Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA-04/07/2022 Hearing TOWN OF SOUTHOLD ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS COUNTY OF SUFFOLK: STATE OF NEW YORK --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TOWN OF SOUTHOLD ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Southold Town Hall &Zoom Webinar Video Conferencing Southold, New York April 7, 2022. 10:04 A.M. Board Members Present: LESLIE KANES WEISMAN - Chairperson PATRICIA ACAMPORA—Member (Zoom) ERIC DANTES— Member ROBERT LEHNERT—Member NICHOLAS PLANAMENTO— Member(Vice Chair) KIM FUENTES—Board Assistant JOHN BURKE— Deputy Town Attorney ELIZABETH SAKARELLOS—Office Assistant DONNA WESTERMANN —Office Assistant April 7, 2022 Regular Meeting INDEX OF HEARINGS Hearing Page Decision for Jay Mandelbaum and Lauren Gordon # 7579 3 Decision for Vincent Bertault#7580 4- 5 Christopher Thirkfield #7608 6- 11 Bay Beach, LLC#7609 12 - 14 Michael Kasper#7610 14- 17 Donna Belvedere# 7611 17 - 19 Thomas Annicq #7612 19 - 19 Kim Ulmet#7613 19 - 22 Colleen Krupski #7614 22 - 25 Andres and Marissa Garcia #7615 25 - 31 John Carter and Catherine Samaan #7634 32 - 34 William C. Goggins and Donna M. Goggins#7649 34- 38 Katherine Hubbard #7607SE 38- 56 Douglas McGahan #7653 57- 60 April 7, 2022 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Welcome everyone to the Zoning Board of Appeals Public Hearing for April 7, 2022. Let me do these resolutions 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: Christopher Thirkfield, Bay Beach LLC, Michael Kasper, Donna Belvedere, Thomas Annicq, Kim Ulmet, Colleen Krupski, Andres and Marissa Garcia, John Carter and Catherine Samaan, William C. Goggins and Donna M. Goggins, Katherine Hubbard and Douglas McGahan. So moved, is there a second? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Second CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA Aye MEMBER DANTES : Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye. Before we get on to the deliberations and the public hearings 'I'd like to ask you all to rise and join me in the Pledge of Allegiance. Would you all remain standing for one moment for a moment of silence to honor the people suffering in Ukraine. Thank you. The decision we're deliberating on is for Jay Mandelbaunl and Lauren Gordon #7579. Does everyone have the drafts?So just briefly you'll recall that this was a decision a number of years ago that was granted to allow an accessory tennis court on a property without principle dwelling but with a lot of Covenants and Restrictions that included the construction of a conforming residence by a certain amount of time and two things have happened. Many, many delays in the process and finally got around to a building permit, they're going to need to have their Covenants and Restrictions amended to change the date. I believe we're proposing to grant them three more years to build a conforming dwelling on the property while maintaining their tennis court. The applicant submitted the application that was not just for a building permit it had very excessive lot coverage originally so then they amended that, they actually submitted a reduced lot coverage so the C&R's (inaudible) conforming dwelling but they did that after the hearing had been closed so we April 7, 2022 Regular Meeting reopened the hearing by a unanimous vote of the Board. Then discussed lot coverage and then that at that time it was clear that they realized both the applicant and the agent that they could build a conforming home based on the fact that their property size would allow them to do that along with maintaining the tennis court. Then we closed the hearing and then once again we got a submission of yet another set of plans which we had already discussed more or less but we couldn't accept them in any case because they were after the hearing was closed. So this is a since they know they can build a conforming dwelling on the property and the law requires that they require a variance in order to construct their project and if it's a variance it's got to be the smallest variance we legally can allow. So based upon that and what's in the record this is a motion to deny the variances as applied for and to grant the extension of three years by amendment to the applicant's filed Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions acceptable to the Town of Southold Acting Town Attorney allowing a residence conforming to the town code bulk schedule to be constructed on subject property with final Certificate of Occupancy issued within three years from the date of the this decision that would be April 7, 2025. Then there are conditions that just simply say that you have to file an amended C&R. The Town Attorney would have to approve it, everything else will remain as it was previously in the C&R's it's just the date that we're changing. Any comments or questions on this? No, we're ready to vote? Okay I'm going to make a motion to deny the variance as applied for and grant an extension of three years on the Covenants and Restrictions requiring that they be resubmitted filing be submitted. Is there a second? MEMBER LEHNERT : Second CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER DANTES :Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye. The motion carries unanimously. Vincent Bertault #7580. This is a request for a reversal of a Building Inspector's Stop Work Order on the property. This draft decision reviews prior approvals from the ZBA and the HPC in 2014. (inaudible) the public hearings that were held on this and the submissions of both testimony 4 April 7, 2022 Regular Meeting and written submissions and then essentially the determination of whether or not to reverse depends upon four different points. I'll review them briefly, first of all the this particular request is authorized under the powers of the Boards of Appeal pursuant to town code 280- 146 powers and duties, because this is an order from the Building Inspector the Stop Work Order falls under our appellate jurisdiction. Secondly, the powers of the Building Inspector they are really set forth in 145 not 148 Chapter 148 and they are far reaching. They encompass all kinds of things including the ability to issue a Stop Work Order simply because whether a permit is required or not there is an issue that looks as though it would be a hazard to public health and safety and we basically indicated in.our prior determination on this property on December 2, 2021 #7467 that a whole series of concrete retaining walls had been constructed. Whether or not It requires a permit is not really the issue, the bottom line is evidence has ,been submitted to suggest that it is in fact a hazard to the public and so it doesn't matter whether or not it requires a building permit. Thirdly, the Stop Work Order has to satisfy the requirements of 140-4258. The applicant's attorney alleges that the Stop Work Order impermissibly vague. However that section of the code says, the Stop Work Order has to be in writing, has to be dated which it is August 24, 2021, it has to be signed which it is by a Senior Building Inspector, it has to state the basis for issuance which it does as construction beyond the scope of building permit 44198 issued 9/23/2019 and for the work will be permitted to resume upon a certain set of conditions and in this instance Stop Work Order it says when the Zoning Board of Appeals and Building Department have issued approvals for all the changes. So the Board finds in this decision that the Stop Work Order was clear and concise and is not impermissibly vague and forth non-compliance with prior approvals. We did request and receive updated architectural plans from the applicant's architect which we which are dated 2/15/2022 Sheet A-1 and A-2 which we received on March 15th. In any case we compared those with the stamped plans we had originally approved and that the Historic Preservation Commission had approved and the Building Department issued the following comments, the "as built" overall height of the accessory barn exceeds the maximum height of accessory structure by 2 plus feet from natural grade. ZBA approval is required, the project has exceeded original scope of relocation of barn on a new foundation permit. It has become a demolition and new per town code. ZBA approval is required, a Notice of Disapproval will be issued. In summation evidence has been presented to our Board showing that the Building Inspector had a rational basis for issuing and maintaining and issuing the Stop Work Order and that it satisfies the requirements of Chapter 144-13B and as a result I'm going to make a motion to uphold the Stop Work Order issued by the Building Department. Before we vote is there any discussion, comments, changes? Okay I'm going to hold that vote, is there a second on that motion? April 7, 2022 Regular Meeting MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Second CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER DANTES : Aye MEMBER'LEHNERT c Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye. The motion carries unanimously. Now we'll get on to the public hearings. HEARIN #7608—CHRISTOPHER THIRKFIELD CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The first public hearing before the Board is for Christopher Thirkfield #7608. This is a request for variances from Article III Section 280-15, Article XXIII Section 280-124 and the Building Inspector's September 2, 2021 Notice of Disapproval based on an app lication for a permit to legalize an accessory garage and roof over rear patio attached to an existing single family dwelling at 1) located less than the code required minimum rear yard setback of 5 feet, 2) located less than the code required minimum side yard setbl ck of 5 feet, 3) more than the code permitted maximum lot coverage of 20% located at 705 Captain Kidd Drive in Mattituck. We have a lot coverage of approximately 25%, the (code permitting a maximum of 20%. The accessory garage has a 2.8 feet side yard setback, the code requires a minimum of 5 feet and a rear yard setback of 4.5 feet where the code requires a minimum of 5 feet. We did receive a letter of support from the neighbor. We'll turn it over to you now Mike. MIKE KIMACK : Good morning everyone, Michael Kimack on behalf of the applicant. It's in an area of r highly the same size lots the whole area twelve, thirteen thousand square foot lots. He is asking for relief from the side yard and rear yards. I would make one comment, it's not a garage it could be a shed. Maybe at one time it used to be I suspect but they took away the driveway. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It is a shed. April 7,2022 Regular Meeting MIKE KI'MACK : Then the porch area they moved over the porch area was probably the newer addition to it they added a porch over what was at one time an on grade patio (inaudible) solar panels on top of it. I would bring your attention I think it's very helpful if you can take a look I gave you an aerial shot of there, it kind of gives you an idea of the neighborhood of all the other houses relative to it. You can see that for the most part it's not certainly out of scale and other places as a matter of fact right next door I think there's another shed that's pretty much right up against it. It's well vegetated the area and that back shed if you can see from that shot there are fairly high vegetation on the back side of this so it's really not that visible from the neighbor to the south of it. The one to the west basically has a shed right up against that property line so it kind of shields it. From the-road you really don't pick it up it's quite a ways back. The porch area at one time they covered you can see from the aerial you can see the solar panels they want to put on that side (inaudible) primarily.. There is precedent for it, there were several prior cases that prior Boards had done in the area and I'll bring your attention to that. Several of them basically are constructed if you can look at my summation of (inaudible) several of them are you know construct an open deck for a total coverage of 28.2%1, in-ground swimming pool and raised deck lot coverage 27% approval of a proposed pool and front porch addition for 22.69% and the only one I can find there was two number six and number seven for an approval one for a deck to be setback 11 % feet from the side yard. Number seven had an approval for a side yard setback of 1 % feet. It's a fairly large shed, the back is only about a half a foot from being legalized, one side is 2.8 as you enter right into it the requirements are 5 feet. So we I do ask for relief for both the shed basically (inaudibl'e). I'm not quite sure when it was built it's been there quite a (inaudible) it's weathered. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It's deteriorating, rotting at the bottom the wood. MIKE KIMACK : Yeah I noticed that too. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : There's also two air-conditioning units sticking out of the back, what is that all about? MIKE KIMACK : You know what, I really wish I can tell you except for the fact that they probably were storing stuff in there at one time and they probably just wanted to condition it to make sure it didn't mildew on the back side. There's nothing else in there, there's no bathrooms or kitchens or anything like that it's just a storage area. The porch with the overhang porch and the solar is obviously (inaudible) and even from that side if you look at April 7, 2022 Regular Meeting the photos the vegetation is very high and the neighbor really can't see that porch from that side so it's almost insulated within itself. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : We also noticed when we were at the site that there's it's not on the site plan there's a second shed one of those plastic sheds right next to the subject wood shed and it should probably be on the survey but it's not. MIKE KIMACK : You got me on that one because MEMBER PLANAMENTO : It's a small shed it's like 8 by 8 or something 8 by 6. 'MIKE KIMACK : Is it next to the big shed? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Yeah it's right sort of in the center of CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : You know where the yellow is down there it's to the right of that it's right in there. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Against the fence. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN Right up against the fence is another storage shed maybe the photograph shows it. MIKE KIMACK : Let me took a look at my photos, oh there it is. Look at number four my picture my photos picture four, I think it's picking up part of it. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : No that's the subject. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :That's the wood shed. MEMBER LEHNERT : No you can see it on photos three and four, you can see the roof. