Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA-05/05/2022 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 May 5, 2022 10:04 A.M. Board Members Present: LESLIE KANES WEISMAN - Chairperson PATRICIA ACAMPORA—Member 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 May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting INDEX OF HEARINGS Hearing Page Pequot Point, LLC#7616 4-5 Glen J. Norton #7624 6- 7 Paul Levi and Raffaella Ceriello#7617 7- 10 Christos Verveniotis#7640 11 - 16 Kim. W. Tetrault and Kim M. Randall #7625 17 - 21 Mark Riesenfeld #7620 21 - 29 Joy T. Sieger and Timothy R. Sieger#7622 29 - 33 Sand Lenox, LLC#7619 33 -45 SV Greenport LLC, dba Sound View Greenport#7630 45 - 55 SV Greenport LLC, dba Sound View Greenport#7631 45 - 55 SV Greenport LLC, dba Sound View Greenport#7632 45 -55 Richard and Suzanne Rothwell #7623 55 - 64 Estate of Charlotte Penza #7618 64- 68 Modern Age Home Builders#7662 68- 70 May 5,2022 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Good morning everyone and welcome to the meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals May 5, 2022. I'm going to we've done executive session there's nothing in the work session agenda so I'm going to ask all of you to stand please and join me in the Pledge of Allegiance. Can I ask you to just take one moment of silence for support for the people of Ukraine and what they're going through. I'm going to make a Resolution declaring applications that are setback/dimensional/lot waiver/accessory apartment/bed and breakfast requests as Type II Actions and not subject to environmental review pursuant to State Environmental Quality Review (SEAR) 6 NYCRR Part 617.5 c including the following: Pequot Point, LLC, Glen Norton, Paul Levi and Raffaella Ceriello, Christos Verveniotis, Kim Tetrault and Kim Randall, Mark Riesenfeld, Joy Sieger and Timothy Sieger, Sand Lenox LLC. SV Greenport, LLC, SV Greenport, LLC, SV Greenport, LLC, Richard and Suzanne Rothwell, Estate of Charlotte Penza and Modern Age Home Builders so moved. 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. We have a possible resolution to close the following hearing, Katherine Hubbard #76075E. I'm going to make a motion to adjourn this to May 15th Special 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 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye. May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting HEARING#7616—PEQUOT POINT, LLC CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next hearing is for Pequot Point, LLC #7616. Before we get started on that I just want to ask Liz to tell anyone who might be on Zoom how they can participate. OFFICE ASSISTANT SAKARELLOS : Thank you, just one thing on Hubbard Leslie the date is May 19th. Good morning everyone and good morning to those on Zoom. For those on Zoom if anyone wishes to comment on a particular application we ask that you raise your hand, we will give you further"instructions on how you will be able to speak. If you are on a phone press *9 to raise your hand and we will let you know what to do next. Thank you. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Thanks Liz. Let me just read the legal notice into the record. This is Pequot Point, LLC#7616. This is a request for variances from Article III Section 280-15, Article XXII Section 280-116A(1) and the Building Inspector's October 15, 2021 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for a permit to construct additions and alterations to an existing single family dwelling and to construct a new accessory garage at 1) dwelling is located less than the code required 100 feet from the top of the bluff, 2) garage is located in other than the code permitted rear yard located at East End Road/2875 Castle Road (adj. to Block Island Sound) on Fishers Island. STEVE HAM : Steven Ham for the applicant. So there are two variances as you mentioned that are needed here. The one relating to the house within the bluff area is a 75 feet distance for new steps and roof for an existing terrace that's already within the setback and further there are some other structures that are within that setback. I was sent an LWRP report that this is consistent and further the owner is undertaking a slope of a bluff erosion control measures, he has a negative dec from the Town Trustees which I have attached to the memorandum that I have submitted.. The garage is arguably all in the front yard but only a small portion is if you take the Building Department's definition is in the side yard. If this garage were being built on .a vacant if this parcel was vacant I think it would be it would not even need a variance, it meets all the setbacks for a principle dwelling. As addressed the various criteria that you need to consider and in the memorandum I can answer questions and if I can't Bruce Kilnin the Architect is on Zoom. CHAIPERSON WEISMAN : I just want to enter into the record here that this terrace construction is 75.4 feet setback from the top of the bluff where the code requires a minimum of 100 feet and this accessory garage is partially in the side yard. Your front yard on waterfront property is permitted or a rear yard. May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting STEVE HAM : And I'm advised it was sited there because that would be the least intrusive on the existing landscape and some old growth trees that's why as it was pointed out in the memo. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Let's see if anyone on the Board has any questions here let's start with you Eric. MEMBER DANTES : No CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN Nick any questions? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : No questions. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Rob MEMBER LEHNERT :This is pretty straightforward no questions. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Pat MEMBER ACAMPORA : No questions. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Is there anybody on Zoom that wants to address this. No, no raised hands, anyone in the audience? Okay that took care of that one. 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. May 5,2022 Regular Meeting HEARING#7624—GLEN J. NORTON CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next application before the Board is for Glen J. Norton #7624. This is a request for variances from Article XXIII Section 280-124 and the Building Inspector's December 27, 2021 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for a permit to construct additions and alterations to a single family dwelling at 1) located Fess than the code required minimum rear yard setback of 60 feet, 2) located less than the code required minimum side yard setback of 20 feet located at 396 Alpine Ave. #356 on Fishers Island. This is additions and alterations with a rear yard setback of 25.2 feet, the code requiring a minimum of 60 on that sized lot and side yard setback at 15.2 where the code requires (inaudible). STEVE HAM : Steven Ham for the applicant. The main point here I guess, it's a very oddly shaped lot, it's fairly large for residential lots in its neighborhood and it's bordered only by one other single family residence that I had to notify, there are two churches and the Pequot Inn that's the other neighbor and in this particular addition would be the closest property line would be to that Pequot Inn but the Inn itself is quite a distance away. The owner of Pequot supports this application he submitted a letter to you and I have attached that to my memorandum. The nearest neighbor is on the other side of a gravel drive, it's quite a distance away from their property that's the Ducet property. As you can see from the survey it's a very constraining building envelope and the house itself is basically completely in a non- conforming location already. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It's a really odd shaped lot as is typical on Fishers Island, so many of them are. STEVE HAM : This one is one acre which is unusual. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It's big it's bigger than most yep. STEVE HAM : So lot coverage is certainly not an issue. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well lot coverage appears 4.9% it's currently 4%so MEMBER LEHNERT : Because of the shape of the building envelope is (inaudible) STEVE HAM : They're actually are going some exterior stairs I pointed this out in the memo but some exterior stairs that are non-conforming are going to be put in a conforming location that's on the exterior. What's driving this is the interior staircase. MEMBER DANTES : Didn't we approve a variance on the other side of the Pequot Inn a couple of years ago? May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting STEVE HAM : You're absolutely right and that was the last time I was here it was for a deck, it was half a foot off the line. It was really tiny .4 MEMBER LEHNERT :That was the one we went out there with the CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : That's right. MEMBER DANTES : Do you have that variance number and the materials. Did you put the variance in the materials? STEVE HAM : No but I can get it to you. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Our office can look it up. STEVE HAM : McCall,John McCall, November of 2019 was the hearing. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Kim can look it up. Alright, is there anything from the Board? Is there anyone on Zoom, anyone in the audience. 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. Thank you nice to see you again. HEARING#7617— PAUL LEVI and RAFFAELLA CERIELLO CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next application before the Board is for Paul Levi and Raffaella Ceriello #7617. This is a request for a variance from Article XXIII Section 280-124 and the Building Inspector's November 12, 2021 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for a permit to legalize an existing wood deck with roof covering attached to a single family dwelling at 1) located less than the code required minimum side yard setback of 15 feet May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting located at 405 Arshamomaque Ave. in Southold. This is an "as built" deck with roof covering with a side yard setback of 13.9 feet where the code requires a 15 foot minimum. We have all been out to inspect,the property and Pat what would you like to tell us? PAT MOORE : Well I will introduce Ms. Ceriello who is the proud new owner of this property. I have provide for you in my area variance application the history here and this was a replacement of an existing covered deck and when it was being done it was slightly modified which resulted in a 1.9 foot encroachment into the side yard. The existing house is on an angle so that's what caused some of the difficulty here. You can see it was a very lovely very well done to commend the contractor it is a well done project. I will address whatever questions you have because my written application is pretty extensive explaining the circumstances. