to you. Do you have any conversation or anything you want to share about that? PAT MOORE :Yes sure.Yes thank you for alerting me to that. I did get it from Kim,thank you Kim. I discussed that room that so I'll give a little history or from what I can tell from the paperwork that addition I went back to the County's GIS aerials historic aerials to try to figure out timing of when that was built. It appears that it shows up as an addition between the seventies and eighties. I also saw that one of the B&B applications the house had been a two family and one of the conditions prior to the B&B approval of a prior owner the kitchen had to be removed and it was the two family was eliminated it was a one family with a B&B approval. I discussed that with my clients, they were there when the Fire Marshall came through and they were under the impression that if they got those metal ladders those fire ladders that would satisfy it. So they actually bought the fire ladder and they have it there as an egress route but when I checked with an architect to verify I think he pointed out Vincent who you saw earlier that he told me and Leslie you may be able to confirm this that the code has been since the seventies you need two forms of egress for a bedroom and you can't use one room like a bathroom as a form of egress. So I posed to the client and I said well if you wanted to create a second egress that's very that's somewhat expensive here. We'd have to create a dormer in essence having a staircase out and quite frankly B&B's are not huge money makers so ultimately they said well you know well that's fine we won't we'll take that bedroom off of the request for a bedroom and we'll just request for a B&B for the three (3) bedrooms that are upstairs that are clearly clean nice and easy simple bedrooms. We'll use that other room as a storage which may have been done by the prior owner also but at the time the prior owner the code was different on the number of bedrooms. Now I think you can have up to five (5) when they applied I think the maximum may have been three (3) two (2) or three (3). So in any case I think we've reached the conclusion that the bedroom in the back that gets access through the bathroom will not be a guest room. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : So Pat did I understand you correctly then this is sort of an amended application that they will seek a three (3) bedroom bed and breakfast permit, correct? PAT MOORE : Correct, correct. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Excellent. Additionally in the bedroom marked number four (4) at the front of the house there's a bathroom that apparently doesn't have a building permit for the bathroom. 31 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 PAT MOORE : Yeah we obviously none of us knew that because it was there when they bought the property so if the bathroom was added that's something that we'll just have to legalize with a building permit. My clients bought the house this way and that bathroom when it was added we just don't know I mean it's a nice bathroom but I don't know the vintage of it. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : So the applicant is fine with whatever the Special Exception if there is a condition that they need to legalize the as built bathroom they will do that? PAT MOORE : Oh sure of course we need to do that regardless yes. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Along that same conversation how, many people live in the house full time? PAT MOORE : Well two just Mr. and Mrs. Dellaportas. They do have a daughter that comes. Mr. and Mrs. Dellaportas that is their home, the daughter will come in and stay with them. I think you saw one of the rooms the messiest room was the daughter that had a lot of stuff what? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I was just commenting that either you or Mr. Dellaportas indicated they have a daughter that would be staying on the property. PAT MOORE : Oh yes they have a daughter yes. MEMBER PLANAMENTO :So I didn't know if they have two daughters or more children. Obviously that impacts the bedroom space so they'll keep the two first,floor bedrooms for their purposes and then three (3) upstairs for guests? PAT MOORE : Yeah I mean they have three (3) children if you want to know how many children they have, two sons and a daughter'so that's their entire family but the one who comes out and visits most often would be the daughter yeah. She's not married oh she's married. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I guess the last conversation it came up when we were touring the house, between the living room and the first owner's bedroom there's a doorway it has a door jamb but there's no door, you walk past that bedroom and then you enter a doorway into the owner's suite, will the Dellaportas be adding a door to keep the rear of the house private from guests? PAT MOORE : They haven't expressed a need for it. There is a doorway between that bedroom and the living room which is actually blocked with furniture or something cause they don't really need it. If ultimately if they find that they need the privacy they would put in the door but it really doesn't for their purposes they don't feel they need it. It's a nice it's an 1800's house, it does have a frame I don't know that it ever had a door. If it had a door maybe some time in you don't think so right? Mr. Dellaportas doesn't think there's ever been a door there. I mean it has nice 32 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 molding so that's more a privacy issue there's no real need. When people come in it's clearly where the living room area is, is the guest open area for serving the breakfast but most people will go they'll come in they'll go up the steps into their private bedroom they don't usually go beyond that point. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Thank you. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : We also need to talk about the pool house. PAT MOORE :Yes that thing drives me crazy. I'll tell you, so I'll give you as much history as I know on that. Again on the County website if you go back and look, that building has been there at least between sometime before the eighties. It's been there a long time just the aerials are not that clear.The older aerials as you get into the seventies you see some shadows but it's not nice and clear as the eighties. The first very nice clear aerial photograph I think is I think '81. That building has been there MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Did we lose Pat. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :Yeah. Well while we try and get her back I guess she's going to realize it I'm going to take a one second break here. I'm just going to stop my video I'll be back in literally a minute. PAT MOORE : Hello okay I'm back that's weird I don't know what happened. I think it was Southold wide because the dentist was down. I think all of us lost we're back up on internet here so thank God. Our computers our phones everything went down. Anyway MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Do you mind holding off, Leslie just stepped away for a minute. We're sort of just taking a,pause. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Where have we left off with this pool house because PAT MOORE : We hadn't started. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : If indeed it's going to be a pool house we have to have the Building Department inspect it and we have to make sure it conforms to the definition that is now in the code for a pool house and we will need a C.O. on it. PAT MOORE :Well I don't want to delay a B&B because of it. I put in an application to the Building Department oh now it's been two years, COVID interrupted everything but it's been at least two years. The Building Department said, oh you have a bathroom even though it's always had a bathroom you need to get Health Department approval. 