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yeah that's it. MEMBER LEHNERT : Roof on three and the side of it on four. MIKE KIMACK : Well obviously I don't think the applicant wishes to increase the lot coverage at this particular point of the game and I would suggest that it be a condition that that be removed I think it would be fine. MEMBER DANTES I have a question for you Mike, on C.O. #25319 it says accessory building is that the same as the subject building or is that different what was that? April 7, 2022 Regular Meeting MIKE KIMACK : What? MEMBER DANTES : It was submitted with your application. MIKE KIMACK Oh with the Certificates of Occupancies? MEMBER DANTES : Yeah MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Eric this is the one dated 1984 MEMBER DANTES : 1973. '62 for one family dwelling and '73 one family dwelling MIKE KIMACK : Is this July 27, 1973? MEMBER DANTES : Yup MIKE KIMACK : I'm sure that's gotta be the shed. MEMBER DANTES : So the shed has a C.O., I'm just confused why we're looking at it if there's a C.O? MIKE KIMACK : I think because this particular one was smaller and they .added to it. The original size of this (inaudible) I think was 12 by 16. MEMBER DANTES : Which is a different building? MIKE KIMACK : So this one was an enlarged building. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Probably when they looked at the covered porch the covered patio they noticed that the building was non-compliant. MIKE KIMACK : Yeah going back to my memory and it's been some time since I've but this one when I look back on the original notes on this one Eric the original building that was approved was I think 12 by 16 and this is 12 by 29. So that triggered that requirement so thank you for picking that up. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I think it says that it's 16 foot 2 inches by 29 (inaudible) MIKE KIMACK : Yeah it used to be that the 12 by 16 or something like that it.was smaller. MEMBER DANTES : Is this building on a masonry foundation? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It is it's partially. April 7, 2022 Regular Meeting MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Mike how did this situation come up that the applicant was I guess flagged or caught for the (inaudible) MIKE KIMACK : He was in the process of selling the place and during that process the diligent attorney picked up that fact that there was at least no C.O. that he could find on that so these particular issues came up at the time and this happened over a year ago I think when they first started this. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : So the new homeowner is the one that's actually MIKE KIMACK : I'm not quite sure, I don't think he sold it yet primarily. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : He's living in it? MIKE KIMACK : He's living in South Carolina they still own the home he was getting divorced. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Let's see if anybody has any questions, Eric? MEMBER DANTES : No I don't have any further questions. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Nick MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Just one thing that you had said, at the opening of the hearing you suggested that the owner current owner whoever it is and the solar panels to the lean to sort of that shed cover why would they have not put them on the actual residence? MIKE KIMACK : I'm not quite sure which came first you know the chicken or the egg on that one. In a sense I think they built the porch over the patio and I think obviously they found that it was more convenient to put it on the porch. I don't think it was and I have to correct myself cause I'm not sure exactly what the sequence of events were basically because the porch was whether the porch was done at the same time as the for the benefit of having the solar in a sense I'm not quite sure that was actually the situation or whether they just built that porch and then that was the more convenient place to put the solar panels on there. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I'm sure the angle is off its kind of like a flat roof versus MIKE KIMACK : It's interesting with solar panels. I have limited experience with them but you know the angle of the sun certainly in the wintertime is about seventeen or eighteen degrees over the horizon you might (inaudible) but in the summertime it's about sixty-eight degrees over the horizon and those pick up quite a bit. The main house there's a little bit more slope April 7, 2022 Regular Meeting not that much more and I think they might have had a little bit more room on this porch (inaudible) I can only speculate on that one I haven't really looked at it from that perspective. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well for us it's lot coverage, it's lot coverage and I think if we just tell them they have to remove that other shed cause that's not even calculated in the lot coverage. MIKE KIMACK : Yes agreed. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :The thing would be demolished if(inaudible) MIKE KIMACK : Well that little one is a lot easier than the big one. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay anything from anybody else, Rob do you have any questions? MEMBER LEHNERT : I have no questions. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Pat anything from you? MEMBER ACAMPORA : No. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay then 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 : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER DANTES : Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye. The motion carries unanimously. April 7, 2022 Regular Meeting HEARING#7609—BAY BEACH, LLC CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next application before the Board is for Bay Beach, LLC#7609. This is a request for a variance from Article XXIII Section 280-124 and the Building Inspector's October 27, 2021 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for a permit to construct an accessory in-ground swimming pool at 1) more than the code permitted maximum lot coverage of 20% located at 1055 Bay Home Rd. in Southold. This is a 32 by 16 foot pool with a lot coverage of 22.7% where the code allows a maximum of 20% and it appears the existing lot coverage is at 19.4% is that correct? ROB HERRMANN : You just eliminated my first paragraph of my presentation. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : So tell us about this justification for this lot coverage. ROB HERRMANN : First of all any increase in the building area here greater than close to a hundred square feet will result in lot coverage exceeding 20% so it is not possible to construct a pool on the property without a lot coverage variance which is why we're here. But like most of the parcels in the surrounding neighborhood the applicants is a substantially undersized pre-existing non-conforming lot as a total area of buildable land area 15,476 sq. ft. in R40 zone district. As we presented in our application pools are a common feature within the immediate surrounding neighborhood, there are five properties within four hundred feet of the applicants that are improved with pools including the adjacent parcel to the east and two of those pools were the subject of ZBA approvals for lot coverage greater than 20% including 185 and 325 Willow Point Rd. I'm just going to hand up to you an enlarged and enhanced version of the neighborhood photo that was submitted with our application but it's marked up. It's not just the locations of those pools but also the locations of the properties that were granted lot coverage relief by the Board. So I want to review these couple of cases a little bit more and the character of the neighborhood standards. So in the case of 185 Willow Point Rd. Appeal #6937 in 2016 granted lot coverage relief necessary to build a new swimming pool that increased lot coverage to 21.72%. That pool was also granted an additional relief for its location in a non-conforming side yard location. In that decision the Board found that granting the variances would not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood. In the case of 325 Willow Point Rd. the Board first granted relief for 23.6% lot coverage to Appeal #4602 in 1998 and in 2013 as part of Appeal #6689 the Board determined that relief for 22.96% lot coverage was not necessary due to their prior decision in 1998. Then in 2019 the Board again granted relief through Appeal #7235 and in that case for 22.3% lot coverage that was deemed necessary to reconstruct an existing April 7, 2022 Regular Meeting swimming pool in the same location. The applicant's proposal that's before the Board today is substantially similar to the (inaudible) prior decisions. For example the proposed 16 X 32 pool is comparable to the (inaudible) 15 foot wide by 36 foot long swimming pool granted at 185 Willow Point Rd. but unlike that case the applicant's pool is located in a conforming location. It's proposed location also well exceeds the minimum 5 foot setbacks to the rear and side lot lines as the pool is located almost 19 feet from the rear lot line and over 26 feet from the nearest side lot line. Therefore it cannot be expected that the pool would cause any potential detriment to the immediate neighboring parcels. A proposed lot coverage was also substantially similar to both of these prior cases. The proposed 22.7% is less than the 23.6% originally granted on Willow Point Rd. and nearly identical to that granted for the same property more recently in 2019. In that decision the Board found the 11.5% relief from the code not to be substantial and so arguable neither would be the 13 % % relief required here. Finally, the project will not result in any adverse impacts on physical and environmental conditions of the neighborhood.The pool will be located almost 300 feet from surface waters of Southold Bay to the south and outside town wetlands jurisdiction nearly outside state wetland nearly also outside state wetlands jurisdiction. The D.E.C. issued a determination that a permit was not required here. The pool is proposed to be elevated sufficiently above ground water to avoid the need to de-water during construction. A salt water filtration system will be used to avoid the use of the traditional high chlorination treatment system. Pool back wash will be directed to a proposed dry well which is provided on the site plan and a project limiting fence will be installed to contain site disturbance to potential surface runoff during construction. If as the Board has required in other pool variances the mechanicals can be placed in a sound deadening enclosure on the property. Pool contractors also (inaudible) here we're both here to answer any questions the Board may have about the plan. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I don't have any questions about the pool but I did have one thought, I can see that applicant has already planted some evergreens along the side yard or actually it's the front yard along the right of way rather than the (inaudible) and there is a small part of the cyclone fence along what you call the rear property line that is very opened and exposed on the other side on the other adjacent property there's a lot of evergreens it's really quite screened, would they consider adding additional evergreens that continues around to cover that piece of cause that's really visible at an angle people going back and forth they probably would want to anyway. ROB HERRMANN : Absolutely, yes. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay that was all I had. Let's see Rob anything from you? April 7, 2022 Regular Meeting MEMBER LEHNERT : I have no questions. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I have no questions. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Eric MEMBER DANTES : I do not have any questions. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Pat MEMBER ACAMPORA : No questions. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Is there anyone in the audience wishing to address the application? Okay I'm going to make a motion to close the hearing reserve decision to a later date, is there a second? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Second CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER DANTES : Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye. The motion carries unanimously. HEARING#7610—MICHAEL KASPER CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next application before the Board is for Michael Kasper #7610. This is a request for a variance from Article III Section 280-15 and the Building Inspector's October 22, 2021 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for a permit to construct an accessory in-ground swimming pool at 1) located in other than the code required rear yard located at 735 Gin Lane in Southold. This is a corner lot for starters and who is technically in a front yard. April 7, 2022 Regular Meeting MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Leslie wouldn't it also-need a setback? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Accessory doesn't necessarily need they have to have the same setback, this is a secondary front yard. BOARD SECRETARY : They consider it's not allowed in the front yard so it doesn't matter what the setback CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : That's technically what we always do it's in a non-conforming location so the setback is not the issue it's whether we grant the location. The house actually fronts on Midway,why don't you go ahead and introduce yourself. MERI ROSE REILLY : good morning Member of the Board, my name is Meri Rose Reilly and I'm from (inaudible) Associates located at 738 Smithtown Bypass Smithtown, New York. I am the applicant for Michael Kasper owner of 735 Gin Lane in Southold. We are requesting as just stated a variance for the construction of a proposed in-ground pool located in other than the code permitted rear yard at 735 Gin Lane. This property is a corner lot which creates two front yards along Gin Lane and along Midway. The house does front on Midway although the address is Gin Lane. We are asking for a reduction in the setback also on the Gin Lane side which from 35 foot minimum required to a structure to 19.4 from the property line.This does have the pool edge 30 feet from existing edge of the road. The pool and equipment maintain all other required setbacks. The equipment will be located in the rear yard. This property has an existing storage shed in the easternmost corner and an existing fire pit and more importantly a sanitary system. This makes siting the pool a very complicated process. The kitchen has access to the existing rear wood deck and it makes sense that the pool be located near where the family spends most of their time outside so the pool use can be readily supervised. The opposite end of the rear yard towards the southeast is congested by the shed, fire pit and sanitary system and is also near to the garage instead of the main living areas of the home. Locating the pool as submitted will address the concerns the family has for accessibility, visibility from the deck and to maintain distance from sanitary system. The owners purchased the home in 2017 updating it while keeping the charm of the original structure. The home is landscaped and the rear yard is surrounded by very large evergreen trees which will remain providing screening and privacy. The Kasper's are planning to add evergreens to the existing landscape to further increase screening and maintain privacy from the road while family is in the yard utilizing the pool. The (inaudible) code required safety measures which are part of the application the Ka`sper's will also be including smart technology, CCTV cameras, cable alarms and surface alarms will all be connected by Wi-Fi to 1 April 7, 2022 Regular Meeting the owners smart phone and to other devices as well as to a central monitoring station as part of the project to ensure further safety. We believe this is not a substantial request of the Board and as such does not have any adverse effect on the neighborhood. The property is clean, well-kept and landscaped. The Kasper are invested members of their community and have developed close ties to this neighborhood. To my knowledge the neighbors have no objection to the proposed work in fact I have submitted three email correspondences from adjoining property owners indicating their support of this application. I'd be more than happy to answer any questions you may have. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Pat do you have any questions on this application? MEMBER ACAMPORA : No questions, I mean the pool is rather small, it's a 12 X 30 pool which isn't large, we've seen many larger and of course here we go with the corner lot so I have no questions. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay thank you Pat. Eric anything from you? MEMBER DANTES : I do not, I think she explained it very well. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The screening is already incredibly dense evergreen I mean the holly that's there must be a hundred years old it's really big. MERI ROSE REILLY : And that's one of the reasons why they purchased this home and wanted to keep all that the privacy the screening and why you know trying to make work what we have. The sanitary system is kind of right in the middle of the back yard. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well it is pushed back from the road as far as you can get it and it is a small pool as well (inaudible) I have no further questions or comments. Nick? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I just wanted to ask if you have any variance relief for homes with front yard pools in the community? MERI ROSE REILLY : I have not, we found one but it was a historical property and therefore you guys had no jurisdiction because it fell under the historic umbrella I guess is the word. I can if you would like I dig around and see what I can find. There are a lot pools in the neighborhood. MEMBER DANTES,: If you can give is that one it shows character of the neighborhood. MERI ROSE REILLY : I'm sorry what? April 7,2022 Regular Meeting MEMBER DANTES : If you can give us the historical one it demonstrates character of the neighborhood. MERI ROSE REILLY : I can get that information for"you. That's the only one that we found and when I had called and spoken to someone (inaudible) that was what I was told that that did not fall under your jurisdiction it fell under historic but I can get that to you. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN Okay, anything from you Rob? MEMBER LEHNERT : No questions. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Anyone in the audience wishing to address the application? Okay I'm going to make a motion to close the hearing subject to receipt of one prior variance in the neighborhood. Is there a second? MEMBER LEHNERT : Second CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER DANTES :Aye c MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye.The motion carries unanimously. HEARING#7611—DONNA BELVEDERE CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next application before the Board is for Donna Belvedere #7611. This is a request for a variance from Article XXIII Section 280-124 and the Building Inspector's November 17, 2021 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for a permit to construct an accessory in-ground swimming pool at 1) more than the code permitted maximum lot coverage of 205 located at 605 Eastwood Drive in Cutchogue. FRED WEBER : My name is Fred Weber I'm the architect on the project. April 7, 2022 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : This is a pool that's going to result in a 20.65% lot coverage so it's less than 1% over what is maximum. I think you submitted two priors on Eastwood for front yard and rear yard setback and the other was a waiver of merger. FRED WEBER : That was for actually a previous owner not for this owner. That was a building permit I think that was received and nothing was ever done and it became void. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It looks like the neighbors to the north (inaudible) pools also in their rear yards. This is a new house. FRED WEBER : Yes it is. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It's got a nice big yard, it's flat. I don't see any visible impacts on anything. We did get one letter from the neighbor, it was unclear and he was welcoming her to the neighborhood and saying how happy she's going to be with a pool and then going on to say that everybody else that has a swimming pool has abused it. So I'm not sure what that means. Is that support or not that's what I call a mixed message. I presume you're not going to have naked guys in your back yard that's what she said I'm just saying I don't make this stuff up. I have no questions, Rob anything from you? MEMBER LEHNERT : No questions CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Nick MEMBER PLANAMENTO : No questions CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Eric MEMBER DANTES : What would a conforming size swimming pool be, I mean how much would you have to cut it down to make it conform? FRED WEBER : The swimming pool that we proposed is 15 X 32 which isn't an overly large pool. It would have to get reduced to 14 X 251 think to make it conform. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : That's an odd size. FRED WEBER : Yeah that's pretty small. The cost of a swimming pool installation with all the filters and things we put a smaller pool in MEMBER LEHNERT : It's still the same equipment. April 7, 2022 Regular Meeting FRED WEBER : And everything is the same the cost is high and the use is much less. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Pat anything from you? MEMBER ACAMPORA : No nothing from me. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Anyone in the audience wishing to address the application? Okay 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 : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER DANTES : Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye. The motion carries unanimously. HEARING#7612—THOMAS ANNICQ CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next application on the agenda is actually withdrawn that's Thomas Annicq #7612 so we'll move on. HEARING#7613—KIM ULMET CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next application before the Board is for Kim Ulmet#7613. This is a request for variances from Article XXIII Section 280-124 and the Building Inspector's December 7, 2021 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for a permit to construct a covered porch and screened porch additions to an existing single family dwelling at 1) located less than the code required minimum secondary front yard setback of 20 feet, 2) located less than the code required minimum rear yard setback of 35 feet, 3) more than the code April 7, 2022 Regular Meeting permitted maximum lot coverage of 20% located at 8385 Great Peconic Bay Blvd. in Laurel. So this is for a front porch and screened porch addition. The secondary front yard setback is 19.8 feet, the code requires 20 so that's .2% variance. A rear yard setback of 26.4 feet, the code requiring a minimum of 35 feet. Lot coverage at 23.4%, the code permits a maximum of 20%. Would you state your name for the record please. KIM ULMET : My name is Kim Ulmet. I've been a resident of that neighborhood for thirty two years. I've lived (inaudible) at the end of the road we just purchased the one (inaudible) and we are on a corner lot also and so 1 don't have the setbacks. I have my neighbor to the rear emailed you a letter. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : We got it. KIM ULMET : Okay I have another copy of two letters of the people of either side of mine that I wanted to submit also. The house was in disarray when we first purchased it and we've done nothing but improvements to the property and we believe that just by adding the porches it's just going to make the home look more pleasing to the neighborhood. The house next to me was built in 1918 so there were no rules back then with the houses and my house was built in the fifties and I have four feet between my neighbor to the west and I have a road so I have two addresses really so I was just hoping that I could get a porch to sit and have my coffee in the morning and look at the bay. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Let's see well we've all inspected the property as we do with all applications prior to the public hearing. It would appear that the proposed porch is not going to be any closer to the right of way than what your existing garage is KIM ULMET : No CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : and the garage is 17.7 feet it looks like. KIM ULMET : Yes and my brother owns the right of ways by the way. The house across the street I know they had to apply for a variance when they built their house because they were too close to our right of way to the water and you guys made them move the house over 15 feet instead of 10 feet. The house to the east of me that was built in the seventies, it has a front porch on it also but I'm not sure if there was ever a variance, I asked the owner and he was unaware of that. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well there's an awful lot of non-conformance setbacks along in that whole area. April 7, 2022 Regular Meeting KIM ULMET: Yes there are. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It's an older neighborhood and some of it pre-dates zoning. KIM ULMET : It's a very old neighborhood. , MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I have a question, from the site inspection the front yard the porch in the proposed location is 19.8 feet where 20 feet is required, did you consider just reducing the porch relatively a small amount to make it conform? KIM ULMET : No I didn't think of that cause I wanted enough room to put a table so that's my brother is the contractor he (inaudible) 8 feet but you want me to 7 feet I'll make it 7 feet. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I don't think the depth is the issue I think it's the length it's 23 feet. KIM ULMET : Oh cause I wanted it in front of all the living room windows, centered on the home. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : And the window it's not my place to design the porch, it just seems that if you just reduced it 6 inches on each side (inaudible) go away without including the windows. I got the design it's just my observation. KIM ULMET: I can do that. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Rob anything from you? MEMBER LEHNERT : No questions. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Eric MEMBER DANTES : No I don't have any questions. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Pat MEMBER ACAMPORA : No questions CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I will just simply say that although that's possible to do what Nick said, I think for less than it's .8 MEMBER PLANAMENTO : It's a nominal amount. April 7, 2022 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It's so deminimus that frankly yea blow on it and make it go away. I don't have a problem with it as proposed I mean it's not even going to be recognizable in any way. If you were making it conforming it would look exactly the same and MEMBER PLANAMENTO : It just removes one of the requests. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It does. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : It was an easy one. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : You're right. Okay is anyone in the audience who wants to address this application? Is there anyone on Zoom? 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 : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER DANTES : Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye. The motion carries unanimously. We'll have a decision in two weeks. HEARING#7614—COLLEEN KRUPSKI CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next application before the Board is for Colleen Krupski #7614. This is a request for a variance from Article III Section 280-15 and the Building Inspector's December 10, 2021 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for a permit to construct a single family dwelling at 1) resulting in an existing accessory barn located in other than the code permitted rear yard located at 2760 Skunk Lane in Cutchogue. AMOS MERINGER : Good morning Amos Meringer how are you today? April 7, 2022 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I'm fine thank you how are you? AMOS MERINGER : Fantastic happy Thursday thank you for your time. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : This is for a new single family dwelling which as a result of its siting locates an existing barn in a front yard. So the first thing the Board has to ask is why not put the barn behind the house? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : The house in front of the barn. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Right leave the barn where it is and just tell us on the record why it's better to put the house where you're proposing and why you can't put the house with the barn located behind it the house closer to AMOS MERINGER : So from the barn to the east it slopes down that would be towards Skunk Lane and you would be getting down into the marshy areas which encroaches on water land issues and uses. When the house is placed to the south of the barn which is what's been proposed it puts it up on the highpoint giving it the best use and your highest out of the water. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Also I noticed that there's an awful lot of trees and bramble and so on there would be an awful lot of ground disturbance if that all had to be cut down to place a house there. MEMBER LEHNERT : You've also got two flood zone lines in front of the barn. AMOS MERINGER : Right on either side. Where we're propose the house there will actually be minimal trees cut down because we pulled it further towards the south on the most recent survey which I believe has been submitted. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : How long has that barn been on the property? AMOS MERINGER : I have the gentleman here who can speak more educatedly to that. AL KRUPSKI : Good morning Al Krupski, Cutchogue. The barn was there I purchased the property in 1983 the barn was existing then it's an old (inaudible) barn so you drive in up on one side they would store potatoes underneath in the cellar. You used to be able to drive in from the north side but before I owned it the previous subdivision made a line there so that you couldn't really use the back door. You used to be able to drive trucks up in the back. So that barn has been there I think since either the forties of fifties. April 7, 2022 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It's still being used for farm equipment and storage and the like? AL KRUPSKI Dry storage and the like Amos had mentioned the siting of the house even though it's (inaudible) lot this is like the perfect spot to put it because to your point there is room in the woods and the grounds the elevation is pretty good behind the barn to the east of the barn but then you're clearing all those trees. The proximity to the neighbors, the proximity to the road make this really and then you gotta get the valley sea breeze every afternoon it's the ideal spot. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : And we noticed that to the side and behind it are open farm fields that are being cultivated, planted and so on. AL KRUPSKI : This was part of so when we sold the development rights in 1986 this was laid out then at that time with this in mind but the subdivision didn't happen until twenty years later. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Are you intending to keep that storage container there also? Is that in use? AL KRUPSKI :That's in use it's for dry storage and stuff.. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay I just wondered cause it's not the barn it's an accessory structure. Let's see if the Board has any questions, we've all been out to inspect the property as you know. Eric anything from you? MEMBER DANTES : No it's pretty straightforward. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Pat MEMBER ACAMPORA : No questions CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Rob MEMBER LEHNERT : No questions MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I just have a question it has nothing to the application but I'm wondering why is the septic proposed in the rear of the house opposed to the front? AMOS MERINGER : So when you give the given the layout of the property we would be in a hill, so from the what we're calling the rear of the house toward the north it slopes back April 7, 2022 Regular Meeting down. So rather than disturb that entire bluff and install the septic there where the septic is proposed there is nothing and it's flat and it doesn't encroach on any of the offsets. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Thank you just curious. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Anyone in the audience wanting to address the application who has not already been heard? Anything from anybody else? Okay I'm going to make a motion to close the hearing reserve decision to a later date. Is there a second? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Second CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER DANTES : Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye.The motion carries unanimously. HEARING#7615—ANDRES and MARISSA GARCIA CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next application before the Board is for Andres and Marissa Garcia #7615. This is a request for a variance from Article III Section 280-15 and the Building Inspector's January 11, 2022 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for a permit to construct an accessory in-ground swimming pool at 1) located less than the code required minimum rear yard setback of 10 feet located at 380 Garden Court in Southold. This is a 15 X 26 foot swimming pool, in-ground swimming pool. MARTIN FINNEGAN : No actually it's a 10 X 32. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Oh why do I have 15 X 26? MARTIN FINNEGAN : I submitted a revised plan and a survey CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I have a 10 X 22 foot L-shaped thing. April 7, 2022 Regular Meeting MARTIN FINNEGAN : Yes. Good morning Martin Finnegan 13250 Main Rd. Mattituck for the Garcia's. So this is a fairly straightforward application, this property is a little over a half acre parcel in the R40 zone it's one of the few lots that are the Southold Gardens subdivision on Garden Court. I just printed out an aerial which will give you an idea of this is Garden Court I'm sure you're familiar with it but as you can see pretty much all the other houses in the cul- de-sac there are improved with rear yard pools. As far as character for those you know we submit that you know the installation of a pool here is in character with the surrounding neighborhood. We actually did submit a letter to the Board from a neighbor who had no objections to the application. Here's why we're here though, in the back yard there are a couple really beautiful trees that are so situated that they were there before these houses were constructed. The root systems are very mature, the trees are very mature and are kind of going out into a lot of the back yard. So in order to sustain those trees because the Garcia's love their you know their beautiful trees they don't want to lose them. They had to find a place to kind of put the pool and as you can tell you should have the revised survey that plots out the pool and it's a 10 X 32 pool so they have you know pretty much compressed this is as best they can to work around the trees and root system. It's an L- shaped because that back end of the pool there's you know it can get into the ground there and not have any impact on trees. So that is essentially why we're here we just need some relief to be able to push the pool back, sustain the trees and it ends up being three feet off the rear line. As far as the other attributes of the property this is the property backs up to a very large densely forested open space the subdivision open space for Southold Gardens. So there's really no neighbor behind it,there's no the placement of the pool is not going to have an impact on the parcel that is to the rear as you can see in what I showed you this is all what we're talking about is what the property backs up to. By the way you'll notice a shed originally when we first applied the shed was part of the Disapproval we decided to move that to a conforming location so that it's not an issue here today and to minimize (inaudible). So the benefit sought you know cannot be achieved by any other method than a variance because as I said we just want to sustain those trees and not remove them. Obviously when we're talking about the 3 foot placement there is mathematical substantiality to the variance. We believe that the screening and that's mitigated by the substantial screening the vegetated open space even the side yard is very heavily screened, if you pull up to this property you can barely see the back yard it's all screened. So as far as impacts we would submit that again the screening would mitigate any potential impacts I don't believe there is any evidence of any type of impact certainly not any environmental impact and you know obviously we would say that the self-created nature to the extent that it would be should not April 7, 2022 Regular Meeting preclude any recovery here. So that is essentially it and if you have any questions I'd be happy to address them. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Nick do you want to start? , MEMBER PLANAMENTO : [really don't have-any questions it's more a comment and maybe I misunderstood something, I did do the site inspection. I was just looking at the photograph here this is the subject location isn't it? There are no trees there, the ornamental trees are more in the yard in the traditional back yard but this area where the shed and the chaise lounges are is wide open. MARTIN FINNEGAN : It's the trees between the trees I'm talking about you see the trees in the photograph. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : The trees wouldn't be disturbed, I just want to make sure that we're talking about the same thing. MARTIN FINNEGAN The trees and the root systems it's been there forever and so that's what they're trying to avoid. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : They're beautiful trees I don't disagree. MARTIN FINNEGAN : between the fencing-and everything else just to find a spot for the mechanicals and everything and (inaudible) CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Is there anything from an arborist indicating how usually root systems are approximately the same length going outward as the canopy and if you know it looks to me as though you probably could and I don't know why one end of that you know L- shaped thing the 10 foot end of it is certainly farther away than the 3 foot end of it and why does it have to be at that angle? I mean why can't you just rotate it slightly to make it parallel to the shed. I'm not saying you know it has be 10 foot setback but that certainly is going to make it probably 5 or 6feet. Why is it at an angle? MARTIN FINNEGAN : We don't have an arborist we had the pool company who went out and did the assessment with whatever they do and for the excavation that is required for the pool they determined that it would be in back of the tree and the (inaudible) tree. It wasn't arbitrary it was based on analysis. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well it certainly looks like there's a huge area I mean I'm not suggesting that root system is not extensive by any means and I'm not an expert on that April 7,2022 Regular Meeting either but it does look to me as though if you just change the angle you're going to get a larger rear yard setback it's going to be at least 5 or 6 feet and still not really be interfering with anything. You see what I'm saying you just crank it slightly so that it parallels the property line and the shed. You're just going to (inaudible) by a couple of feet and I mean then maybe it's a fifty percent variance instead of an eighty percent or seventy five whatever it is I don't have a calculator but you know it seems like a very small tweak. You've done it with the shed which is easier to move and maybe you can't get the 10 feet in and have that corner but you can certainly increase it a little bit. MARTIN FINNEGAN : Okay well why don't we do this, if you want to leave the record open for two weeks until your meeting and I can talk with the client and respond. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay I think that's fair that's fine. I mean I don't want to see tree damage either and it's perfectly conforming location but even though it's open space you know we have to grant the minimum variance. MARTIN FINNEGAN : I understand, I understand. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Martin to make sure that we're all on the same page, the sun deck as proposed is on that return correct the closest to the tree root system? MARTIN FINNEGAN : Well the sun deck is further back so I mean we're trying to avoid this here that as you go further towards the east I guess it's not as impact able it's just MEMBER PLANAMENTO : The sun deck is on the return. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It's the 10 foot length on the MEMBER PLANAMENTO : The 10 X 20 side not the 10 X 32 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Right, correct yeah. I mean it wouldn't even be pushing that 10 foot swimming pool closer than what it already is, it would just be straightening it out. So you know I think it just reduces the degree of variance without any harm at all. Why don't you talk to your clients. Pat are you okay with that? MEMBER ACAMPORA : I'm fine with that, that was the question that I was going to ask. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : There is nobody in the audience so BOARD SECRETARY : Do you want to submit that aerial that you have? zal April 7, 2022 Regular Meeting MARTIN FINNEGAN : Sure MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Leslie do you want to have any brief commentaries from maybe two or three days prior to the Special as opposed to CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The homeowner's are on Zoom? Okay let them come in and speak. MARISSA GARCIA : Good morning I'm sorry I joined a little late. The reason why we are the property is angles the back of the property it's not a straight line that's why the pool is angled the way that it is and we're avoiding trying to go out cause we have some lovely cherry trees in our back yard that we don't want to impact the root system of the cherry trees. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Could you yes we understand that and Martin has informed us of that and we've all inspected the property so we've seen it in person but what we were did you hear what we were suggesting that you talk to Martin about which is just simply to make the well we'll call it the back of the pool the one that's 20 foot length you know the L-shaped thing make it just simply parallel to the shed and that rear yard line and just angle it slightly differently and you're going to increase your setback from 3 feet to we're guessing see it's much farther on the 10 foot end it's a bit farther I don't have a scale so I can't tell you how much farther just eyeballing it, it looks like that could be maybe 5 or 6 feet at least. MEMBER LEHNERT : Probably at least 5. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yeah and you know if you just straighten that just tweak it slightly so that it parallels the shed now it's going be less of a variance. You're still going to need a variance but I don't see how you would anyway impact any tree roots or you know it wouldn't be any closer to any trees basically so we're suggesting we'll wait for two weeks to our next meeting and you and Martin and your pool guy or whoever you want can have a look and see what you think and if you want to amend this you'll let us know. If not we make a decision based on what we have. MARISSA GARCIA : Okay I apologize I don't want to belabor this I just I'm a little confused cause the shed sits like this and the property line cuts at an angle. MEMBER DANTES : We could just do alternative relief this is 2 feet, this is I mean it'll look good on paper but it won't have any (inaudible) in real life. MEMBER LEHNERT : Yeah that would probably be easier. April 7, 2022 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : What do you want to do Martin? MARTIN FINNEGAN : That's up to the Board. I understand your position, you're trying to do alternative of 5 feet? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yeah 5 feet instead of 3 feet, it's that much. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : (inaudible) open space too which I think the open space of the subdivision helps to mitigate things. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yeah it definitely does the fact that you're next to an open space rather than an adjacent neighbor and noise impact and all that kind of stuff is mitigated. I don't think anybody objects to the location per say it's just the attempt to decrease the amount of non-conformity that's all. What do you want to do? MARTIN FINNEGAN : Could we leave it open for the two weeks and let me just talk to my client and then I can I'll let you know or CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : If that's what you I'm okay with that but MEMBER PLANAMENTO : My only request would be perhaps any written comments so we can perhaps allow any submission through Monday the 18th that would be helpful. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yeah lately we've been including you getting things really the night before or the day before. MARTIN FINNEGAN : Who does that? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yeah who does that? See this, you know you're pants on going to catch on fire. The problem with that is that it's very hard for us to review things. MARTIN FINNEGAN : No, no, no I will get that to you. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :This should not take long, yes, no here not whatever. MARTIN FINNEGAN : I'll just let Kim know and she can report to you? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : If you decide to you know amend it then we can have a draft ready otherwise if it comes in a little too late we'll probably just have to close it and have a draft for like a month from now and if you want to get your pool going quickly even if there's April 7, 2022 Regular Meeting a contractor available out here to do a swimming pool we want to you know help you do that but that's going to be up to you. MARTIN FINNEGAN : Okay. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : And (inaudible) you're describing isn't it that you were just pulling this section CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yeah this corner goes back it goes like this and this goes like this. Martin do you want to have a look at what I'm MARTIN FINNEGAN : I think I understand what you're saying Leslie. Let me just have a chance to talk with them. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay I'm going to make a motion to adjourn this hearing to the Special Meeting on April 21St. Is there a second? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Second CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER DANTES : Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye. The motion carries unanimously. Please be sure to get anything that you want us to know about in by Monday before the Special the 18th. I make a motion to recess for lunch. Is there a second? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Second CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER DANTES : Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye April 7, 2022 Regular Meeting MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye. The motion carries unanimously. See you back here at one. Motion to reconvene from lunch. Is there a second? MEMBER DANTES : Second CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER DANTES : Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye HEARING#7634—JOHN CARTER and CATHERINE SAMAAN CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next application before the Board is for John Carter and Catherine Samaan #7634. This is a request for a variance from Article III Section 280-15 and the Building Inspector's January 13, 2022 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for a permit to construct an accessory swimming pool at 1) located in other than the code permitted rear yard located at 125 Broadwaters Rd. in Cutchogue. Please state your name for the record please. CATHERINE SAMAAN : My name is Catherine Samaan I'm the owner of 125 Broadwaters Rd. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Welcome, so this is a pool in a side yard where the code requires a rear yard setback and this is a corner lot so that makes somewhat of a difference. That would be your secondary side yard because your house is actually fronting on Broadwaters is it not? CATHERINE SAMAAN : Yes it is. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay just checking. We have all been at the property and inspected it so we've seen what the circumstances are. Let's see if the Board has any April 7, 2022 Regular Meeting questions unless you'd like to say anything. We have read your reasons that you submitted but if you'd like to enter anything now into the record feel free. CATHERINE SAMAAN : I do have something prepared but I'm happy to take any questions. I'm going to basically be reiterating what you already have. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : What you already submitted? CATHERINE SAMAAN : Yes CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay, well we do all see that you wrote about this is your application your reasons that your property steps back from Vanston is heavily wooded CATHERINE SAMAAN : Yes CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : and Vanston is actually a lot higher up in elevation than your property so the site lines are no problem you won't be able to see much from there. It is in what we would call your architectural rear yard meaning the house fronts (inaudible) but it's been designated as front yard because of the two street frontages. Let's see if the Board has any questions, Rob anything from you? MEMBER LEHNERT : If it wasn't a corner lot I don't think they'd be here. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : No they wouldn't, Nick. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I completely agree, I just have a procedural question and it's not for you it's more for our Board, why weren't there any notices from the Suffolk County Planning? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : You have to ask Kim. BOARD SECRETARY : There's no New York or Suffolk County properties within 500 feet. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : So in case of other applications it goes back to the Board if it's something owned by the County. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yeah they need to be notified as an adjacent property line. BOARD SECRETARY : Either highway like NYS 25,48 or wetlands, in this case it wasn't. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Eric do you have any questions on this application? April 7, 2022 Regular Meeting MEMBER DANTES : No it seems fairly benign. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Pat anything from you? MEMBER ACAMPORA : No questions. CATHERINE SAMAAN : I did speak with our neighbors the Dawson's across the street and verbally she extended support for the project and we did receive an email I printed out copies from our neighbor on Vanston who said he has no issues with our variances he's just trying to make sure we weren't removing any mature trees from lot 194 which is the lot abuts Vanston. So if I may approach I have copies for everybody. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Does anybody in the audience wanting to address the application? Okay 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 : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER DANTES : Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye, We'll have a decision in two weeks at our next meeting. HEARING#7649—WILLIAM C. GOGGINS and DONNA M. GOGGINS CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next application before the Board is for William C. Goggins and Donna M. Goggins #7649. This is a request for a variance from Article XXIII Section 280- 124 and the Building Inspector's December 3, 2021 Amended January 11, 2022 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for a permit to construct an accessory in-ground April 7,'2022'Regular Meeting swimming pool at 1) more than the code permitted maximum lot coverage of 20% located at 2000 Jackson St. in New Suffolk. This is a lot coverage proposed at 26.3% where the code permits a maximum of 20% for a new in-ground swimming pool at 16 X 36 feet. It looks like the existing lot coverage is 20.762% and what would you like us to know about this? BILL GOGGINS : William C. Goggins the applicant 2000 Jackson St. also known as 415 Jackson St. New Suffolk, New York. Good afternoon .Members of the Board. We're seeking to put a pool in, we want to put it between the existing garage and (inaudible) workshop and cottage so we don't have any setback issues. We want to put in a pool like most properties in the area and we need a variance so that 26%. 1 had done some research, New Suffolk is a hamlet that's been around now for almost forever and most of the lots are pretty small and the houses are close to the property lines and so it's kind of difficult to comply with the laws because of the small lots. The Board has granted similar variances in the past so having this pool installed would be consistent with other properties in the neighborhood and as well precedent set by this Board in the past. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Bill do you have copies of any of those prior decisions to submit? BILL GOGGINS : I can email them to you by the record there is one under ZBA#6127 Cacioppo SCTM# 117-9-6, the Board on May 22, 2008 granted a 23.4% lot coverage increase. Recently on July 11, 2019 this Board granted a pool variance to the Whitecap Northfork LLC they're located at 16500 Main Rd. New Suffolk, SCTM# 117-9-13 their new lot coverage was different it was 28.4%. MEMBER DANTES : Do you have the number on that? BILL GOGGINS : The ZBA File number is 7272. Also the applicant Charles and Diane Harkoff commonly known as Legends under ZBA file #6392 I can't read the date here but they're in a Hamlet Business Zone which permits 40% coverage and this Board granted 62.8% lot coverage. I have another one ZBA file #7104 applicant Grella and Osbourne 1200 First St. New Suffolk, New York SCTM# 117-7-30 they were in a Marine II Zone which permits 30% lot coverage and this Board granted 38.2% lot coverage. Finally, I have one for Barry and Carol Sweeney in 2011 ZBA file number 6462 this Board granted a 26% lot coverage. The tax map number is 117-9-25 and I think I have three or four others but these ,are the ones that are closer to (inaudible) the amount that we're asking for. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN Let's see what the Board has, I just wanted to see if perhaps it was something that I didn't have in the file or that is missing. I see in the file three C.O.'s for the April 7, 2022 Regular Meeting property, one is an accessory garage, one is for a foundation on a single family dwelling, one for porch addition for single family dwelling, '88, '86 and '91. 1 don't see any C.O. or PreCO for either the single family dwelling or the cottage. BILL GOGGINS : There is none. It was passed on from family member to family member until I came into title.The house has been there since I think the late eighteen hundreds. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Have you ever applied for a PreCO? BILL GOGGINS : No ma'am CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I wonder why. BILL GOGGINS : I never needed to (inaudible) to refinance it I haven't needed to get a building permit so I just haven't done it. There are more pressing things going on. I can do that if the Board wants me to get PreCO's it's not a big deal. MEMBER DANTES : Would the cottage qualify for a PreCO as well? BILL GOGGINS : Yes that cottage has been there since the twenties or thirties. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I think it would be good to actually just get them updated. BILL GOGGINS : I think so too. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : You know you're a lawyer. BILL GOGGINS : As of today I am. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Let's ask the Board if they have any questions on this, Rob? MEMBER LEHNERT : I have no questions MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I want to ask one question, you stated in the introduction of the hearing that the garage isn't a garage it's a workshop. BILL GOGGINS : Yeah the current owner actually built a steamboat inside that garage it looks like he had gotten a variance so that he can use that as his shop so you know MEMBER PLANAMENTO : So there's a variance on file for the garage. April 7, 2022 Regular Meeting BILL GOGGINS : Yeah there was a variance from the eighties for the garage yes. He had built a steam powered boat called the Lady Jane he named it after his wife, These are my neighbors and they lived a long time. She died at the age of a hundred and he lasted to about ninety six. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Interesting history. Can you see if you can find that variance? BILL GOGGINS : Yes I'll look for it. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : As long as you're going to look at getting PreCO's I'd just be interested to see them and we like to have absolutely all the priors on the property in our files if we can. Anything from you Eric? MEMBER DANTES : No CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Pat anything from you? MEMBER ACAMPORA : I have just a question about the size of the pool because in the two different surveys one has it at 16 X 32 and the other one has it 16 X 36 so which is it? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Which of these surveys are we using? BILL GOGGINS : 16 X 36 that's what the lot coverage calculation was based upon. That was certified by Nigel Williamson. MEMBER DANTES :The one that has the second garage (survey)? BILL GOGGINS : Yes, I was going to make the application for both but it was kind of difficult (inaudible)for the garage so I removed it. MEMBER DANTES :Then the 16 X 32 we'll discard that as well. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yes so it's just this one. Okay is there anyone in the audience wanting to address the application? Anybody on Zoom? No hand raised okay, I'm going to make a motion to close the hearing reserve decision to a later date. Actually you know what we'll do I don't think you're going to get it that fast so any approval that may be forthcoming we'll just simply condition this based upon submission of PreCO's when you get them cause I don't know how long it's going to take them. BILL GOGGINS : Well that's the thing they could take forever. April 7, 2022 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I don't want to delay a decision you know so we might as well do it that way. Is that okay with everybody on the Board? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Yes CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : So we'll handle it that way. So motion to close the hearing reserve decision to a later date. Is there a second? MEMBER DANTES : Second CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER DANTES : Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye HEARING#7607SE—KATHERINE HUBBARD CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next application before the Board is for Katherine Hubbard # 7607SE. The applicant requests a Special Exception under Article III Section 280-13B(13). The applicant is the owner of subject property requesting authorization to establish an accessory apartment in an existing accessory structure located at 2465 Elijah's Lane in Mattituck. PAT MOORE : Hi good afternoon Patricia Moore. I have Katherine Hubbard here with me also. This is an application as you mentioned for an accessory apartment. This piece of property is an acre in size, lot 11 on Elijah's Lane Estates. The house was originally constructed in 1997 and a deck was added in 2007 the deck in the back. Mrs. Hubbard she and her husband live in the house and her sister needs a place live and right now they're all living together in the house so she would like some privacy and a place of her own so they decided to pursue this accessory apartment as the law generally allows and encourages (inaudible) for family. So April 7,2022 Regular Meeting she began the process because the code says it has-to be an existing 'structure which I'm hoping someday we will change the code to allow people to do everything at once. In any case she got a building permit for the garage. During the construction it's a Morton building so there's really no framing on the.inside it's self-contained, it was suggested to her gee why don't you include electrical into your permit so she accommodated not really understanding what was you know she just followed blindly and proceeded and what happened is that in order to put electric the electrician says well I have no studs to attach it to so the contractors started framing the inside she got a Stop Work Order and then it ballooned from there. So when you went to see the property the rough framing is there and some of the rough electric but that's all that's been done till now. There's none of the plumbing nothing for the apartment has been roughed in. So the only unique issue here with the accessory apartment because it's a garage it has a very small bay for a car which has accommodated her sister's car and there was a motorcycle in there I guess her husband or your oh yours cool sorry that's her motorcycle. What was explained in the what we were doing with the Building Department the Building Department saw the framing of the upstairs closets I think everybody kept coming to the wrong conclusions, she's not doing anything other than building closets upstairs for storage. Her business she transports patients that's her business how she supports herself and when you transport patients you have to maintain HIPA information and the D.O.T. records it's very regulated so private information of clients has to be under lock and key. So the storage space has a closet that allows for locking and you know the HIPA people are separate from the D:O.T. paperwork and that's it it's just storage. No different I've had clients that close out their lawyers typically close out their businesses they're retiring and they're just putting their storage boxes cause you have to maintain records for seven years. So it's just storage, it has no heat, it has no plumbing it just has framing for a lock and a closet. The Building Inspector was going to give us a hard time with that so we said fine we'll take the walls out that he said and Mike said well discuss it with the Board and if it's okay with the Board to have closets upstairs.for storage then it's okay but that's where we are. There's really not much to say, she meets all of the criteria for an accessory apartment, that was all given to you as part of the application. This is her home, here sister is the occupant of the apartment and that's it. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : A couple of things, what is the current address of the applicant's business? PAT MOORE : Well she works from home but come on up. April 7, 2022 Regular.Meeting KATHERINE HUBBARD : Good afternoon, I'm Katherine Hubbard.The transportation company that I have the vehicles that I have are not stored at my location, each driver keeps their vehicle so you know the main part of my business are vehicles and again those vehicles are not on the premises I usually keep one there (inaudible). Other than an office it's a computer lap top which is pretty much mobile so my,office is mobile most of the time but you know. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : So you've been working out of your home. PAT MOORE : It's her home. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : And what do you do just call the drivers when they need to go pick up somebody? KATHERINE HUBBARD : Yeah I get a request you know prior to the transportation date and then I send out the driving schedule I have tablets so everyone just logs on to see what the schedule is for the next day and that's pretty much it. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I noticed that what you have here is the square footage for the accessory apartment that's proposed on the ground floor. PAT MOORE : Yes. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Did Anthony do this no John Condon PAT MOORE : No John Condon CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : What we're going to need is the livable floor area, architects don't always get that. There's a difference between livable floor area and square footage, square footage usually go wall to wall and that's it you know one times the other. Livable is determined to be the area in which habitation can take place, closets are not typically included I guess sometimes bathrooms not included either I'm not quite sure but Mike Verity will have to confirm the livable floor area. He does that for every accessory apartment. The Building Department gets a copy of what your proposal is and then they give us a form that says it conforms to the code minimum 450 maximum 750 so it's gotta be within that Livable floor area. He will have to get that for us we have to get a confirmation from him. PAT MOORE : We thought that was provided. KATHERINE HUBBARD : That was on there because the bottom floor is around a thousand square feet not including the walls April 7,2022 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well the garage PAT MOORE : The whole footprint KATHERINE HUBBARD : Right minus the garage I would say I guess the first floor is a thousand square feet after that it's 500 sq.ft. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It's not the same it says 480 sq. ft. but what I'm trying to tell you is the square footage is not calculated in the same way as what the code requires which is the livable floor area PAT MOORE : He didn't do the closets CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I'm not exactly sure, to be honest I don't want to misspeak so I don't want to say exactly how it's calculated MEMBER PLANAMENTO : And then Mike also normally supplies us with CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yeah he will give us a form, yeah we have a form that we send over to the Building Department with the application and all he does is he looks at the plans to calculate the livable floor area and he'll say conforming it's between those two numbers or non-conforming it's under or it's over. So that's one step that we have to take care of but we can do that internally we can send this over. PAT MOORE : I just wanted a clarification Katherine is explaining to me she hasn't even provided for a closet for her sister it's going to be a wardrobe so really it sounds to me like if my memory serves me bathrooms are considered livable floor area so the way that this is set up is very efficient, no closets so if you see anything CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :There's no closets there is one PAT MOORE : Oh there is a little closet? MEMBER LEHNERT :There's one on the plan. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : 8 BY 10 or CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : 4% by 7 MEMBER DANTES : The apartment is around 480 sq. ft. it should be fine. April 7, 2022 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : No, no, no I'm not saying that it's not fine I'm simply saying we have to have it in our files. PAT MOORE : No, we're just looking for there it is okay thank you sorry. For some reason it's missing from my I must have given you all of mine. So you think that it's less than three CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It might be less than 450 if you take the closet out. That doesn't mean that we couldn't either eliminate the closet and make it bigger or we can provide a variance that we wouldn't charge you for we'd just do it as part of this application if it's just a few square feet under. So that's one step we have to go through. The other thing is the Eileen Santora you know submission the (inaudible)stamped by John Condon, on the second floor she shows completely unfinished attic space right here and there are still some closets up there that are framed out which we saw when we did the inspection. PAT MOORE : Well that's what I want to make sure that we address because Mike was we were kind of stale mate on moving along this application and so Mike said just give me a plan. that shows no closets upstairs. I don't know what the issue was with having storage in the closet that I think when we saw John Condon's drawing because it has fire rated walls which is part of the state code as you know you have to have fire rated walls and it has to have proper lock I think that they were seeing it you know I used to get this response from prior Code Enforcement that walks like a duck it quacks like a duck it's a duck. So that's the reaction when it looks like an apartment it must be an apartment but this is actually designed with two closets so it was not intended as any additional living space it's a closet it's just framed and designed as closets. So we would like to keep that use because it's storage, it continues to be storage it's just storage with a lock on it rather than storage you might put storage regardless on the door of a garage but this allows for segregated storage to meet federal regulations and state regulations. So you have that drawing I believe that was part of the CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well that one was the one that was exed off and when Eileen submitted the one that shows an open plan that's what I've got here. PAT MOORE : Should we include the one or take the X off so that it allows her to put the closets in? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I think the safest thing to do is to maybe perhaps provide if you really need some of it locked is maybe to do something simpler instead of all these separate closets, one area that's locked and another area that's not locked. I mean just storage and April 7, 2022 Regular Meeting PAT MOORE : Is it a problem for you or no? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The other thing that we saw that was a little confusing when we did the interior well we went separately but the wiring there's cable wiring that's going upstairs it's a high speed wiring that's not your typical electric for light bulbs that you would have in a storage area KATHERINE HUBBARD : I want to go back a little bit, when I first started this project I was given I wasn't given the correct information. I was told that I needed to construct a building big enough to where I can use a certain a percentage of that for the apartment. The building didn't need to be as big as it is. I could have went a little bit further out but I didn't want to go you know that far out cause I'm planning on putting a swimming pool there. So my builder said well just go up so when he said go up the idea of doing something upstairs kind of just came into play. I don't need the upstairs, if you guys tell me don't use it for anything I won't use it for anything. I mean I want to make this as simple as possible, if I would have had the correct information to begin with I'm finding out that I did not need a second floor at all. It was a waste of time, it was a waste of money you know I'm new at this you know. In my past life if was a contract (inaudible) representative in Afghanistan for twelve years. I thought I knew what I was doing cause you know I'm used to you know doing contracts and figuring things out and keep things moving along so it was not my intention to do anything upstairs other than make a space requirement so I can turn a certain percentage of that into livable space. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : If you weren't to be using that second floor where would you be storing all these HIPA documents that you need to store? KATHERIN HUBBARD : I hadn't thought about it yet. I used to use someplace called Iron Mountain or something like that and you just kind of just call them, they pick up your stuff and they keep it for however many years that you want. That's the kind of storage that I'm used to having so this came into I said hey I can save myself some money I'll just store it upstairs but the Department of Transportation I have to keep their files separate for separate for seven years and the Department of Health I have to keep my clients files separate also for seven years at least. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Couldn't you just put a lock on the door leading up the stairs and storage stuff in an unfinished second floor? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yeah. April 7, 2022 Regular Meeting PAT MOORE : That was going to be an option as well. I mean if the Board said don't create smaller closets then we just put in a lock. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : So the question since you're sort of talking about it, upstairs and (inaudible) and other things, I was there for the interior inspection with the Electrical Inspector I was asked to go along with him and there's all kinds of wiring and PAT MOORE : Yeah why was the wiring MEMBER PLANAMENTO : It was all labeled for you know kitchen exhaust, bathroom exhaust on the second floor, that needs to be removed. KATHERINE HUBBARD : Yes it will all be removed MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Along with the framing. PAT MOORE : Oh I understand what you're saying, apparently so let me explain what happened because I couldn't believe (inaudible) met me the first time. What happened is that the person who sold her the building misread the code and looked at the accessory apartment rules for the accessory apartment in the house and that has percentages of space first floor, second floor so on so she had she had this building built two stories because for a certain percentage she had to have the entire building of a certain size. When she and I met for the first time and said no you know that's the wrong section of the code so we pulled out the correct section of the code on an accessory apartment in an accessory building we were able to clarify everything but by then the building is up so it's done so now it's just storage space and I don't know why the electrician was extending electricity upstairs beyond what was necessary other than nobody got a chance to tell him that he just got he was charging more than she was spending more money more than she really should have spent. So we're resolving that pretty easily because for storage you don't need other than normal electric a light bulb. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Basic lighting MEMBER DANTES : So what you're saying is we take Eileen Santora's set of drawings other than the ones we approve, put your locked door leading up to the loft and that'll be sufficient to meet code? PAT MOORE : That'll be sufficient. MEMBER DANTES :That'll be code. April 7, 2022 Regular Meeting PAT MOORE : Okay CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN Cause at one point there was a Notice of Disapproval saying there's a home office being planned in that building along with an apartment you can have an apartment in an accessory structure as long as you qualify for proper parking and so on. Nick were you going to MEMBER PLANAMENTO ': Yeah I was just going to add one other comment relative to upstairs and that's the width of the stairwell because Sean while he's an Electrical CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yeah it's not to code. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Yeah and the Electrical Inspector in his opinion it's not to code. It's awfully narrow and it's steep. MEMBER LEHNERT :There is a difference CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yes there is. PAT MOORE : I'm sorry so let's clarify because I'm getting, so the stairs that are there are fine if it's just storage. MEMBER LEHNERT : Yeah stairs to habitable space are different than stairs to storage. PAT MOORE : Alright thank you. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Yeah but that's something that (inaudible) Building Department determination. MEMBER DANTES : (inaudible) difference in code we don't . MEMBER PLANAMENTO : The Building Department determines MEMBER LEHNERT Yeah I don't know the exact number but that is CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :The Building Department can determine that. PAT MOORE : Yeah we're waiting for the building permit will be issued at you know it's been showing they have a building permit for the building so I don't know. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yes they're permitting a pull down stair for storage but certainly that stair would probably be fine. April 7, 2022 Regular Meeting MEMBER DANTES : Living space is different code than storage space. PAT MOORE : Yes, yes although you still need I saw a section that was given to me by the architect which is you still need fire rated separations MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Because of the garage PAT MOORE : The garage and the apartment and even the storage upstairs you have to fire rate MEMBER LEHNERT : If you didn't have the garage then you wouldn't need any of that. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : One other thing that we need to do, prior to making a final decision on this and the same thing happened in the Diakovasilis that you represented, we will have to have the Building Inspector come into your home and inspect the premises. We are only permitted to approve an apartment in an accessory structure if that's the only apartment on the premises. So we just have to verify because there is a vent for like a wood burning stove or something, there is a door that you go in and out of in what appears to have been at one point a two car attached garage that is not two cars anymore. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : And there's no building permit for the conversion of the two car garage to what (inaudible) space. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : So we just need to what we do here is to try and straighten out any potential issue either the Building Department so you can have smooth sailing going through only just touch base on any possible aspect that comes before the Board. We do this with many accessory apartment because the code only allows one. PAT MOORE : I never had that before. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : You had the Diakovasilis accessory apartment in the basement. PAT MOORE : One of my applications? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yeah MEMBER LEHNERT : No that wasn't her. PAT MOORE : Oh thank you I thought I was losing it. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : No Anthony Portillo came in after the fact. I think it's April 7, 2022 Regular Meeting PAT MOORE : No it wasn't me. MEMBER LEHNERT : No it was the guy from up island the Permit guy. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Oh yeah. We have done that, in other words when it would appear that we need to take a look at the house to make sure that the apartment qualifies we by appointment will have the Building Inspector come in and they'll report back to us. At the same time we'll get Mike Verity to take a look at the livable floor area that he has to sign off on for what you're proposing now on the ground floor with this Eileen Santora's and we'll let you know what to do with that closet or not or if it's okay the way it is and we'll take it from there. PAT MOORE : Has this been scanned yet because I seem to be missing my set of plans with the apartment. If anybody has something that they're going to throw away I'll take one back. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : We're not throwing anything away. PAT MOORE : You guys once it's done you throw it away so MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Pat if I can ask sort of two interrelated questions, I was thinking just from the initial site visit because I was working off the survey in the packet as applied for so when I went with Sean we discovered that there's a swimming pool and a pool house on site. It's not shown on the survey I don't know if the rest of the Board would appreciate this but I think it should be shown there. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It should. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : and the reason why PAT MOORE : She has a building permit. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I'm not talking about I'm hoping that there's a building permit it's not shown on the survey so what's strange PAT MOORE : No because we've been waiting six months for this hearing so MEMBER PLANAMENTO : So we (inaudible) updates so we're all looking at the same thing but what's interesting what's in the application April 7,2022 Regular Meeting PAT MOORE : With all due respect it's very expensive and very I mean trying to get Nat Corwin to get this survey was such an achievement I don't want to hold up an accessory apartment cause you want an updated survey that shows the pool and the pool house. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : The reason why I'm asking though and I don't know how the Board you know I'm speaking independently but when we were there and I think it was the applicant's sister who let us in I don't remember what the relationship was, there's the framed garage where the accessory apartment is proposed for but the right off the back is what we were told is a pool house PAT MOORE : It's a separate structure MEMBER PLANAMENTO,: Yes it's a separate structure 10 or 15 feet out and it is quite substantial but then there's the swimming pool which is in front of the framed garage towards the middle of the yard and we're told that the septic is going in there but Sean paced it out with me and the septic is too close to where the pool is. Well again I'm going what your sister or whoever the individual was told us where the septic is so you know I think it's helpful information to understand where the (inaudible) go. KATHERINE HUBBARD : Yeah I think she probably trying to tell you an estimate as to where it will be but MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I don't know but it's helpful to know where it is because the pool is there I think at 25 feet or 20 feet MEMBER DANTES : You have to apply to the Department of Health and supply a survey for that aren't you? So this will have to be done eventually. PAT MOORE Yeah well a site plan you might be able to use a site plan architects can do the location of the sanitary. KATHERINE HUBBARD : John Condon I believe is doing it. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : and the other structures too, I mean you'll get to them a lot faster than a land surveyor. I mean as long as he can accurately scale it off based on the original survey from the surveyor which is what architects to they use data from the survey and then they'll add proposed new structures and so on. PAT MOORE : So let me just get clarification, did John do the drawings yet of the pool and the pool house? 481 April 7, 2022 Regular Meeting KATHERINE HUBBARD : He has that, I don't have a copy with me but I know there are plans for the pool and there are plans for the pool house. Each application has been submitted already. MEMBER DANTES : So you submitted all this to the Building Department? KATHERINE HUBBARD : No John Condon Jr. he's okay PAT MOORE : You must have done a building permit for the pool and the pool house. KATHERINE HUBBARD : I got a separate permit for the or application for the pool and I put in a separate application for the pool house. PAT MOORE : Okay that makes sense. KATHERINE HUBBARD : The septic system has not been started yet but the idea and the plans have been given to John Condon Jr. he has already submitted all the plans to the Department of Health, he's waiting for that to come back but he has not yet determined where that's going to (inaudible). MEMBER DANTES :Just give us the copy of the plans PAT MOORE : That I can do that was going to be my suggestion. When he gives me the livable floor area calculation I'll ask for a copy of the plans. You want the Health Department plans or all the plans? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Whatever you got. PAT MOORE : Pool, pool house that would be at the Building Department and the sanitary. Probably the sanitary is waiting for this approval because you don't need a sanitary if you don't have a bathroom. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : If you don't have an apartment. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I think it was mentioned it would be more helpful because Sean pointed that out to me the distances it doesn't seem and again I don't remember the individual where she had said it would go, logically it would be off the back of the garage the building and it doesn't seem that any of that would fit. PAT MOORE : Hopefully John April 7, 2022 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : What you don't want is to get stuck with the Department of Health because the sanitary is too close to the swimming pool. The swimming pool is already in the ground so you want to make sure that they don't mess you up with you know saying it's too close to the pool. PAT MOORE : No, no she was just going to show on the survey that's our survey that's before the pool and the pool house. BOARD SECRETARY : Do we have this one? PAT MOORE : Yes it's the only one I have. KATHERINE HUBBARD : I have a septic system already in the front CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :That's for your house. KATHERINE HUBBARD : and right now the idea is to put it somewhere anywhere in that area. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It looks like you have plenty of room, I just want to make sure that you know there's a code for that and don't get stuck with the Department of Health. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : (inaudible) exactly where you illustrated the septic will go that's where we understood it to be. KATHERINE HUBBARD : John Condon and then I was going to John Condon Jr., John Condon Jr. he's the one I've been working with for the septic system to the Department of Health. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay so I think we have plan here, we'll have to send this over to Mike to get the livable floor area Mike Verity, you're going to submit to us more of the information. We looked inside the built the pool the pool house rather and it's just as an open structure. I presume you're going to have electric in there KATHERINE HUBBARD : Yes. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : any plumbing going in there?You have an outdoor shower. KATHERINE HUBBARD : Yes I have to wait till the application gets approved before I can submit anything for the electric and the plumbing. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay, are you planning to put in a half bathroom or anything like that in there? April 7, 2022 Regular Meeting KATHERINE HUBBARD : Yes half bathroom. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Half bathroom okay. Well that'll be something that you have to get the building permit for that's a permitted use so you wouldn't need a variance for it. We'll tell John that we requested that he do a John Jarski do an inspection of your home and let us know that it's okay to go and have it KATHERINE HUBBARD : Anytime is fine. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well he'll call to make an appointment he's not going to just come and catch you in your pajamas. PAT MOORE : And it might be quite a while because he's really backed up so it could take a month. This wouldn't hold up the approval because it would be done through the C.O. process. The Building Department will not issue a permit for the apartment if you have another apartment there so it seems to me that the Building Department CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well let me see how fast he can do it. If it's going to be an endlessly long wait that's one thing but it may not have to be. PAT MOORE : If he can do it quickly and squeeze us in. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well he knows that we are going to be requesting that and you don't have to be there as long as he can get in. KATHERINE HUBBARD : My sister will be there. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : If your sister is there or whatever then you know that can take care of that. PAT MOORE : Sorry to be (inaudible) I just want to make sure I give you what you need. Do you need the calculation of the livable floor area or (inaudible)? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well Mike is going to confirm it but it would be good if you can get a calculation from the architect but tell him it's not the square footage we need or Condon we need the livable floor area per definition in the town code cause it's described in the town code. Mike as the code enforcement official is the person qualified for our Board to confirm it one way or the other or tell us what's missing, that's what they do over in that department. So we'll get that over to him. April 7, 2022 Regular Meeting PAT MOORE : Okay and we now agree that the second floor is just going to be open storage but with a locked door. Is that correct? KATHERINE HUBBARD : Yes. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : That's fine and let's see what else I have in my notes here, you're going to submit the plans that you got to date for the pool house the pool and the whatever septic, sanitary proposals John Condon comes up with. PAT MOORE : Yes. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I just made a note that you really don't have trucks on the premises, vans are kept by the drivers. I did actually ironically as I was pulling into your house I did see a truck leave it but they could have been dropping off stuff I don't know it doesn't matter. KATHERINE HUBBARD : It wasn't one of my drivers. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It wasn't? KATHERINE HUBBARDS : No. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It was somebody else. KATHERINE HUBBARD : I'm not sure who that was. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I don't know it had initials on the front. KATHERINE HUBBARD : Oh that was me, yeah that's right I was coming in and somebody was leaving that was me. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : You don't have drivers? KATHERINE HUBBARD : I have a very small office a small operation when my drivers available there's always somebody missing I have to jump in and go pick up people. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I think it goes without saying at least what f understood, the wiring that's up on the second floor other than basic electrical PAT MOORE : It's useless MEMBER PLANAMENTO : needs to be removed. April 7, 2022 Regular Meeting PAT MOORE : Yeah KATHERINE HUBBARD : So I can't have any electric upstairs? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Just regular wiring. PAT MOORE : What they put in cost you ten times more because it's some kind of internet wire instead of just a standard you know light bulb wiring. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It's nothing an attic needs and you've got high hats in there. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : There's high hats, there's exhaust fans, there's KATHERINE HUBBARD : When I was doing the apartment they were like hey look you've got this extra space you might as well put the cable up there and I was like I don't care at this point go ahead. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : (inaudible) but according to the Electrical Inspector it-was actually wired for kitchen fan, for bathroom fans KATHERINE HUBBARD : That's for the downstairs. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : No, no it's clearly all upstairs. PAT MOORE : I'm telling I think that they have just been charging her as long as it's MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I'm telling you what I saw but it has to go I think we're all in agreement. KATHERINE HUBBARD : That's fine. PAT MOORE : As long as it's adequate to carry CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : You just need basic electric upstairs so that you PAT MOORE : And you do allow I mean the Building Department does allow you to put in sheetrock and high hats just to make it clean dry space doesn't it? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well unfinished storage is different than finished. Finished would be sheet rocked it's now framed for sheetrock. KATHERINE HUBBARD : I have to have it insulated. I was told I have to put full insulation up there. April 7,2022 Regular Meeting PAT MOORE : Who told you? MEMBER DANTES : Why? PAT MOORE : For the fire code? KATHERINE HUBBARD : Somebody told me there was the thickness of the spray foam. PAT MOORE : Maybe fire rating cause I actually saw the cross section and KATHERINE HUBBARD : It's open I mean birds and MEMBER PLANAMENTO : The Building Department (inaudible) spray foam allows that you don't sheetrock the spray foam. MEMBER DANTES : Yeah but this house doesn't fall in the HERZ ratings and things like that it's too small. PAT MOORE : No because it's just a metal I mean you tell me, as a metal it's really just metal sheets for the Morton buildings so there's nothing. KATHERINE HUBBARD : It's open birds can get in there and they already are anything can climb up in there and get into the building. The roof is like this I don't know what you call things exactly but where the roof meets the wall it's open you can just stick your hand out of the whole upstairs is like that. I can't leave that like that. PAT MOORE : I mean how it was the Building Department in order to control whether or not be habitable had them drop the rafters to code height that would not allow usable space up there but as storage it's nice to have clean storage so that you know papers don't get mildewy. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : From my point of view I would leave that decision up to the Building Department and we can ask John to tell us when he goes to inspect your house he can have another look and just say okay it's going to be all open upstairs, you're going to have a locked door, you're going to have just regular electric what does he want to do with the finishing upstairs the insulation and walls. If he says it's fine to put in insulation and sheetrock I'm fine with it. If he says you can put in this kind of insulation but not sheetrock it I mean this is a building codes thing that's not what we really do. April 7,2022 Regular Meeting PAT MOORE : So as long as you don't prohibit it I just want to make sure that we don't inadvertently prohibit because we're calling it unfinished space that it's really not,habitable space it's storage. MEMBER DANTES : They can't call it finished I don't know how they define it if there is a defined term. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The terms are really not good in the code. They keep (inaudible) around what is finished space, what is habitable space and I just want to make sure that it's safe and that it's to code and that it's to code and that it suits your needs and we don't want to prohibit anything that the code is going to allow you to do. MEMBER DANTES : We just call it (inaudible) storage must be uninhabitable. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : It sounds like we're leaving this open why don't we allow the applicant the time to find out from the Building Department CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well that's true, you can just go over there and ask them. Just tell them we're using this just open PAT MOORE : I'll just ask John Condon to because so far what has happened every time she's gone to the Building Department I won't let her go by herself something gets screwed up either in the translation or you and ['all of us understand-these very special terms but it's not fair for the applicant who is not in the construction industry to understand the difference so I'll try to get the answer but it might be helpful for you guys to let the John know in advance hey that is a question we had. We just want to make a dry clean space, it's not heated but we just you know are you allowed to put in insulation in a some kind of insulation so that the metal Morton building is not you know pervious from animals and other things. That's all. know. KATHERINE HUBBARD : I couldn't do anything cause I have a Stop Work Order, am I permitted now to have somebody come up to remove all the wiring or do I have to wait? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : You have to wait until John gives us feedback and Mike gives us feedback. Don't do anything (inaudible) it sounds like in your effort to want to get it done you're undoing yourself along the way so maybe it's just better to make sure and we're on the same page. April 7, 2022 Regular Meeting PAT MOORE : There's been no GC here that is in the industry and kind of (inaudible) everything so CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I understand, well when you get a Morton building they deliver it to your property and PAT MOORE : and they say here do what you want with it CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Alright I'm going to make a motion to adjourn the hearing we'll adjourn it to next month and if everything is not ship shape we'll adjourn it again but in the meantime that gives everybody time to get all this stuff sorted out. PAT MOORE : I was going to try and get you the answers and just make it can you make it just subject to receipt of these things because CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : We might have questions I don't know it depends on what John is going to find and so I think rather than I would adjourn it to the Special Meeting but I don't that's not going to be enough time we know that's not enough time. We don't have to necessarily have another hearing we can close it in a month if we have everything we need right? I mean I'll just adjourn it I'll just put it down to close that day if everything is in place, there's no need for another hearing if we don't have any questions if they're all answered so we'll just do it that way. Does that sound sensible to everybody?Are you okay with that Pat? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Yes. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Alright I'm going to make a motion to adjourn this hearing to May 5th. Is there a second? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Second. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER DANTES : Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye April 7, 2022 Regular Meeting HEARING#7653—DOUGLAS MCGAHAN CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next application before the Board is for Douglas McGahan #7653. This is a request for a variance from Article IV Section 280-15 and the Building Inspector's February 17, 2022 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for a permit to legalize an "as built" accessory building at 1) located less than the code required minimum side yard setback of 10 feet located at 1820 Stillwater Ave. in Cutchogue. DOUG MCGAHAN : Hi, I'm Doug McGahan I reside at 1820 Stillwater Ave. Cutchogue. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay so you have an accessory shed with a 6.1 foot side yard where the code requires a minimum of 10, the shed is in the rear yard. The shed is about 100 sq. ft. DOUG MCGAHAN : Yes CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : and you're saying only the roof overhang is non-conforming in its setback is that right? DOUG MCGAHAN : Yes the shed itself is 10 feet from the line but the roof overhang is an encroachment that I was unaware of and that is the issue. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Alright. Rear yard setback at 22.9, side yard at (inaudible), the rear yard it looks like there are two accessory garages. Is there a second accessory garage? DOUG MCGAHAN : No CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Shed DOUG MCGAHAN : and garage CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay got it. If the Board has any questions on this it looks pretty benign to me. MEMBER ACAMPORA : Yes MEMBER PLANAMENTO : It's really just the lean to portion of the shed, the shed is compliant. MEMBER LEHNERT : It's the overhang. MEMBER DANTES : Why go through this, why not just cut the overhang off? April 7,2022 Regular Meeting DOUG MCGAHAN : It's very useful and I think it adds to the look of the shed. I need outside storage you know not getting covered with rain (inaudible). My shed itself I have a construction business and there's saws and stuff just like every bay of my garage I can't walk into it so I had to have something to get out of the rain (inaudible) stick it underneath the lean to there. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Mr. McGahan what prompted the application? DOUG MCGAHAN : I wanted to get a permit for it because I was starting to not need a permit I was told because it has that overhang you need a permit cause it doesn't it's too close to the line. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : The shed is actually 100 sq. ft. which you don't need a permit for but in an attempt to legalize cause you thought you needed it that's when they caught that there's actually area under the roof. DOUG MCGAHAN : Correct CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Let's see if the Board has any questions on this. MEMBER DANTES : Why not just slide it over? DOUG MCGAHAN : I did slide it a couple of inches cause one part was 6.1 feet and the other one was like 5.8 and I thought 6 feet was fine so I got a machine and I slid it but to slide it another 4 feet it would structural the lean to was not put into concrete so it just sits on the ground so it would destroy the roof structure to move it unless I hire Davis Brothers Moving Company to come which would be cost prohibitive. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well there's a lot of area around it, it doesn't have any visual or physical impact on anything that I can see when I was at the site. In fact you can't really tell where the property lines are. The way the homes are it angles DOUG MCGAHAN : It's nice it's all open. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : It's something also that the lean to (inaudible) are very clean sort of New England (inaudible) structures much more pleasing DOUG MCGAHAN : That's what I was looking for. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Better than those nice plastic tubs. April 7, 2022 Regular Meeting DOUG MCGAHAN : I do take pride in my work. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Eric do you have any questions on this one? MEMBER DANTES : No CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Pat anything from you? MEMBER ACAMPORA : No questions. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Rob MEMBER LEHNERT No questions. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : There is nobody in the audience. 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 : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA Aye MEMBER DANTES : Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye, we'll have a decision in two weeks. Thank you for patiently waiting through a longer hearing. Motion to close the meeting, is there a second? MEMBER DANTES : Second CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA Aye MEMBER DANTES : Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye April 7, 2022 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye. April 7, 2022 Regular Meeting 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 Elizabeth Sakarellos DATE :April 15, 2022