33 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Could I just interject one thought,you were talking about before we all broke for a minute, in our packaged delivered I guess by the'applicant or you it illustrates a Pre CO in 2002 and it illustrates other documents going back to 1991 that the structure was in fact a shed. So whatever improvements were done I would argue were done sometime after 2002. PAT MOORE : There is a shed there, I don't know. When did you buy what year? (asking the applicant) my client is saying that he bought he's going by his memory 2012 or 2014. If it was done in 2002 it was already there so in any case we've been trying to clean this up. We inherited this issue but I put the application in to the Health Department for the sanitary approval, they have had my submission my resubmission I mean they keep losingthe papers I don't know what's going on. We've done it by a portal, we've done it by FedEx, Express mail and Jimmy Trent is the reviewer we even emailed him recently and said hey what happened because they sent us some paperwork that implied that it was already there or like the'sanitary system was already there and we said no we're applying for a new system. So there was some screw up on the Health Department part, we are trying to clean this up. We will get a permit for it. It has a code violation so we are obligated to clean it up otherwise it will never get out of Justice Court. So they have the stick to the carrot but we have been actively working on it. I had to get architectural drawings from Rob Brown. He gave it to me, I put in the application, I had to do a sanitary design because of it. So it has been a very tedious process and I just can't seem to extract from the Health Department the sanitary approval the construction the approval to construct for the sanitary system which is what I need to do. I don't want to delay you B&B's are you know the time to have a B&B is in the summertime not wait until all of this old paperwork that we can't that we inherited getting cleaned up I just don't want to penalize people on that when we are actively doing it and I will you know you can make it as a condition we have to clean it up. We know that we've been doing it so that's all I can tell you. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Is there anybody else who wants to address this application? Board Members are you ready to close this, you have what you need or do you want to do something else? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : We can close it with conditions obviously. MEMBER LEHNERT : Close it. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay, I'm goingto make a motion to close the hearing reserve decision to a later date, is there a second? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Second. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Kim would you call the roll please. 34 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 BOARD SECRETARY : Member Acampora how do you vote? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Acampora votes aye. Member Dantes how do you vote? MEMBER DANTES : Aye. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Dantes votes aye. Member Lehnert how do you vote? MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Lehnert votes aye. Member Planamento how do you vote? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Planamento votes aye. Chairperson Weisman how do you vote? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye. BOARD SECREATARY : Chairperson Weisman votes aye. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :The motion carries unanimously. HEARING#7490-JOSEPH and BARBARA ORLANDO CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next application before the Board is for Joseph and Barbara Orlando#7490.This is a request for a variance from Article XXIII Section 280-124 and the Building Inspector's February 25, 2021 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for a permit to construct additions and alterations to an existing single family dwelling at 1) located less than the code required side yard setback of 10 feet located at 900 Goose Creek Lane (adj. to Goose Creek) in Southold. Is Elizabeth Thompson here, yes. Good morning and thank you for your patience. Fortunately this one is a side yard setback of 5 feet where the code requires 10, 1 think it's to use its LWRP exempt you're using the renovated existing garage as living space and connecting it with a small conditioned space. Good you got the drawing up, okay. To me this is very minor, extremely minor. Is there anything else that you would want us to know Elizabeth? ELIZABETH THOMPSON : No I think it's pretty straightforward. I agree with you, it's very minor. It increases the lot coverage by 1% and it's the most minimal kind of connection tucked back out of sight from pretty much every angle.The owners need additional space you know for the COVID 35 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 they have adult children returning home and they're remote working so just this additional space is needed. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well it's set back very far from the'creek. It's as you said not visible to the road. It's also screened with a large hedgerow along the side yard. (inaudible) property and some very large on the neighbor's property and it's a very you'know it's an unpaved road it's very private back there. Does any Board Member have any questions or comments for Elizabeth? Eric anything from you? MEMBER DANTES : Not at this time. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay, Nick. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : No questions. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Pat. MEMBER ACAMPORA : No questions. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Who did I miss, where's Rob? MEMBER LEHNERT : I'm here, no questions this is very minor: CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :Yep. Okay anyone else in the audience? BOARD SECRETARY : I don't see anybody raising their hands here. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Alright I'm going to make a motion to close the hearing reserve decision to,a later date. Is there a second? MEMBER LEHNERT : Second. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Seconded by Member Lehnert. Kim call the roll please. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Acampora how do you vote? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Acampora votes aye. Member Dantes how do you vote? MEMBER DANTES : Aye. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Dantes votes aye. Member Lehnert how do you vote? MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye. 36 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 BOARD SECRETARY : Member Lehnert votes aye. Member Planamento how do you vote? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Planamento votes aye. Chairperson Weisman how do you vote? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye. BOARD SECREATARY : Chairperson Weisman votes aye. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :The motion carries unanimously. HEARING#7491—CATHERINE and PETER MELLY CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :The next application before the Board is for Catherine and Peter Melly #7491. This is a request for variances from Article XXIII Section 280-124 and the Building Inspector's February 12, 2021 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for a permit to construct a new single family dwelling at 1) located less than the code required front yard setback of 35 feet, 2) more than the code permitted maximum lot coverage of 20% located'at 1375 Sterling Rd. in Cutchogue. Who is here let's see we have BOARD SECRETARY : I think Eileen Wingate I believe. Eileen is that you? EILEEN WINGATE : Hi, hello. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aside for that fact that it's impossible to find this property even my GPS was going in circles,this is a corner lot that is oddly shaped and tell us what you'd like us to know about this application. It's a lot coverage of 20.68% which is so deminimus I wonder why you can't just be conforming but MEMBER LEHNERT : That was my question. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : A front yard setback at 20.2 feet, the code requiring 35 and the lot coverage is just deminimus literally, I don't know why you just can't get rid of .68%. Okay let's hear what you have to say about it. EILEEN WINGATE :The hardship that we're facing is because it is a corner lot and Horton Rd. has been abandoned it doesn't exist. We're having a problem meeting the corner lot setback. The Melly's are here can you hold one second. I'm sorry I'm having an echo. Is that better? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : You're fine we can hear you. 37 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 EILEEN WINGATE : So the corner lot presents a problem. If we weren't on a corner lot we would meet code and we wouldn't have any issues and the abandoned road just gives us a hard time. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I can see the odd shape and so on. I think it's a reasonable request. What I don't understand is how we got .68% lot coverage variance. EILEEN WINGATE : To be perfectly honest Leslie the Building Department actually missed it and while I was doing the calculations I decided to ask them to amend the Disapproval because I didn't want there to be any problems. Peter Melly is looking at aging out in this place so the house if you noticed the hallways are a little wider,the bathrooms are designed for handicapped accessibility and all these little considerations kind of inflated our floor plans just a little bit. If you notice the hallway coming in from the garage is a little larger than an average house.So there are just some little idiosyncrasies built in. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Alright well I mean it's so minor that's why we had to ask why you couldn't be conforming but if you're saying basically it was so small the Building Department missed it and you asked them to amend it you know I'm okay with that. I don't know what the rest of the Board thinks, Rob do you have any questions or comments? MEMBER LEHNERT: My comment was the same thing, it's a blank slate. I understand the setback it's a weird shaped lot but the .68 1 mean we can't work our way around that and make that go away? It's minor. EILEEN WINGATE : I'm going to ask, what do you think? CATHY MELLY : I don't know. I mean it has to stay handicap accessible. Pete has Parkinson's Disease and we do need the room. MEMBER DANTES : Take a foot off the garage and get it MEMBER LEHNERT : Yeah there's covered porches and all sorts of things here you can shave a foot here and a foot there. EILEEN WINGATE : It's actually as I recall it's been a while since I, it's 106 sq. ft. PETER MELLY: It's a three bedroom home, it's something that's very amenable to the community. It's going to be one bedroom down, were going to have two bedrooms for me and my wife and two girls. MEMBER LEHNERT : But again our charge is to minimize the number of variances and it's so tiny there's got to be a way to make that go away. 38 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : We can go one of two ways, we can either say yes make it go away and simply deny it and let them figure it out. On the other hand we can say it's so deminimus that its really insignificant so who cares. One way or the other. EILEEN WINGATE : Well the garage can't get any smaller. If you look at the floor plan, these are not overly generous rooms. The rooms are pretty average but it's the circulation having 42 inch hallways that's causing us to just be a little bigger than we need to be. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Eileen the garage is 27 feet deep at its shallowest. EILEEN WINGATE : There's a work space back there. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : It's deeper that makes it an additional,3 feet almost 4 feet deeper. So couldn't you just take 7 feet off the garage or whatever is needed? EILEEN WINGATE : No there's a little workspace in there and there's also a need to have room getting wheelchairs in and out and there's a real chance that the vehicle will be larger than your average-car too. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Look you know we're not allowed to personalize variance relief which is unfortunate in a way and probably a good idea in the long run because people sell houses they move on they don't need what they thought they had to have because it's a different owner. That's why the law doesn't allow us to personalize it. Having said that if you're making a reasonable argument about what is essentially about you know a half a percent or round it up three quarters of a percent I can live with that. I don't know how the rest of the Board feels. In general Eileen you know us well enough to know that we don't give variances unless they're absolutely justified and when it's this close you know we really are in a (inaudible) because it seems like there should be a way to just not have to deal with that variance. I understand why you asked the Building Department to put it back on because you wanted everything to be on the up and up and legal in case it was discovered after the fact. EILEEN WINGATE : Exactly. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : So I don't know. We're just going to have to poll the Board and I mean I certainly know all I need to know at this point unless anybody else has any questions. No, okay is there anybody else in the audience I don't think so. Okay well we'll just grapple with it. The Board will have to duke it out, we'll figure it out. Hearing no further questions or comments I'm going to make a motion to close the hearing reserve decision to a later date. Is there a second? MEMBER LEHNERT : Second. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Seconded by Member Lehnert. Kim call the roll please. 39 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 BOARD SECRETARY : Member Acampora how do you vote? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Acampora votes aye. Member Dantes how do you vote? MEMBER DANTES : Aye. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Dantes votes aye. Member Lehnert how do you vote? MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Lehnert votes aye. Member Planamento how do you vote? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Planamento votes aye. Chairperson Weisman how do you vote? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye. BOARD SECREATARY : Chairperson Weisman votes aye. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The motion carries unanimously. EILLEN WINGATE :Thank you very much. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I just want to let them know, Mr. Zuhoski and Tyler Danowski we have you schedule for one o'clock and we are not allowed to hear your application prior to the stated time on the agenda because we never know if somebody if we take you early there might have been someone planning on attending making a comment and then we have barred them from the opportunity to do that. So we're going to take a break until one o'clock and we'll be back promptly at one o'clock to open up and hear your application,. So I'm going to make a motion to recess for lunch. Is there a second. MEMBER ACAMPORA : Second. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor raise your hands please. The motion carries unanimously. Okay everybody we will be back at one o'clock see you then. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I make a motion to reconvene, is there a second? MEMBER DANTES : Second. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor raise your hand please. The motion carries unanimously. 40 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 HEARING#7492—STICKS &STONES OUTDOORS—IAN ZUHOSKI CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :The next application before the Board is for Sticks &Stones Outdoors- Ian Zuhoski #7492. This is a request for variances from Article XXIII Section 280-124 and the Building Inspector's March 1, 2021 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for a permit to construct additions and alterations to an existing single family dwelling at 1) located less than the code required front yard setback of 40 feet, 2) located less than the code required minimum side yard setback of 15 feet located at 3995 Wells Ave. (adj. to Jockey Creek) in Southold. Liz would you please tell people how they can participate. OFFICE ASSISTANT SAKARELLOS : Thank you Leslie. If anyone wishes to comment on a particular application we ask you that you send us a note via the Q&A tool at the bottom of your screen or click the raise hand button and we will allow you to unmute and let us know which application you are here for. If you are using a phone in order to let us know you would like to speak please press *9 to raise your hand and we will allow you to speak and we will give you further instructions on how to unmute. Thank you. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Thank you Liz. This is an addition to a single family dwelling with a front yard setback at 26.5 feet where the code requires 40 feet and a side yard setback of 7.8 feet where the code requires 15 feet. The proposed project includes a demo of the attached garage and a rebuild. I think this needs Trustees approval also and a sanitary system is being installed. Okay let's see what the applicant or their representative has to say about this. TYLER DANOWSKI : Hello everyone, Tyler Danowski with Stronski Architecture. Yes as stated we are currently looking for a front yard setback relief on the Oaklawn Ave. side as well as a side yard setback on the opposite end where there is a current it's actually a detached garage currently and we are looking to install a new attached garage in its place.Just some background, we do have a Trustees permit in at the time and that was submitted at the same time as the Zoning Board application. We also have a D.E.C. application in for the bulkhead that was submitted by the prior owner (inaudible) purchased the property in 2020 roughly and they continued with that D.E.C. application. Our plan is, once we get our approvals through the town we will look at amending with the D.E.C. for the proposed work to be done to the property. In regards to what we are looking to do, on the Oaklawn Ave. side where we currently have a setback of 30 feet that the existing house we're looking to get closer to the Oaklawn side (inaudible) and have an offset of 26 foot 6 inches. Now just in reference to that is called off of the proposed masonry patio. That masonry patio also has a proposed pool in it and it will be elevated out of the ground at roughly about 4 feet above grade which is what triggered us to have to get the variance for it. In addition on the other side where we are looking for a 7.8 foot setback, currently we have a detached garage there that's sitting at 3.8 feet off of the property line so we're actually making the garage further away from the property line. The proposed 41 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 garage is 9 foot 8 off the property and the 7 foot 8 reference is actually off of the sunroom which would be getting a little bigger by about 2 feet from what's currently existing. So the existing sunroom is 7.8 feet and we're just making that a little bigger so we're increasing the degree of non-conformity there but the garage itself is actually getting further away from the property line by about 5 feet roughly. I think that's pretty much it. There is'some second story space but that is all over the existing footprint. We are also looking to do an addition I guess the northwest corner. That does not encroach on any of the setbacks more so than what's existing. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : So the side yard setback is pretty understandable. We've all been out to inspect the property. We do that with every application as I'm sure you know. It would appear that the property slopes down towards the creek. Did you say that was a 4 foot high retaining wall that you're going to have to put in for that pool? TYLER DANOWSKI : Roughly from what we've estimated with the existing survey and where we're looking to do the addition. Yes it would roughly be about 4 feet high where the masonry patio drops to grade which is where that (inaudible)to the Oaklawn side. OFFICE ASSISTANT SAKARELLOS : Leslie may I interrupt a minute? This was not in your packets because this was issued on March 11th, there is a Stop Work Order on this property for construction without a building permit. They need to get a building permit for the work that is being done. TYLER DANOWSKI : Okay I believe that's due to the egress stair on the side of the house which she had excavated due to a foundation leak so he opened that up to repair it and then he did pour that egress stair to the side for storage which he's eventually going to have down the road. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay thank you Liz. Let me get back to what I was going to ask. Since it is waterfront property you can locate this in a conforming front yard. That part of the property is as flat as can be, is absolutely empty and also has a row of continuous new evergreen screening that has been planted. Why not put it there? TYLER DANOWSKI :The masonry patio? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : No I'm talking about the pool. TYLER DANOWSKI : Oh the pool. Just due to the view towards the creek obviously. My client is trying to take advantage of the view towards the water as well as the privacy and Oaklawn is a rather busy street so between that and Wells Ave. is just a matter of trying to keep it a little further away from that and mostly due to the advantages of the view and the background. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :Well if you had it in the vicinity of the cornerwhere Oaklawn and Wells come together you would see the creek, you can see it from anywhere from everywhere. 42 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 TYLER DANOWSKI : It also ties into the existing and proposed layout within the house. Right now the living room and all the main gathering space is towards the rear of the house as well as the existing wood deck and sunroom that all is off the back end of the house on the creek side. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Is there a new sanitary system being installed? I think you said there was. Is that an IA system? TYLER DANOWSKI : Currently we're going to have the existing system certified. We have not submitted to the Health Department yet as we are just waiting to go through this process. It's an existing four bedroom and we're putting back four bedrooms (inaudible). MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Where is the existing sanitary? I saw by the basement access where the excavation occurred,there's an open it looks like an old septic tank for lack of a better word. TYLER DANOWSKI : I believe that the existing sanitary system is to the north east roughly where the it would be the office addition that (inaudible) into effect for the ZBA. I believe currently that's where it's set. I believe the property owner did go through and try to have it staked out to figure out where it's laid out. That's going to be something that we are going to get certified and we'll figure out the existing location of it. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : How far along are you with Trustees approval? Are you on for a hearing yet? TYLER DANOWSKI : I do not believe so. I think they were looking to go through this process first before they got back to us with any feedback. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : And how about the D.E.C? TYLER DANOWSKI : D.E.C. my client is dealing with at this time. I have not heard anything in that respect. Again there's an open permit currently for the (inaudible) so it would be an amendment to that existing. Yes we didn't do anything in regards to what we were (inaudible) doing with the house, we're just looking to amend that once we'll amend the bulkhead permit once we get to that point. IAN ZUHOSKI : This is Ian here how are you guys. So we do have approvals for the bulkhead, Rob from En-Consultants is who we continue that paperwork with. All of that work I believe has been one hundred percent approved for the bulkhead repair. We did just receive some paperwork the other day from En-Consultants. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :There are several mature deciduous trees in the vicinity of where you want to put that swimming pool and 43 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 IAN ZUHOSKI :A few of them, a few of those are in terrible shape. We actually have a tree service company with an arborist, they're up and over the house which is not safe. We actually applied for the neighbor or the neighbor applied for one, we just took down we got approval on it a few weeks ago. There's a continuing issue with red oak trees with some of the crotches rotting out with water so a good portion of those will need to come down obviously as part of this construction project but even if they were we would be pushing to eliminate a few of those because of the danger of them. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Let's see if the Board has any questions, Pat? MEMBER ACAMPORA : No, no questions. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Rob MEMBER LEHNERT : No my only question was the septic system where it was. IAN ZUHOSKI : So just to kind of follow up on that, I know that small tank that you guys noticed is the only tank that we kind of exposed. That is only a 4 x 6 which seems to be like a little collection tank from what we understood as Tyler had mentioned. I'm definitely going to further progress down the lines of getting that system certified in short minutes it's copasetic. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Eric any comments, questions? MEMBER DANTES : No not at this time. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Nick MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I actually have two just sort of from a record keeping standpoint, I'm confused about the front yard setback. I can understand what the applicant is trying to achieve with the request on Oaklawn Ave. front yard setback but if that's in fact a front yard isn't the swimming pool then in a front yard? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : No I think it's on the side of the house. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : It's kind of hard to define cause they've got Wells Rd. frontage and Oaklawn. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Right well they didn't say it was in a non-conforming location so maybe because it's attached. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Well what I was thinking is I was working this through because originally I thought it was in a non-conforming location but if that's cited for being a front yard setback then actually the pool is in a conforming location. 44 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Maybe that's right. IAN ZUHOSKI : I was under the impression that as long as it's outside of the 75 foot from the wetlands attached as a there's no percentage really in the town handbook but as long as we're attaching it we're above that 75 and we're out of the ground by 10 or more on the topo map that we're all within you know approvals on that. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : So clarify something else then, you just said 75 foot wetlands setback but I thought Trustees had jurisdiction to 100 feet. IAN ZUHOSKI : Yeah it's 75, we're outside that 75 MEMBER LEHNERT : Or even so showing to the patio it's 105.4 MEMBER PLANAMENTO : To the house. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :Yeah the house not the pool. MEMBER DANTES : You know what Nick, the pool becomes conforming but it's still a non- conforming front yard setback because they take it from the edge of the patio as part of the house. MEMBER LEHNERT : Yeah because of the two front yards. MEMBER DANTES : Yeah so it's just semantics there's still a non-conformity. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Then the only other thing I wanted to bring up because the sanitary did come up is the lot coverage, like the last application where they were just a tad over this one the calculation is at 19.9% but I don't know if that includes the wetlands. So I don't know if actually over 20%. MEMBER LEHNERT : You're not allowed to include the wetlands in that. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Right but that's (inaudible)out.They're looking at the actual (inaudible) CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It's gotta be 20% of buildable area. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : It doesn't extrapolate what the buildable area is which makes me think they're over 20%. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Anybody have anything else, anything else you'd like to say Tyler? TYLER DANOWSKI : I think we're all set I believe. 45 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Alright then hearing no further questions or comments I'll make a motion to close the hearing reserve decision to a later date. Is there a second? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Second. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Seconded by Member Acampora. Kim call the roll please. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Acampora how do you vote? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Acampora votes aye. Member Dantes how do you vote? MEMBER DANTES : Aye. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Dantes votes aye. Member Leh,nert how do you vote? MEMBER LEHNERT :Aye. - BOARD SECRETARY : Member Lehnert votes aye. Member Planamento how do you vote? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Planamento votes aye. Chairperson Weisman how do you vote? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :Aye. BOARD SECREATARY : Chairperson Weisman votes aye. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :The motion carries unanimously. HEARING#7493— LEON PETROLEUM LLC (BP MATTITUCK) CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next application is for Leon Petroleum LLC (BP Mattituck) #7493. Request for variances from Article XIX Section 280-85D(7) and Section 280-87A and the Building Inspector's March 1, 2021 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for a permit to replace three (3) existing roof signs and one (1) existing freestanding sign at 1)four (4) signs proposed to be internally lit which is not permitted, a sign may only be lit from an external source, 2) freestanding sign is more than the maximum size permitted of 24 sq. ft. in area. 3) freestanding sign is more than the maximum height permitted of 15 feet above the ground located at 16900 NYS Route 25 in Mattituck. So replacing three (3) existing roof signs and existing freestanding 46 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 sign all to be internally lit. The size is 62 sq. ft. the code allows no more than 24 sq. ft. The third is the height above ground is 18.7 feet,the code allows a maximum of 15 feet. You must be here to represent the applicant. Would you state your name please. CHRISTINA BRAVIN : Good afternoon, Christian Bravin Morano Expediting 2938 Hempstead Tpk. and we are located in Levittown, New York. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Thank you, do you know if there were prior variances for the signs that are there now? I didn't see any. CHRISTINA BRAVIN : I know that they have been in existence since approximately 1988 with respect to the ground sign. As far as variances obtained back then I don't know if I have variance numbers in the packet. Let me look in the application. I don't have that information in the packet let me just see oh dated.1987 yeah. May 19, 1987 appeal#3636 I'm just trying to breeze through this record. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : There were several prior ZBA decisions submitted in the packet but it's a bit confusing and there were also denials on,this property. So I'm just trying to get in the record what the actual situation is. I mean we know the signs have been there for quite some time and I'm not sure the date whether the signage code was actually finalized or whether this pre-dates that code or not. Bill if you're on and can hear me, do you have any idea when that signage code was adopted? T. A. DUFFY : I could look it up if you give me a couple of minutes. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Sure that would be helpful. Just trying to piece together the background on this cause we have the same application really in about two minutes coming up, the other BP the other location. T. A. DUFFY : I'm sorry I had someone in my office,what was exactly what you wanted me to look up? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The signage code that we're dealing with now these two BP applications that limits the height and it limits the square footage and it says that they have to be dark sky compliant, they can't be illuminated internally. T. A. DUFFY : Sure. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :That's what we're trying to figure out. T. A. DUFFY : Give me one minute and I'll get back to you. 47 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Meanwhile is there anything else you want to enter into the record Christina? CHRISTINA BRAVIN : Just in general, the reason for the request to replace these signs is to (inaudible)the ground sign we're just going to retro fit that pricing cabinet area so no changes to the height, no changes to the sign just replacing the interior LED lights. They do create a little bit more lumens these days the lights so just slightly brighter however they will be no negative impact on the area. This is directly across from farmlands.'Really just increasing visibility to passerby and the roof or canopy signs they're going to be almost exactly the same.They are those BP (inaudible) helio signs again upgrading those LED's inside to more current efficient option. If you have any questions, do you have the full packet and I have it with me as well to review anything. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : While Bill is looking up that information it would still appear based on the packages delivered to me that there were no building permits or a C.O. for any of the signs. So the question would be, why can you not comply with the current code? CHRISTINA BRAVIN : We do have the C.O. in the packet. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Did I miss the C.O. on the sign? MEMBER DANTES : I don't know if the C.O. spells out the sign but it is mentioned it says Special Exception not a variance that there was a sign as part of the application. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : There's the canopy one and the Pre CO, there's no discussion of signage. MEMBER DANTES : I know but it is in the Special Exception they go into the signage. T. A. DUFFY : Also sign regulations came into effect in '94. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : '94 okay. I know it was probably, more recent than what this past history was on here. MEMBER DANTES : Actually May 12, 1988. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Is this going to require Planning Board approval also or no? It's not cited in the Notice of Disapproval. I don't think it will. MEMBER DANTES : The 1988 decision denied the Special Exception. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : That's what I was going to say that's the 1987. You're talking about decision 3636. 48 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 MEMBER DANTES : Yeah. There's 3633 MEMBER PLANAMENTO : So I guess Christina why can't the applicant or tell us why the variance should be granted that they do not have to meet current code. CHRISTINA BRAVIN : We're asking that we since we're retrofitting the ground sign we're not making any changes to its location or its height, they're just simply retrofitting one portion the lower portion of the sign the pricing cabinet. It's been in existence since 1988 which as we just confirmed predates the code, we're asking for permission to maintain that sign where it is without having to incur the cost of taking it down, relocating it, completely rebuilding a sign in that (inaudible) and some more requests with the roof signs they have been in existence since predating the code.These are just logos on the canopy that would be the request. If they weren't making any changes we wouldn't obviously be coming to the Board. It would remain (inaudible). CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :What exact changes are you doing?You said you're retrofitting,you're changing part of the ground sign? CHRISTINA BRAVIN : Right so part of the ground sign today the lower portion is the pricing cabinet which contains the prices of all three fuel levels and today it has a manual display and what they would like to do is just retrofit that with a digital display more up to date, more efficient and they don't have to go out and change any portions of the sign to reflect the current prices. The digital display will be able to be updated by computer. MEMBER DANTES : There's something from 1967 approving a pole sign. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well we're going to have to go through this you know all I was trying to do is get in place the sequence of events,the history,the background, how it all came to be in the timing to see which way we should think about this. The point I guess I'm making is you're not really replacing anything. CHRISTINA BRAVIN : Correct. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : You're retrofitting one and you're just replacing light bulbs basically? CHRISTINA BRAVIN : They're upgrading the LED inside both signs and well the both sets of signs, the ground sign and the roof or canopy (inaudible) so all LED's will be changed out. So we're not changing locations of any of the signs or quantity of any of the signs or sizes of any of the signs. They will remain intact in place the same way, lit the same amount of hours just slightly different LED units will be put inside which produces a little bit more lumen. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Let's see if anybody has any there is somebody there's a hand up. BOARD SECRETARY : That's for later, that's for Harvest. 49 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : So there's nobody else attending who wants to address this application. Any other questions from the Board? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : The only other thing I wanted to bring up also and it seems like things got (inaudible) over the years how everyone looks at whatever the turnover is and sort of my own timeline relative to the applications provided via the file but the decision #1958 rendered in 1974 which allowed the placement of a used car sign which is actually where the pole sign is had a condition to maintain the 10 foot wide buffer which that whole area is like paved over. This is in what I guess would be the northeast corner so I don't know if that's something worthy of discussion. I don't know if it creates a traffic problem or a sight issue but like the I guess east and southern lot lines the sort of area of non-disturbance the wooded areas, there was I think the intention that there was supposed to be something in the northeast corner. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Do you have any idea what that means Christina? CHRISTINA BRAVIN : I'm looking at the current photographs and as far having any negative impact on the traffic it's completely clear from the bottom of the pricing approximately 5 % to 6 feet below the pricing cabinet so it would not obstruct the view from any traffic on that side entrance or on the Main Rd. Nothing was built along there as far as a buffer with plantings or trees I'm not aware of that being a condition on (inaudible) or having been removed at some point. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : It even shows I'm looking right at the 1987 survey, it shows the area was grass so I don't know if it's something that we want to put back in, I don't know how the Board feels about it but it seems that it fell off at some point. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well I guess I'll have to just pour back over that a bit but it looks like that shipped sailed basically. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Maybe I don't know. MEMBER LEHNERT : It's the same as the signs I mean not having C.O's because like I said the'88 variance denies them. MEMBER DANTES : Yeah it's only that'71 or'67 decision that mentions it. MEMBER LEHNERT : Yeah but wouldn't the '88 variance override that? MEMBER DANTES : I don't know what the application was. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well for signs you would need variances not Special Exception. You need the Special Exception for the gas station use but then you need variances for the signs. 50 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 MEMBER LEHNERT : You need variances for the signs and the variance for the signs in '88 was denied. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It's very confusing. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : And I would think we recently rendered a Special Exception on the north road in Southold for a gas station but signage didn't come up because they're supposed to conform. MEMBER LEHNERT : Correct. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : That's a new you know MEMBER PLANAMENTO : it's a new structure. MEMBER LEHNERT : Right if they conform it wouldn't be an issue. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I know. CHRISTINA BRAVIN :Just for a reference,the Gulf in Mattituck on Route 25 has a ground sign also internally lit. I don't know if they received a variance but just to put that out there that this is not out of character for gas stations in the area. MEMBER DANTES : Is that the one in Laurel? CHRISTINA BRAVIN : I'm sorry what did you say? MEMBER DANTES : I was just wondering which one it was if it's the one in Laurel I think right? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Alright you know what why don't we do this, let's close this one and move on to the other because the questions are going to be much the same. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : It's all the same. I don't know if this is just an oversight but CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The height is slightly different you know alright I can leave this open and just open up the other one or we can just close this one and move on to the other one. What do you want to do? I guess close it. MEMBER LEHNERT : Yeah close it and move on to the next one. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : So I make the motion to close the hearing reserve decision to a later date. Is there a second? MEMBER PLANAMENT : Second. S1 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Seconded by Nick. Kim call the roll please. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Acampora how do you vote? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Acampora votes aye. Member Dantes how do you vote? MEMBER DANTES :Aye. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Dantes votes aye. Member Lehnert how do you vote? MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Lehnert votes aye. Member Planamento how do you vote? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Planamento votes aye. Chairperson Weisman how do you vote? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye. BOARD SECREATARY : Chairperson Weisman votes aye. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :The motion carries unanimously. HEARING#7494— LEON PETROLEUM LLC(BP PECONIC) CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Here is the next Leon Petroleum LLC (BP Peconic) application #7494. Same request for variances from Article XIX Section 280-85D(7) and Section 280-87A and the Building Inspector's March 10, 2021 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for a permit to replace three (3) existing roof signs ,and on (1) existing freestanding sign at 1) four (4) signs proposed to be internally lit, which is not permitted, a sign .may only be lit from an external source, 2) freestanding sign is more than the maximum size permitted 24 sq. ft. feet in area, 3) freestanding sign is more than the maximum height permitted 15 feet above the ground located at 32400 CR 48 in Peconic. So here we have the same situation with the illuminated three (3) roof signs and the ground sign also. Then the size in this case in 99 sq. ft. again maximum is 24 feet and then the height here of this freestanding sign is proposed at 22.7 feet where the code only allows 15 feet. Any other kinds of questions or when was this gas station built do we know the date?That would have to also have been a Special Exception approval. 52 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 MEMBER PLANAMENTO : They have it here, it was CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Quite some time ago. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : The Special Exception was 1987 most recent. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : And that signage code what did Bill just say? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : '94 did Bill say? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I'm looking I wrote it down. BOARD SECRETARY : 1994 yes. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : '94 yeah. So I guess these are all predating those laws. So again Christina are you doing the same thing with that ground sign just replacing the cabinet to digital? CHRISTINA BRAVIN :That's correct. (inaudible) cabinet (inaudible) retrofit it and no change to the change to the square footage and no retrofit again no changes to the quantity of signs, location of signs and as you stated these have been I think 1986 1 have dated when the first took this property and that's how long the signs have been (inaudible). Again no negative impact to the neighbors.There is no residential homes directly facing this property and across (inaudible) Lane is a very heavily vegetated road (inaudible) that home from the (inaudible) no buildings or residences that the ground sign would impact. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Any questions from Board Members? MEMBER PLANAMENTO I think it's the same questions that we discussed in the earlier application. I mean there's a little bit of a gray area here but I still wonder why the applicant can't conform. The existing sign is four times greater than what's allowed. In Mattituck it's fifty percent. MEMBER LEHNERT : Do we have copies of the old sign permits? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : There's nothing provided with the application. MEMBER LEHNERT : Sign permits, I don't see them. MEMBER ACAMPORA : Nope. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I don't know that they ever had any. I don't know what the prior code was either, the sign code. That would be something interesting to research. MEMBER LEHNERT :There was always a code on freestanding signs. 53 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yeah I just don't know what it is. MEMBER LEHNERT : Neither do I, 1 know it was there. BOARD SECRETARY : Leslie I was wondering if you want to also look at the site plan approval for Peconic to see if there was any conditions regarding the signage. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : You mean on the North Rd. the application we're talking about now? BOARD SECRETARY : Yes. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :Well they must have to have had site plan approval also.That's D.O.T., they had to have had curb cuts and all that kind of stuff. We can pull them up, we can see what the Planning Board has in their file BOARD SECRETARY : I'll see if I can find anything. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : and see what the prior signage code was. You can check the Building Department files also and see what kind of permits if any were ever issued for any of those signs. Just so we have a whole picture because I can you know really see this proliferating if we begin to start looking at saying okay it's fine it was there a long time, legal or no we don't know we can't find out and then the next thing you know we're going to be getting another one and another one and another one. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Well that's what happens, people today put signs out without permits all over the place and there's no reason unless code enforcement CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Sandwich boards are everywhere, everywhere dog gone business has one of those fold up sandwich boards now sticking out and along the highway with an arrow. MEMBER ACAMPORA :Yep. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I guess the code was created for a reason. It can really have a very adverse impact on the picturesque quality of the landscape. MEMBER ACAMPORA : Eye pollution. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yep. I think we need to do a little more investigating Christina you know just to find out a fuller idea of where this all came from and where it needs to be going. I mean BP is a big company, it's got gas stations all over the place. Are they basically doing this with all of their gas stations all over or you don't know? CHRISTINA BRAVIN : (inaudible) and I wish I had more information to clarify really that we could have had permits dating to the eighties. I don't however so I understand the concern of the 54 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 Board and if there's anything we can do to facilitate on our end via the property owner we will do so. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay you know what I got an idea, let's give you an opportunity to see what else you can dig up and we'll do the same from our end. Instead of closing the hearing why don't we just adjourn this to the Special Meeting in two weeks.That way we can take in anything else that we turn up and we can share that with you so that you have an opportunity to I'm taking to you Christina that you have a chance to respond if you wish to, to anything we turn up. You can give us whatever you find and then if we feel we have a better complete picture we'll just close the hearing at the Special Meeting on May 20th so that gives us like two weeks to see what else we can unearth about all of this background. Having said that about this application I'm going to make a motion first to reopen the application so that we treat them the same way that's in fairness we have to do that. So let me go back and reopen Leon Petroleum LLC MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Can we leave this one open first adjourned and then vote and then open up the other one? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : We can do that if you want to sure. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : It's neater. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I'll just make a motion on this one which is application 7494 the one in Peconic to adjourn it to the Special Meeting on May 201h subject to receipt of additional research and information. Is there a second on that? MEMBER LEHNERT : Second. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay Kim call the roll please. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Acampora how do you vote? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Acampora votes aye. Member Dantes how do you vote? MEMBER DANTES : Aye. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Dantes votes aye. Member Lehnert how do you vote? MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Lehnert votes aye. Member Planamento how do you vote? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye. 55 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 BOARD SECRETARY : Member Planamento votes aye. Chairperson Weisman how do you vote? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye. BOARD SECREATARY : Chairperson Weisman votes aye. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The motion carries unanimously: Now I'm going to go back to the MATTITUCK, I'm going to make a motion to reopen Leon Petroleum #7493 and change the resolution to an adjournment to the May 20th Special Meeting. Is there a second? MEMBER PALANAMENTO : Second. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Kim call the roll please. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Acampora how do you vote? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Acampora votes aye. Member Dantes how do you vote? MEMBER DANTES : Aye. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Dantes votes aye. Member Lehnert how do you vote? MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Lehnert votes aye. Member Planamento how do you vote? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Planamento votes aye. Chairperson Weisman how do you vote? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye. BOARD SECREATARY : Chairperson Weisman votes aye. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The motion carries unanimously. Christina you know the Special Meeting is not a public hearing, it's where we deliberate on drafts. It's not likely that we're going to have a draft in two weeks simply because we have to mull over and get together whatever research we can find. If we feel we have enough information at that point we'll just close it and then we will have decisions scheduled for the next meeting which is again two weeks later. That would be the June Regular Meeting what date is it in June? BOARD SECRETARY : The 3rd I believe. 56 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Again there won't be testimony taken unless we feel we need to. I mean if we decide at the Special Meeting we have additional questions as a result of all the research then we will make a motion at that meeting May 2011 to adjourn to the Public Hearing on June 3rd and then we can talk about it. You can come back you we can discuss it in a public hearing setting. Is that clear? CHRISTINA BRAVIN : Thank you for the consideration for the opportunity to pull up some more info hopefully it can resolve it quickly. Thank you so much. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : We'll move as quickly as we can, we just need to be careful doing it the right way that's all. HEARING#7504SE— HARVEST INN—STACY and STEVEN ISAACS CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next application before the Board is for Harvest Inn, Stacy and Steven Isaacs #7504SE. Applicants request a Special Exception under Article III Section 280- 136(14). The applicants are the owners requesting authorization to establish an accessory bed and breakfast accessory and incidental to the residential occupancy in this single family dwelling with five (5) bedrooms for lodging and serving of breakfast to the B&B casual, transient roomers located at 40300 Main Rd. in Peconic. I see you're on, if you like to unmute yourself you can do that now. STEVEN ISAACS : Hi. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Welcome to the neighborhood. STACY ISAACS : Thanks we're loving it. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :As you know Member Lehnert was there on behalf of the Board to do an interior inspection which is standard for anything we have to really look at the inside of. Normally we would have all shown up but because of COVID we decided till things are a little more normal it's less stressful for everybody if just one person goes and reports back. So right now we see that your basement is that the problems with the habitable space in the basement have been pretty much resolved.The sheetrock is all down,the studs are remaining and it's being used for storage. STEVEN ISAACS : Yes. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : No other changes right? 57 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 STEVEN ISAACS :Just fresh coats of paint. STACY ISAACS : And lots of furniture. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay. I believe we granted are you requesting a five (5) bedroom B&B? STACY ISAACS : Yes. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Previously we granted a four (4) bedroom B&B. STACY ISAACS : Yes but they had asked for a five (5) bedroom but because the two of them weren't married one of them had to live in the guest rooms so they couldn't CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Right, in other words it was an adult daughter also. So you want us to revise that because that's not the case, you're the only two occupants? STACY ISAACS : Correct. STEVEN ISAACS : Correct. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Alright well that's cleared that thing. Anything, Rob do you want to update us on anything or MEMBER LEHNERT : No just you know the report I gave you before that I saw that the basement was all the sheetrock was taken down and the ceiling tiles and you know it was deemed non- habitable space. STACY ISAACS :There's so much stuff that we're storing. MEMBER LEHNERT : Yeah the basement was cleaned up from the last application. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : You have so much stuff. Let's see if the Board has any questions, Pat do you have any questions about this application? MEMBER ACAMPORA : No I think you just discussed the two areas in question was the basement and the fourth or fifth bedroom. So no questions. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Eric how about you? MEMBER DANTES : Not at this time. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Nick. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : No questions but maybe the applicant can stop by the Assessor's Office.The property card illustrates it's a seven bedroom house and having been involved in three 58 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 decisions for bed and breakfasts at that location we know it's not it's a six bedroom house. There's like a storage room or a den I think in the master suite which causes a lot of confusion so I think maybe if you guys wouldn't mind telling the Assessor to correct the record that might be helpful and maybe there's a tax benefit I don't know. STEVEN ISAACS : Absolutely and that would be great if there is. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : You'll find out. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Nick I'm sorry I was taking notes, how many bedrooms? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : The Assessor's town property card illustrates seven, it's a six bedroom house and I think people just see that and they automatically think it's seven and we've discussed this so many times with owners and we know it's not. STACY ISAACS : Okay we'll go down there. MEMBER DANTES : Probably the listing from the last owner trying to sell it. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Yes. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Don't go there please Eric that's water under the bridge. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Rob you affirm that that bedroom is gone correct in the basement? MEMBER LEHNERT : Yeah it's gone, I sent you the pictures too. All the sheetrock is gone there's wood studs there but it's not you know it's just storage space. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :The Building Department said they were okay with the studs. Nobody else is in attendance so there's nobody else that wants to address the application. So hearing none I'm going to make a motion to close the hearing reserve decision to a later date. Is there a second? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Second. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Would you call the roll please Kim. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Acampora how do you vote? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Acampora votes aye. Member Dantes how do,you vote? MEMBER DANTES : Aye. 59 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 BOARD SECRETARY : Member Dantes votes aye. Member Lehnert how do you vote? MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Lehnert votes aye. Member Planamento how do you vote? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Planamento votes aye. Chairperson Weisman how do you vote? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye. BOARD SECREATARY : Chairperson Weisman votes aye. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :The motion carries unanimously. We'll have a decision for you in two weeks on May 20th. Again that's not a public hearing, we don't take testimony but it's open to the public via Zoom and if you want to listen in while we talk about the application the draft decision you're more than welcomed to but I will go in the day after we vote that evening it's five o'clock at night and sign the decisions and then they get sent out and they get sent to the Town Clerk and they're legalized. STACY ISAACS : Great thank you so much. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : We have a couple of resolutions to deal with. The first is a resolution for the next Regular Meeting with Public Hearings to be held Thursday, June 3, 2021 at 9 am so moved is there a second? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Second. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Seconded by Member Acampora.,You don't have to call the roll just everybody raise their hands if you approve the next meeting. Let the record show that the vote was unanimous by hand motion. Resolution to approve the Minutes from the Special Meeting held April 15, 2021 so moved. Is there a second? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Second. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :Seconded by Member Planamento.All in favor raise your hand please. Motion carries unanimously. Finally we have a request to extend a condition on as build improvements I'll read it, resolution to approve extension for thirty days from the date of this approval for as built improvements condition number two in appeal #7148 Neil and Amy McGoldrick dated June 21, 2018, so moved. Is there a second? MEMBER LEHNERT : Second. 60 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Seconded by Rob all in favor raise your hands. The motion carries unanimously. I believe that's all. I didn't ask in the work session if anybodywanted to put anything on a future agenda item. I'm not hearing any. Okay so I'm going to make a motion to close the meeting of the Board of Appeals. Is there a second? MEMBER LEHNERT : Second. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Seconded by Member Lehnert. Call the roll please Kim. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Acampora how do you vote? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Acampora votes aye. Member Dantes how do you vote? MEMBER DANTES : Aye. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Dantes votes aye. Member Lehnert how do you vote? MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Lehnert votes aye. Member Planamento how do you vote? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye. BOARD SECRETARY : Member Planamento votes aye. Chairperson Weisman how do you vote? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye. BOARD SECREATARY : Chairperson Weisman votes aye. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The motion carries unanimously. Okay this meeting is adjourned and we can stop recording. 61 Regular Meeting May 6, 2021 CERTIFICAT10N I Elizabeth Sakarellos, certify that the foregoing transcript of tape recorded Public Hearings was prepared using required electronic transcription equipment and is a true and accurate record of Hearings. Signature alizabeth Sakarellos DATE : May 18, 2021 62