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Of course the site inspection showed that there's a split rail fence and a lot of woodland, it has no visual impact on anybody and it is the front of the house the entry to the house facing the side yard rather than the front yard. PAT MOORE : Right and the house is 104 feet from the road so it's very little if not any impact. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I don't have any questions about it, it's straightforward enough. MEMBER LEHNERT : One question, do you happen to know the square footage of the deck that actually violates the setback cause it's really tiny? PAT MOORE : I don't have that calculation cause it's kind of a triangle. MEMBER LEHNERT: Yeah like I said only part of it actually clips the setback line. PAT MOORE : Exactly it's very small. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Pat if I may this is a question not relative to the application but to the site,just because we're seeing a pergola later on today, the pergola on the front lawn was there a C.O. for that? I didn't see anything in the packet. MEMBER DANTES : Is it over 100 sq. ft.? PAT MOORE : I remember seeing it but I don't remember. I can't read the numbers here, it wasn't called out by the Building Department so it didn't appear to be an issue so MEMBER PLANAMENTO : So if necessary I would say you know when you go for a building permit you might ask the Building Department about it I don't know if that's important for us but just in light of what we're seeing on later on today. May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well obviously you're attempting to make sure that everything is legalized on the property so if they say you need one then you PAT MOORE : We might have to be back cause I see well I don't know if it's waterfront or not waterfront here because it's wetlands, it's very wet. MEMBER LEHNERT : If I scale it it's less than 100 sq. ft. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : But it is in the front. MEMBER LEHNERT : It is in the front. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I think it's deminimus to tell you the truth. I don't think that it's particularly significant. MEMBER DANTES : Then the shed would want to get moved MEMBER PLANAMENTO : That's the other point I was going to bring forward. MEMBER DANTES :Just a couple of feet. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : But that also needs a building permit. RAFFAELLA CERIELLO : My name is Raffaella Ceriello owner of the house my husband and I. We are aware that the house the shed is not certified I think it's about 10 feet too close to the property so we are going to take care of that. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : So you're alright if we approve this and indicate it as a condition of approval to move the shed to a conforming setback. The location is fine it's just the setback is too close. PAT MOORE : It's been so many months I forget what (inaudible). Any other questions? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Not from me, is there anybody on Zoom? No, okay anybody else in the audience. I'm going 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 May 5,2022 Regular Meeting MEMBER LEHNERT Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I'm going to do the Resolutions. Resolution for the next Regular Meeting with Public Hearings to be held Thursday, June 2, 2022 at 9:00 a.m. so moved. 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. Resolution to approve the Minutes from the Special Meeting held on Thursday, April 21, 2022 so moved. 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. Resolution to approve a one year extension from March 16, 2022 to expire March 15, 2023 for John and Theresa Murname located at 125 Bow Rd. in Southold, New York so moved. Is there a second? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Second CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA,: Aye May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting MEMBER DANTES Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye. HEARING#7640—CHRISTOS VERVENIOTIS CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next application before the Board is for Christos Verveniotis #7640. This is a request for a variance from Article XXII Section 280-105D(4) and the Building Inspector's January 10, 2022 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for a permit to legalize an "as built" deer fence at 1) deer fencing is prohibited in or along the front yard or primary front yard of any property located at 4690 Horton Lane in Southold. PAT MOORE : I have here Mr. Verveniotis, he's present. I also have Mr. Tetrault his neighbor and the next applicant is next to him. This application actually the property (inaudible) for the record and my submission this is a three acre piece of property that was subdivided back in 1992. My client has a house with an extensive agricultural use on the property. He's got trees, fruit trees, he's got row crops in the back and he also controls the adjacent property which is vacant. He bought it it's in your daughter's name I believe yes but his daughter lives with him he's a widower and his daughter lives in the house with him so he controls both properties. In total there's six acres of agricultural land here. Since the nineties when the fruit trees were planted I submitted aerial photograph showing that the property has been planted in agricultural use here. There's row crops in the back as I said fruit trees, additional vegetation. There are additional plantings next door and he has.for the past twenty five years grown and donated all his agricultural products (inaudible) make it a financial venture it was a donation. So he's been feeding many people over the years with the vegetables and fruits that he's generated on the property. I was hoping that he would qualify under the AGs and Markets not for tax purposes but for the fencing that's permitted on agricultural land but he wouldn't have qualified under the financial criteria when he's been donating. He certainly has invested the amount of money in the thousands of dollars in maintenance of the agriculture with fruit trees that had to be sprayed and the crops that have grown. So in this instance we have really a private farmer, the house is his homestead and the rest of the property is in agriculture. I May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting would also point out that this portion of Hortons Lane is really kind of an agricultural quarter. You've got the berry farm across the street, the property has been in agriculture for many generations, the surrounding land is also close proximity of the vineyards and there's a large piece of property in the back that I couldn't quite I don't really know what they're doing there but it's quite a large piece of property. It looks like it's in agriculture but I didn't see the actual plants that are being grown. It could be tree or nursery stock. MEMBER DANTES : Are you talking about the land owned by the Water Authority? PAT MOORE : Is that what's behind I couldn't tell. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I think so. MEMBER LEHNERT : It's on the survey. PAT MOORE : Oh okay I apologize I was taking aerial photographs and I couldn't tell what it was so the Water Authority being a public authority there's no development there it's just part of their probably their well and their buffers for the wells. I'd be happy to answer any questions you have. I have submitted written documentation, I have photographs. You can see from the outside the trees that line the in front of the property you can also see that the deer fence is actually completely imbedded where the arborvitae, the arborvitae was planted years ago at the time the deer fence went up to protect the crops and it has all grown in as one imbedded protection. To remove the deer fence would it's impractical you'd have to cut down the arborvitae or significantly impact the arborvitae that is providing an entire buffer for the property. I have additional photographs that he my client I was hoping I would take because of the fact that everything is flowering now so it looks so beautiful, you went by the property I don't know if you can see inside the property or not CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN The property had the gate open so we were able to access. PAT MOORE : Oh good you were able to go in great, great. Yes I had mentioned that you were coming cause they have a lovely dog that's why the fence is there but very friendly but most of us wouldn't go in. So here are additional photographs of just the flowering trees. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Perhaps the applicant can answer this if you can Pat, what kind of fruit you're saying these are fruit bearing trees I did see what I thought was some apple trees in a small grove. What other fruit is produced because most of the landscaping looked like ornamental flowering trees not fruit producing. PAT MOORE : That's around the house. May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting MR. VERVENIOTIS : Yes I grow my dream was to make (inaudible) was to buy (inaudible) because the Greeks we like fishing but me especially my life (inaudible) fruit trees and tomatoes. So that's what I put (inaudible) so make different variety apple trees I have about fifteen it think, peaches I have about four or five nectarines, I have three apricot and I have about maybe ten, twelve (inaudible) trees maybe sixteen something like that. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay cause I could tell the apple blossoms were fruit bearing apple trees but I wasn't there are ornamental pear trees and ornamental cherry trees that just flower don't produce fruit but yours are fruit producing. MR. VERVENIOTIS : All fruit trees. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The deer fencing also goes around the lot that is adjacent to your residential lot. MR. VERVENIOTIS : Yes it was for my new neighbor. PAT MOORE : No that's on this side. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : That's the other way. I'm talking about going to the north. MR. VERVENIOTIS : Yes (inaudible) CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : That is a separate lot, it is designated as a separate lot but it's undeveloped and you planted on it. MR. VERVENIOTIS : Yes my daughters and (inaudible) PAT MOORE : You have row crops. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well he's got row crops in the back which is also_enclosed with additional fencing but that's perfectly legal to have high fencing around that in your back yard. We're really talking about the part of your property that comes in front of your house. Even though it's the side property line it's because it's in front of your house 'it's considered in a front yard and that of course what's along the street. PAT MOORE : Well in this case you do have both the fruit bearing trees all in the front yard because the house is set back pretty far let's say the house on a three acre piece the house is midway so the survey shows the distance. From the aerial looking at it's pretty far back. So you have the fruit trees all as you said there are some shrubs there that are what are they call? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : They're just ornamental. May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting PAT MOORE : They're well they're landscaping but there are also all the trees are there so he's got really every piece of the ground covered with some form of vegetation. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Pat can you tell me cause I don't see it on here anywhere, is this zoned residential or'AG or I think it's a residential. PAT MOORE : Let me double check. MEMBER LEHNERT :The.application says AC PAT MOORE : What does the Notice say? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It doesn't say. PAT MOORE : I think it's I think I checked that and it was AC because these lots are so large, they're really you know farm lots in a sense between three acres and the zoning code the map doesn't differentiate because I want to say smaller lots and then large farm lot across the way so yeah. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well there's another thing we have to sort because the adjacent lot you know your daughters or yours whatever it is that's considered a separate lot even though they're next to each other and it has deer fencing on it and an undeveloped lot is not permitted to have any structure on it at all any fencing of any kind unless it is an AG operation. PAT MOORE : Well that's what I was based on the Building Department's review of this property because Mr. Tetrault was fixing his fence that caused the Building Inspector to come and issue a violation to my client and this piece because it vacant and AC I did not analyze that the Building Department was probably looking at it as an AG parcel being that it's three acres vacant and it's got plants on it and some AG buildings on it small AG accessory structures on it I think that there's it's like an greenhouse or something yeah small greenhouse CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :There's a lot of sheds and PAT MOORE : Yeah like typical greenhouse structures, accessory structures. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Let's see if the Board has questions. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I looked it up it is AC. PAT MOORE : Yeah I remember checking it so good. 14T May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Pat if I can you brought up the small structures, going through the packet where you put the Certificates of Occupancy I noticed I didn't see although on the property card it shows a building permit for a swimming pool there is no C of 0 included. PAT MOORE ' No there's a C.O. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : For the swimming pool? PAT MOORE : I submitted it. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Can you verify that and then also for the greenhouse and the other structures. PAT MOORE : The vacant lot? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : No, no all on the subject premises. PAT MOORE : When you're dealing with these small AG structures at least in the past they were built with there wasn't a need for permitting they were let me look and see because I thought one of them MEMBER PLANAMENTO : You need to verify that. PAT MOORE : Yeah MEMBER PLANAMENTO : So I have a C of 0 for a house with an attached garage and a deck, an accessory shed and a shed but that's it there's no second garage, there's no C of 0 for the ,pool and then the little buildings I mentioned those greenhouses. PAT MOORE : You have a CO for the pool right? Yeah, yeah, yeah we'll pull everything and double check. I'll ask the Building Department to get them for me. C.O. for a pool and there are a couple what other accessory are you looking at? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Well on the survey it shows a second garage, there's a small shed. PAT MOORE :There's a two car garage that's part of the house. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I didn't go on the property so I didn't PAT MOORE : Oh no those are all sheds and MEMBER PLANAMENTO : So good so Kim just showed me there is a C of 0 on the PAT MOORE : On the pool good okay. May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting MEMBER DANTES :.I think the greenhouse might be, cause they're calling it a seasonal metal hoop and plastic greenhouse. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Which is exactly what it is. I did go and I walked all the way around on both lots PAT MOORE : Yeah I did too and I saw that they were typical farm structures. MEMBER DANTES : It's the seasonal that makes it not need a C.O. I believe the'glass ones that aren't seasonal have to have C.O's CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yeah cause then they're a structure. PAT MOORE : They're permanent CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : They're building opposed to it's just plastic. Anything from you Rob? MEMBER LEHNERT : Nothing right now. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Pat MEMBER ACAMPORA : No MEMBER DANTES : I don't have any questions. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Anybody on Zoom. Liz? No, okay anybody in the audience wanting to address the application? Okay motion to close the hearing reserve decision to a later date. 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. May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting HEARING#7625— KIM W.TETRAULT and KIM M. RANDALL CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next application before the Board is for Kim W. Tetrault and Kim M. Randall #7625. This is a request for a variance from Article XXII Section 280-151)(4) and the Building Inspector's January 10, 2022 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for a permit to legalize an "as built" deer fence at 1) deer fencing is prohibited in or along the front yard or primary front yard of any property located at 4650 Horton Lane in Southold. State your name for the record.please. KIM TETRAULT : Kim Tetrault CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : We were not able to get into the property because both of the wooden gates were closed, one with a key pad and the other one with a big bar so we have no way of verifying what's there and we're going to have to do a site inspection before we can make a final decision. So we're going to need you to open up one of those gates. KIM TETRAULT : Absolutely or I can just give you the key pad code if I'm at work or i can meet you .any time. I wish I had known I can give a phone number I can meet anybody any time. I will let you know that there are not additional structures on the property, we just bought it last year. I did have a new survey done which shows that there are no new structures on the building on the lot but I'd be happy to show anybody around. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well you don't need to do that, we just go independently we don't particularly meet with the applicant we have to be before the public in order to talk to the applicant but what you could do is just write it down on a piece of paper and give it to Kim, she will email it to the Board Members so that we can go out. KIM TETRAULT :The key pad? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yes. KIM TETRAULT : It's not to keep the people out, it's to keep the deer out. I've been living on and off in Southold for the last thirty years and it's a wonderful town, I don't feel threatened by people coming. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN Alright so when you bought this the deer fencing was in place or did you put the deer fencing in? KIM TETRAULT : No I put the deer fence in really not knowing because everywhere around me was a deer fence and I just I was clueless that it was an issue. Also our original survey showed that it said agriculture on it and the code it said agriculture residential and-1 just didn't think that it was an issue until it came up in violation and then went immediately to rectify that and May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting to see if we could I mean the deer fence as you if you went to the property you can see that the deer fence is pretty much not visible from the street. There's one section that we planted that should grow over that fence shortly and would certainly do anything we could to completely hide that fence from view. Right now it's if it wasn't for my wonderful neighbor who helped me trim the hedge last year it would have been the hedge would have been over the fence but we cleaned it up to make it level and that showed the fence, it's kind of ironic. There is a wonderful hedge that literally hides the entire fence from the street which is ironic because across the street is the blueberry farm which is as far as the eye can see a naked 8 foot deer fence which I certainly don't mind to look at. I love farmland and I love the blueberry farm. As you come down Horton Rd. there in that section it's all deer fence so I just was clueless that it was an issue and I apologize for that and will do anything we need to do to make that whole. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yeah I mean the town it wasn't even all that long ago I remember talking about a code that would permit deer fencing on agricultural property that was in production because it was such a financial loss to farmers because the deer would go in take one bite of a tomato:and walk away and ruin all the crop and couldn't sell them. KIM TETRAULT : The other thing is that when we bought the property it's just lush, it's paradise it's just the'most beautiful plants but the deer eat it all to stumps. My wife is an avid gardener we're not ever we weren't really ever planning to be in business for it but then again with tomatoes going for nine dollars a pound these days you never know what retirement would bring. Again it's a little bit of irony that you have to be in production and make money and show it for three years but if you have the deer that are in that area I don't think that you could ever make money in three years if you weren't protected with a deer fence so it's a little bit of a strange catch twenty two. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well all AG properties are as of right you just go and get a building permit allowed to do it because they are in a business. KIM TETRAULT : Right, right. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : But not the residents. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN Yes exactly but all of us I live on Soundview I'm one of your neighbors, he lives on Horton. So believe me we know the neighborhood, the point I'm, making is that we are all very burdened by herds of deer that are very distructive. It's a problem that the town faces in general, certain neighborhoods are worse than others particularly those that have some undeveloped lots but what we have to do is look at what the code allows and why it allows it. May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting KIM TETRAULT : I certainly understand that but would only say in my defense that this particular deer fence is pretty much invisible. If I was living on the Main Rd. of Southold it would have been blatantly obvious not to put an eight foot deer fence along the Main Rd. We're certainly not looking to obstruct any of the beauty of the town it's the opposite really. I don't even notice the deer fence behind it's fully behind the arborvitae. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : We can see a little bit on you know that extends beyond the hedgerow and you see the posts when you get up to the gates. KIM TETRAULT : We planted there and plan on continuing to plant until it will be totally invisible for our own (inaudible) too. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay let's see if there's some questions here, let's start with you Pat. MEMBER ACAMPORA : No questions. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Eric MEMBER DANTES : I do not have any questions. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Nick MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Just out of curiosity, the application says three sides the fourth side being KIM TETRAULT : My neighbors, my wonderful neighbor he took care of 400 good feet for me. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay so it's on three sides not KIM TETRAULT : Well it is the new fence is three sides. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : So the other side yard is your adjacent neighbor. MEMBER LEHNERT : The survey shows that it's on the neighbor's property. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yes I saw that too. KIM TETRAULT : The fourth side is on his MEMBER LEHNERT : Correct the northern side of your property line is on your neighbor's property. KIM TETRAULT : Of the new fence? May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : No on the existing fence. KIM TETRAULT : Yes,:yes, yes MEMBER LEHNERT : You tied into your neighbor's fence. KIM TETRAULT : Well he's a good guy, we can duke it out later about what he did to me or what I did to him whichever came first. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Anyone in the audience wishing to address the application? PAT MOORE : It occurred to me that most recently there was an article in the Suffolk Times regarding the deer and I think that they've been declared a nuisance at this point.There was an article about it and there was some discussion about addressing the number of deer in the community but in this particular area and I think it's most difficult when you have a property on one side that's completely fenced in like the berry farm that prohibits impedes the deer from crossing and moving that it centralizes all the activity of the deer on parcels that are not fenced in. These properties as I pointed out during the prior hearing these are three acre parcels and from the beginning when they were subdivided and my client was one of the family members that subdivided created these three acre parcels specifically to be able to sustain agricultural whether it's a hobby farm or whatever agricultural use the owner would want to undertake certainly my client did and your future use of maintenance of the property. I would point out that the deer are truly a nuisance out here and they I believe have been declared so and I would just point that out. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Nick anything else from you? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : No CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN Rob MEMBER LEHNERT : Nothing CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Anyone in the audience wishing to address the application? Okay because we have to do an inspection and we now know how to access it KIM TETRAULT : Come during lunch. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : We will go and do an inspection so I'm going to hold this open until we can do that so I'm going to make a motion to adjourn this to the Special Meeting of May 19th and if we have no further questions 19th? KIM TETRAULT : Do I need to be there for May May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : No, no, no you don't. It will be on Zoom, it's a meeting it's our next meeting we meet every two weeks so I'm adjourning this hearing until then we'll see what we see and if we're ready to make a decision we will close the hearing in two weeks at that meeting and we may or may not have a draft ready a draft decision. If we have it ready it will be on the agenda for deliberation and that meeting is over in the Town Hall Annex building, the second floor in the Board Room and it's available on Zoom you can listen or you can just call the office the next day see what's going on. If we don't have a decision we will have one certainly the following meeting. KIM TETRAULT :Thank you very much. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : You're very welcome. Okay so I made a motion to adjourn this to the Special Meeting on May 19th, 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. HEARING#7620— MARK RIESENFELD CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next application before the Board is for Mark Riesenfeld #7620. This is a request for a variance from Article X Section 280-45C and the Building Inspector's December 8, 2021 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for a permit to convert an existing accessory barn to an accessory artist studio/workshop at 1) the proposed use in the accessory building is not a permitted accessory use located at 800 Village Lane in Orient. Is there someone here to represent the application? MARK RIESENFELD : Yes I am. I apologize for the Zoom presentation but that is a health consideration today. My name is Mark Riesenfeld with my wife Andrea, we live at 800 Village May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting Lane in Orient. We're asking you to take an affirmative action on our request to convert the existing barn to an accessory artist studio and workshop based on the findings that this artist studio workshop is a use that is customary and incidental to the principle single family use of the property and your Board has found that artist studio workshops uses to be incidental to residential uses in many cases in the past. The property is improved with a single family dwelling that was originally built in 1810 and the barn we think was built around 1900. It was originally located on the southerly property line but was moved off the property line with a building permit and a Certificate of Occupancy was issued in 2006. In recent history the barn has been used as a storage building and workshop with unconditioned space. We are proposing a full restoration of the structure to meet current codes as conditioned space. The design objective here is to have the building exterior to look exactly the same as does now and the proposed use of the structure will be a personal artist studio/workshop for small art projects and photography pursued by the current owner. The studio will not be used for any commercial or residential purposes. We have already been before the Historic Preservation Commission last February and they approved the project and issued a Certificate of Appropriateness. I'm available for any questions you might have on the project. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : This use was not considered a permitted use until the Board of Appeals rendered it's code interpretation sometime around well it was quite recently just a couple of years ago Ryckman when was that just a few years ago. MARK RIESENFELD : February 4th of 2021 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : We did so on the basis of looking at the code to determine what was accessory and incidental to the primary principle use which was a single family dwelling but there was a whole series of standards that only the Board the Building Department would typically if we made an interpretation see that as de facto code. However in this instance they are not in the position to make the decision as to whether or not the applicant meets the thirteen standards that were included as conditions of approval determining that it was incidental to the principle use. You mentioned several of them but I'm going to go through these and ask you to answer them just to ensure that you are in compliance with all of them or you intend to comply with all of them. MARK RIESENFELD : So Madam Chairwoman I have a copy of that decision and I see all thirteen conditions and we would state that we would comply with all those thirteen conditions. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well just for the public record, a number of those conditions essentially are directed toward insuring that this is not a retail business, it was not a commercial use of any kind, whether it's for professional artist or a hobby artist that's not the May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting point. We do limit half bath in this structure, it can be conditioned and we limit the kind of just tell me what kind of you did mention it but want to hear it again what sort of art work are you proposing to do in there? MARK RIESENFELD : We do I personally do a lot of photography on large format printing and we also do small art projects pertaining to ceramics and a particular Japanese style of fixing ceramics called Kintsugi.This is all for our personal use and not for commercial purposes. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : You have no accessory apartment anywhere on the premises within your house or in any other structure? MARK RIESENFELD : No. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Alright let's see if the Board has anything, anything from you Pat? MEMBER ACAMPORA : No CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Eric MEMBER DANTES : Not at this time. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Nick MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Mr. Riesenfeld I have a question relative to the half bath, in the plan it shows a shelf that's about 4 feet by 2 %feet wide at the far end of the half bath MARK RIESENFELD : Yes MEMBER PLANAMENTO : The area to the side of the toilet on the other side of the hand wash sink would really be.Like 4 feet by 3 feet it would seem that if the shelf was removed one can easily install a shower in that location. I know you said and you understand the code but would it be something that you would be able to move the bathroom wall in and have the shelf that's accessible from what looks like a kitchenette? MARK RIESENFELD : Well I think the size of the bathroom is really a function of trying to match the staircase, there's no particular plan or attempt to put in a shower it's just basically a half bath with some storage in it. The room has we haven't built any storage into the first floor at all so that's probably where we would store a few things. It's certainly possible to move the wall if that's MEMBER PLANAMENTO : a closet door from what appears to be the kitchenette side for access for storage. May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting MARK RIESENFELD : It's not a kitchenette it's just CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : A utility sink that's all MARK RIESENFELD : It's a utility sink it's not a kitchenette. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : He's not referring to the utility sink, he's simply referring to the shelf that's inside the proposed powder room that thing yes exactly. MARK RIESENFELD : Yes I understand it's a storage closet. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : So the question becomes, can you access that storage closet from the other side that's all? MARK RIESENFELD :,Yes CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :Just change the door. MARK RIESENFELD: Yes that would be possible not a problem. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay because he is right nothing having to do with you but people do sell properties and we've seen it done time and time again that if there's room suddenly it becomes an inside shower and somebody is living in it. So we're just very careful about designs that have potential for development that exceeds the code. So if we can just get an amended drawing whose doing this is this Hideaki? MARK RIESENFELD :Yes Hideaki CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Can you just ask him to just submit an amended plan showing that wall showing access to the storage closet on the other side not from the bathroom? MARK RIESENFELD : I understand, can you make that a condition of approval? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yeah I don't see why not. MEMBER LEHNERT :'Do we also have plans for the second floor? I see the stairs up but what's going on up there? MARK RIESENFELD : It's just storage. The ceiling height is not I don't think would classify as habitable space. MEMBER DANTES : I'm confused how that works. Why do you need those big windows into that how to get that it looks like the way this is drawn it looks like a different roofline. MARK RIESENFELD :The roofline is staying the same, the roofline stays exactly the same. May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : After the renovation is really just replacing what's there. The window is there, it's all just replacing what's there that second floor is open rafters, open studs completely unfinished. MEMBER DANTES : So that window is not (inaudible) CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : If you finish if you plan to condition the downstairs which is okay you might have to have a door or something on that at the bottom of that stair so that MEMBER DANTES : On the drawing (inaudible) is different than what's existing as far as the roofline the roof pitch. I don't know if it's higher or not or CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well it's not intended to be. MEMBER LEHNERT : I still would like to see what the second floor is going to be. MEMBERDANTES : Right and then window number six 1 don't know where that goes. MEMBER LEHNERT : There's no plan for the second floor. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Right there's no plan. MEMBER DANTES : What he drew on the outside looks like it's a full second story. What's existing there's no way you can put a second story in it.That's my question. MARK RIESENFELD : The second floor has basically 3 % side walls and when the cross beams were added for structural strength you have it only goes to 7 feet for less than fifty percent of the area of the second floor so it's not really space you can use for anything other than storage. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Are you planning to sheetrock that up there? MARK RIESENFELD : Yes, we need to insulate it cause it can be conditioned space for the entire building. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay that's why I was saying because otherwise you'd need a door on there if you were just going to leave it as open rafter storage. So are you saying you want what is the Board asking? MARK RIESENFELD : I'm sorry CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I'm just asking the Board what it is that they're looking for other than the floor plan for the first floor that changes the access to the May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting MEMBER LEHNERT: Floor plan for the second floor. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : and we want a floor plan for the second floor. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Leslie I might be mistaken but I think when we've allowed this sort of use typically there would be a door at the base of the stairs or the top of the stairs unconditioned space or if in fact it becomes conditioned not conditioned but finished then it has an exterior access or a pull down stair (inaudible) written decision in the past? MEMBER DANTES : Yeah I think you're right. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Primarily that way, we basically haven't been looking at two story artist studios this is I think this is the first one. Well it's a story and a half however we haven't looked anything above MEMBER PLANAMENTO : It's supposed to be storage which CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Storage is usually unfinished, unconditioned space which is what it is now. That's why I'm asking you what your plans are for upstairs because if it becomes sheet rocked and conditioned it can easily become habitable even if it doesn't have really clearance. It wouldn't be legally habitable but it certainly could become habitable. MARK RIESENFELD : It doesn't meet the legal definition of habitable space. MEMBER ACAMPORA : Do you need all these windows on the second story? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The Building Department determines if something is insulated and sheet rocked and conditioned it is no longer storage it is potentially habitable space that's their definition. MARK RIESENFELD : I thought had to be a certain height. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It does have to be at a certain height but many people simply throw a bed up in a place like that and call it quits. I think Nick is right, I think the way to handle this is to put .a door either at the bottom or the top cause typically storage in an accessory building would be a pull down stair not a full stair. Now this is a hybrid, this building existed for a while and there's nothing wrong with wanting to convert it for your own personal art projects but what we're trying to do is make sure that it doesn't come back from the Building Department to say oops. We're just trying to get all of this out now so we can get it straightened out. So if Hideaki can give us a drawing of the second floor, indicate how he's going to conform in making that second floor for lack of a better word conforming to the code as storage. He can go and talk to John Jarski in the Building Department that's fine or you can May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting and just say look this is what we're planning to do is this okay with you as storage space? So we're just on the same page and everybody is working toward the same goal which is to basically since you qualify meaning our prior standards allowing the use but we want to make sure that we've never done a two story one. So the storage has always been either on the same level you know or there has been no storage at all it's just been a studio. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Well there has been storage but it's a pull down stair. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Or a pull down staircase. MEMBER DANTES : And we did deny that one accessory apartment when they tried to have that conditioned loft storage space. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Right we did. . MEMBER DANTES : and they were able to figure out a way MEMBER PLANAMENTO : So here the easiest probably is just to have a door at the bottom of the stairs with an unfinished storage area.above. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : That's something he should talk to his architect about. We shouldn't be designing the property for you, we're just making you aware of what we saw when we inspected the property and how the Building. Department will look at this. So I personally don't have a problem with the proposed use, I think we just need to have drawings that reflect storage on the second floor, how that storage will be maintained and again under certain circumstances John has been okay with insulating and sheet rocking a storage area. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : But not conditioned. MEMBER LEHNERT : But it's not conditioned. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Not conditioned. You can go ahead and do that insulate it sheet rock it as long as you have the door. MARK RIESENFELD : I don't think that's a problem. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I don't either. MARK RIESENFELD :To put a door at the base of the stairs, it's fairly easy. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yeah I would think so it's wide enough and it looks like it's in very good condition. May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting MARK RIESENFELD : So what I'm hearing is that the upstairs can be insulated, sheet rocked but isolated by a door at the base of the stairs and the upstairs is not heated or cooled not conditioned and the door access to the storage space and the bathroom is on the reverse side. Those would be the modifications. MEMBER DANTES : We need the second floor plan showing a wall separating the storage from the open loft. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : There is no open loft. MEMBER DANTES : The open section, you can't have the open section and then the storage have the wall then the heat will just flow through. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : No, no, no, no the door at the bottom of the staircase there's walls on either side of the stairs. MEMBER LEHNERT : There's no (inaudible) space in there. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okayyou have it correctly. The question I want to ask the Board is do you want to go ahead and make a determination and condition the approval based upon submission of those things or do we want to get them before we make a decision. MEMBER LEHNERT : Well we can close the hearing subject to the revised plans. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : That's true, that's a good idea. So what we're going to do just to be clear we're going to close the hearing but we're going to close it subject to receipt of amended plans showing those things we just talked about. MARK RIESENFELD : So there's two items. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The door and the closet basically and a second floor plan just an open plan showing the staircase and that's it with the windows. MARK RIESENFELD : We have those plans in the full set of architectural drawings. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Good okay and the sooner you get them to us the sooner we'll be able to write a decision. So send them in to the office okay? Alright is there anyone in the audience wanting to address the application? Is there anybody else on Zoom Liz? Okay motion to close the hearing subject to receipt of amended plans as discussed. Is there a second? MEMBER LEHNERT : Second CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor? May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER DANTES : Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN Aye. HEARING#7622—JOY T. SIEGER and TIMOTHY R. SIEGER CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next application before the Board is for Joy T. Sieger and Timothy R. Sieger#7622. This is a request for a variance from Article III Section 280-15 and the Building Inspector's December 3, 2021 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for a permit to legalize an "as built" accessory wood trellis at 1) located less than the code required minimum side yard setback of 10 feet located at 41780 NYS Route 25 in Peconic. Would you state your name for the record please. SCOTT DESIMONE : Good morning, Scott DeSimone, Scott DeSimone PC attorney agent for the applicant. The address is 41245 Rt. 25 Cutchogue, New York. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : So the code requires a 10 foot side yard setback minimum and we have a 3.9 foot is that correct? SCOTT DESIMONE :That's correct. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : So what would you like us to know? SCOTT DESIMONE : I would like you to grant my area variance. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I didn't say what would you like us to do, I said what would you like us to know? In other words make your argument. SCOTT DESIMONE : The application is complete, the pergola was constructed on the pool deck. There was no other place to put that for seating area around the pool there because of the terrain and topographic nature of the yard. I did provide pictures showing that a 3 foot retaining wall needed to be built on the west side of where the pool was going to be constructed because of the nature of the topography so that restricted greatly the area in which you can put any type of pool decking around the pool. Also important to note that the May S, 2022 Regular Meeting adjoining property owner to the east, that is a 25 foot right of way as part of a flag lot which is a five acre parcel. The flagged lot runs adjacent to the property heading south and then opens up behind the residential property on the other side of the flag and runs behind and then fronts on Main Rd. Development rights are intact with that, that was a set off the development right are sold behind the property. There is also behind the subject property an area that was set off as a preserved area as part of the subdivision that was built by the Schemberi's on Indian Neck Lane so there will be no impact on the neighbor. I purchased the property in 1999. and sold it to the Siegers in 2020 and nothing changed at my property at that property or in the surrounding properties in the twenty years that I was there. MEMBER DANTES : i have a question for you, on the survey the 3.9 key is to a lot line and there is a partially dotted line that says deed on it, what is the other line that says deed and what's the black line? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I think that may be the fence. MEMBER DANTES : The black line is usually what signifies a property line but then it's got this dotted line that says deed on it. SCOT DESIMONE There's nothing there but a black chain link fence. MEMBER DANTES : I'm just saying why I mean is there a discrepancy between the survey line and the line that's (inaudible) the metes and bounds of the (inaudible)? MEMBER LEHNERT :',It's actually showing here to the left of that is also another metes and bounds. MEMBER DANTES : Right and if that's true is the trellis then conforming under the metes and bounds of the deed? SCOTT DESIMONE : As a matter of fact one of the deeds shows that property line going out further to the west I mean to the east so actually the amount of relief that would be needed would be less. MEMBER DANTES : Right and then your swimming pool I'm assuming if it has a C.O. to code conforming would have to be from the deed line and not from the SCOTT DESIMONE :There is a C.O. for the pool. MEMBER DANTES : Right so maybe they took that C.O. from the deed line and not from this black line. SCOTT DESIMONE : We just chose the line that was the shortest distance to the pergola.. May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well certainly it's a variable. SCOTT DESIMONE : I'd be happy to amend the application to show that I only need 4 feet instead of 6 feet. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : You'd have to get an amended Notice of Disapproval. SCOTT DESIMONE : I'm not going to go through that. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : That's what you have to do in order to do what you SCOTT DESIMONE : That's why I'm asking for the relief from CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I understand, I understand, let's see if the Board has any questions, Rob anything from you? MEMBER LEHNERT : No that was my only question. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Nick MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Yeah I was going to ask in light of the trellis if it has a 10 foot setback how did the pool get a C of 0 but I think that might be the answer depending on the different which line you use. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It just depends who looked at it. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : So the only other thing that I would add because I would think the trellis is open air, it's relatively benign you know whether we look at the deed or the actual survey line it would be greater either way it's benign there's a right of way it's not close to the farm field but the question I would have is, the small shed on the west side of the property that's at 4.8 feet and that's from the deeded line not the excuse me from the survey line not the deeded line but wouldn't that also conform to 10 feet? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Not if it's really small it depends, it depends on what year it was put there cause the setbacks changed. SCOTT DESIMONE :The shed is less than a hundred square feet. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Oh completely but my understanding is that the shed would need to comply. MEMBER LEHNERT : Again depending on what line we're using (inaudible) line it would be on the neighbor's property. May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Well that too. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It's really rare that we see a survey with you know these two lines there which can be interpreted differently (inaudible) SCOTT DESIMONE : ,That came up as part of the title when we were selling so that issue was resolved. The Building Inspector as you can see when I bought that house in 1999 there was a very small farm house and it had an accessory structure in the rear. You've probably driven by the house a number of times, you're probably familiar with the house having seeing it, a lot of work was done to that house and there have been Building Inspectors there for twenty years so everything is C.O'd everything has what is required. It's just at the time we built that ,pergola I went and looked at the definition of structure in the code and I didn't interpret that definition including a pergola so that's why we didn't pursue a building permit cause I doubt very much people go to BJ's and buy a pergola and you can buy a pergola of that dimension at BJ's. I can't imagine they have a thought process that when they bring that home they have to go get a building permit before they erect .it. Actually this is probably safer only cause it's anchored to concrete below the paver decking. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : We have one of those a BJ's pergola on the water literally sitting on the beach. So you mentioned that everything has a C of 0,1 just want to bring up in my packet I didn't see one for the generator, does the generator have a C of 0? SCOTT DESIMONE : I should as far as I know. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Maybe you can look into that. MEMBER DANTES : Sometimes they do it on the plan they don't give it a separate or they used to they don't always give it a separate description maybe they do now. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Just a little bit of a (inaudible) check. I don't have anything else to add. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Anything else from anybody? Is there anyone on Zoom? Anyone in the audience wishing;to address the application? Okay I'll 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 May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye. HEARING#7619—SAND LENOX, LLC CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next application before the Board is for Sand Lenox, LLC#7619. This is a request for a variance from Article XXII Section 280-116A(1) and the Building Inspector's November 19, 2021 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for a permit to demolish an existing dwelling and to construct a new single family dwelling at 1) located less than the code required 100 feet from the top of the bluff, 2) located less than the code required minimum front yard setback of 40 feet located at 1450 Salt March Lane (adj. to Long Island Sound) in Peconic. So we have a demo and a new construction with a bluff setback of 76 feet the code requiring a minimum of 100 and a front yard setback proposed at 30 feet where the code requires a minimum of 40 feet. MIKE KIMACK : Yes that is correct. There is an old cottage that is sitting kind of at the top of bluff. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : We saw it. MIKE KIMACK : It had I think probably moved back at one particular time (inaudible) had gone through Trustees who basically we started out originally we were planning to do that with 67 feet from the top of the bluff which was not acceptable to the Trustees. That was keeping the 40 foot not creating a variance we achieved that (inaudible). The Trustees basically required the applicant to move it back as much as we could. It's 76 feet to the second floor deck but it's 80 feet to the foundation on both sides as a clarification. The closest point is the second floor deck yes but not the structure itself 80 feet. So we did push it back it pushed us back 10 feet into the front yard which was a maximum we could do because we had to not only get a driveway in there but also get the innovative alternative septic system on the property in that particular area. The dry wells are shown on the particular design and then the front area primarily is going to be this is probably I'm looking at the LWRP comments, there is an existing well on the property that's going to be its location is going to be tapped off and discontinued. There's a new well that's going to be put on it's pretty much where the existing building is right now and the question I think was raised by the LW.RP as to why there? The reason why May 5,2022 Regular Meeting there is because the only place we can put the septic area you have to take a look at the plan to see where the adjoining wells are primarily. To put this well here was to try and keep it as far away from the, septic as possible, we're still into a variance area with the Health Department because it does not meet the 150 foot setback and it doesn't meet it in and of itself but (inaudible) but it doesn't meet it with the adjoining properties also it's simply the nature of where those other wells are located relative to where the septic system can be put in a feasible location. That's why that well is located up there. The other comment, this is interesting, it says non-disturbance buffer and probably it's a jargon that we kind of use to say Well we're not going to do anything to it. It's either between that or a non-turf buffer. This ultimately will become a non-disturbance except it's gotta be disturbed until such time as becomes non-disturbance and the reason I say that is that in (inaudible) we have to take down the house, we have to take down the platform the deck right there, we have to do a new well, we have to take down two dead trees and we have to do a complete planting plan according to the.plan that was approved by the Trustees and that first twenty feet basically in that planting plan there's.fifty feet there that goes right up against the patio primarily that first 20 feet it's probably ultimately going to get disturbed anyway because of the construction and basically reconfiguring the contours of the land in order to match into the deck itself of ther patio itself and the house itself. So when we're all done with all of that yes it will non- disturbance. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN Is that a planting plan that the Trustees approved? MIKE KIMACK : Yes, yes it's in your packet and what's also in your packet I think I put together a complete number of trees that were coming down and those that would be preserved. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : A lot of them. MIKE KIMACK : Yeah but we are planting the Trustees asked us to put in two more we were taking two out which;were close one was dead and the other one was dying on top of the bluff and in place of that we're planting five along the southerly side by the existing house. If you look at the planting plan here if I may, (inaudible). MEMBER DANTES : Did you say you're installing an IA system Mike? MIKE KIMACK : Yes MEMBER DANTES :Okay the survey shows a traditional system that's what it looks like here. MIKE KIMACK : No it's'an IA, the Trustees wouldn't let me out the door without that. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Now the law is going to require that. May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting MIKE KIMACK : In essence you're absolutely right on that one. From the Health Department=s perspective once it becomes a vacant lot it's automatically an IA system whether you guys do anything about it or not. It used to not be that way and they have gotten somewhat specific primarily even so much as to say you have the existing home and you want to put in a new system as long as you don't add an addition to it as long as you don't exceed substantial. construction they'll let you put in a standard system up to five but anything beyond that they have the same way of looking at it that the town does from the construction if it's fifty percent more based upon construction materials they-would consider that substantial that would most likely from Health Department's perspective trigger putting in an IA system but in this case 'it's clear it's an alternative and we have to get that design we also have to go for variance because obviously there's no way we can get 150 feet and it wouldn't have mattered CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN Between the well and the well. MIKE KIMACK : And it wouldn't have mattered whether we did or not because the wells on both sides are within 100 feet it's just the way the very nature of how tight this spot is. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : So that's from the Health Department. MIKE KIMACK : Yeah I mean we would not even if you didn't decide IA which they basically did you know CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : We have this don't we?You know what Kim do we BOARD ASSISTANT FUENTES : From the Trustees? I believe we do. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It's spelled out in the Trustees requirements. So the other question then that Mark raised was your application says a 30 foot non-disturbance buffer which is now explained but the survey shows a 50 foot. MIKE KIMACK : In essence that whole area once it's finished will be non-disturbance primarily. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Once it's planted. MIKE KIMACK : Once it's planted. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It will be 50 feet. MIKE KIMACK : Yes, it's just that we have to disturb it to get to the non-disturbance if it makes any kind of crazy sense but there's actually no way around that but we used that language because essentially that's what we really that's what the Trustees wanted to get at when we were all finished that area in front of the patio to the top of the bluff which represents the 50 May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting feet. By the time we're finished with everything that's it. The planting plan basically elucidates what's going to be there. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay so one of the things we observed when we were there individually was the fact that the front yard setback is sort of like what, there's no room I mean it's grass and dead ends in grass okay so we were figuring well what's the big deal I rather grant you a much bigger variance for a "front yard setback" and be more distanced from the bluff but you now explained you need it for the IA system. MIKE KIMACK : We need it for the IA system and also what we basically did what made it work for us was that because it's so tight there to run cars in and swing them around we wanted to be able to have that,U loop in there and we moved the road over to the other side of the right of way of the road coming in which is up against Peconic Land Trust which is on the other side there. By moving the road over we were (inaudible) to come in there and stick the L piece in that are right about 5 feet off the property it was the best we could do and also had to be 10 feet from the foundation anyway that was part of Health Department. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The IA system yeah. Okay I think we got it. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Kim do we have a stamped survey? I have an original survey from Ken Woychuk but it's'not stamped. MEMBER DANTES : Yeah it doesn't show an IA it shows a traditional. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Relative to that so that we're all speaking the same language the site plan was developed using the Woychuk survey but the site plan that we should be using is the one that you most recently delivered to the office. :BOARD ASSISTANT FUENTES : So this is the site plan which is stamped. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Which is the one that I have. CHAIRPEROSN WEISMAN : We have the planting plan and we've got the Trustees approval. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : That I didn't get. BOARD ASSISTANT FUENTES : Can you send that to us? MIKE KIMACK : Absolutely, I'll make a copy this afternoon and I'll I mean I know it says ST which is basically (inaudible) it really (inaudible) but the IA system is (inaudible) fact that the Trustees would not allow or the Health Department would not either than an IA system. May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting MEMBER DANTES : You're going to need a (inaudible) from the Health Department anyway right? MIKE KIMACK : Yes that was the next step but we didn't begin that process quite yet Eric cause I wanted to make sure Eric where the location of the house and everything else was going to be able to be acceptable to both the Trustees and Zoning Board before we actually went into a design phase which is a matter of fact my next stop after this meeting get together with the P.E. and get that one started. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well that bluff is sure (inaudible) holy mackerel it's completely unvegetated. MIKE KIMACK : Yeah I'm not quite sure who owns it, I'm not quite sure who cares for it but I suspect that my client probably will have to contribute CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :You're going to have to revegetate some of it. MEMBER PLANAMENTO But that's their property that's their responsibility. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I know now it is. MIKE KIMACK : Mike had said he didn't know who owned it. MIKE KIMACK : Well the road itself I'm not quite sure I can look at the tax map number I'm not quite sure they all have obviously a use of the road but I'm not quite sure CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : We're not talking about the road we're talking about the maintenance of the bluff. MIKE KIMACK : Oh the bluff, she knows that. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It's really a mess. MIKE KIMACK : It's interesting and I don't want to take up a lot of your time, you try to set back 100 feet on the assumption that nothing is going to be done to fix the bluff and then ultimately the bluff does cave in. It's never going to get to that severe state that's going to affect the construction of the house cause 100 feet in the code represents the town's best guess as keeping it back far enough so that it's never going to be interceded by the erosion of the bluff. She understands and I pointed it out to her basically the next step that she has to (inaudible) and get that. They're coming in they're beginning to loosen up in terms the kind of restorations we can do, I'm beginning to convince them that I can do a better job with stainless steel gabions (inaudible) and they're beginning to understand that so that's probably what (inaudible). 7 May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : This is not really related to variances or anything but I think some of us were just curious how in the world they're going to construct the swimming pool on the roof. MIKE KIMACK :Well you can, water basically is 3 lbs. per cubic foot. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It's heavy. MIKE KIMACK : It's heavy, I've seen it before I've designed it and built houses along that way. It's really much more,that's from a structural point of view of carrying (inaudible) I think it's an open pool anyway for the most part so that's okay it's not an enclosed pool but it's heavy, it's heavy. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : How deep is the pool? MIKE KIMACK : I'm not quite sure 5 or 6 feet I would imagine. The only place they could put (inaudible) confines of the house so there was no other place. MEMBER LEHNERT: (inaudible) leak? MIKE KIMACK : You know Rob you're right it's something that I wouldn't necessarily want to do primarily but as (inaudible) I didn't want to interrupt when you get into the storage area John Jarski will not allow sheet rock (inaudible) insulation and flip it so that the matte side of insulation is on the sheathing side of the roof that's it. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I know we've talked to him many, many times and we keep bouncing all over the place with this. It used to just be a bloody attic for crying out loud that's all it was just rafters.and MIKE KIMACK : I apologize for digressing. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : No that's fine I mean that's one of the things that we need to have clarified and that's when the architect should be doing that with the Building Department and making sure that they're doing whatever they're going to need to do to get a C.O. MIKE KIMACK : Well they're the original interpreters. CHAIRPERSON 'WEISMAN : And we've been trying to support what they interpret because that is their jurisdiction. MIKE KIMACK : Are there any other questions of me on this? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I don't think so. May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I have sort of a whole laundry list, I'm still puzzled about the pool, the depth cause when you look at the cross section is doesn't illustrate the pool and the sort of roofing'material that supports the roof terrace is about 2 feet according to the elevation so I don't understand how a pool can fit. MIKE KIMACK : He was absolutely aware we could not exceed the 35 foot from natural grade. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : It seems like the pergola it at 34.6 and that was just my rough (inaudible). CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : What about the chimney, it's a fireplace it's an open fireplace two sided fireplace. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : So Mike I know you mentioned the need for sanitary in the front and the IA system but looking at and I'm using the most recent site plan why couldn't you build a house you're seeking and getting rid of the rear yard bluff setback build it at 100 feet and there's a history of the neighbor to the west that was limited where the home needs to be constructed at 100 feet from the crest of the bluff, why wouldn't you be able to just seek a front yard setback? MIKE KIMACK : I am seeking a front yard setback. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Yeah but you're also seeking,,a secondary setback from the top of the bluff you're less than 100 feet. So start construction at 100 feet build a narrower house? MIKE KIMACK : I have a variance (inaudible) because your responsibility is limit the variances. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : And I'm trying to eliminate one. MIKE KIMACK : Well we can't. From our perspective the reason we can't is that I started at 40 feet from the town and basically in order to be the 100 feet with a 40 the house would be 12 feet wide. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Right but I said you can maybe keep the front yard setback at 30 feet and maintain the 100 and have like a 24 foot wide house that's similar to like Bombara. MEMBER DANTES : To your point Nick, I mean technically for something like this they could even put the septic tank under the driveway, they could MIKE KIMACK : No they don't allow that in the Health Department. They used to at one time Eric it used to be we can do (inaudible) MEMBER DANTES : Right.we saw someone do it last year. May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting MIKE KIMACK : They might have gotten a variance for it but every time I've gone to the Health Department they (inaudible) under at all. As a matter of fact one that I just got approved the tanks were under a walkway a wood walkway and they would not give the green stamp until they were moved. The walkway was moved away and that's a walkway forget about a driveway. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I'm currently applying for one where it's been approved where it's a drive over system an IA system. MEMBER DANTES : We saw one last year on Peconic Bay Blvd. was a drive over system. They had no other options!but MIKE KIMACK : I'm surprised I haven't had that success with that one Nick. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : So that's at least two that we're aware of. MEMBER DANTES : So he can get to maybe 10 feet off the front yard setback and MEMBER PLANAMENTO Well I don't know if we need to further reduce the front yard I mean at 30 feet that's reasonable that's the end of a private road there's nothing there and I think that the property is owned by the Land Trust. MIKE KIMACK : I think it is the Land Trust. The history of the 30 feet is a (inaudible) simply because when you take 10 feet away from the foundation and 5 feet from the property line and an 8 foot wide (inaudible) that's pretty much it in terms of what you can get in the front keeping it 10 and 8 and 5 added together that's pretty much it. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Again as I said there's the history of the property to the immediate west, not immediate I guess it's three lots over where the requirement is to build at 100 feet so you'd still have a substantial house. MIKE KIMACK : Yep except in that particular one that property there is much longer and much of the property to the west goes I think is 400 foot long it's a lot longer piece of property. This one is trumping it, this one is cutting off. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : You do have the benefit of the non-developed land of Peconic Land Trust right there so I think as Leslie said at the beginning MIKE KIMACK : No, no that's a right of way road it's 30 feet from the right of way road that's all MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Owned by the Peconic Land Trust along with the land to the south of it. May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting MIKE KIMACK : The only thing we can put on that is the driveway itself we can't put anything else on it. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I didn't suggest to build a house on it I'm suggesting to maintain the proposed 30 foot setback. MIKE KIMACK : We can maintain the 30 foot setback basically the way it's designed at the present time. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Right but the question was why can't you build a house at the 100 foot setback and maintain the 30 foot that you're requesting so you can eliminate one variance. MIKE KIMACK : Because the client has done everything in their power to we designed it a few times to give them the kind of house they would like. To still meet the criteria that you are judging on the setback primarily which has been found to be acceptable of the Trustees which you sent to them first for their analysis. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : You understand why, sometimes Trustees should go first. MIKE KIMACK : Yes. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I know you historically you said ZBA has wider jurisdiction and should probably go first and normally we do but we are seeing so many blown out bluffs, so much erosion, so much overdevelopment subprime properties out here because people come out with money and they want what they want and you know they're willing to pay you and variances and all that MIKE KIMACK : It's a difficult lot and I had to deal with lots that five or eight years ago were not even looked at but there aren't that many of them left you know. In this case though the Trustees and I'm going to bring out because they gave the original permit felt that the 80 foot represented to them at least the fact that would give the kind of protection that (inaudible) more of the bluff was lost and I have pointed out to my client I said, look you can't really afford to lose much more. I mean could you lose 10 or 20 feet sure but you don't want to. D.E.C. doesn't care about that. I mean I've had more than one conversation with D.E.C. on this matter with the State Senators and everybody else involved including the Chairman of the Trustees and D.E.C. would even prefer to have the slopes eroded because they're not going to be able to replenish the beach. So we do recognize she has to address any further that 80 feet back of what is the bluff now which has already probably eroded over the last three or four year perhaps ten or fifteen more feet I'm not quite sure but I think so. May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting MEMBER ACAMPORA : You have that big tree laying on MIKE KIMACK : On that one side. They felt that the 8 feet was in their case was sufficient primarily to meet the (inaudible) 100 feet no but it gives my client the kind of dwelling that she would like and at the same time protect the house and really the 100 feet is to protect the house from being perhaps you know taken down from the eroding beach from the eroding bluff and the 80 feet in their minds they feel that that was sufficient setback. We originally thought it was 67 we pushed it back 13 feet and still redesigned the house Nick to be fair and try to make it to fit within those corridors and still give the client the kind of place they're looking for at the end of a really rickety road to try to get in there. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : My teeth rattled just trying to just get down that way. I had the great pleasure of having torrential rain while I was down there. MIKE KIMACK : All my stakes were still in there though. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The stakes were there. MIKE KIMACK : I put them back and we don't have the hearings for three or four months and I said Kimack you gotta go back and make sure they're still standing. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : That's going to be another thing, how are they going to construct that whole thing? MIKE KIMACK : I think they're going to have to upgrade the road before they go back in there. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I would think so I mean really. MIKE KIMACK : To the benefit of everyone else on the road going in basically. It's a tough place to go. I guess at one time it was all just CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : cottages they were just summer cottage. MIKE KIMACK : To a large extent a couple of them still are for the most part. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : At the beginning there's one or two MEMBER ACAMPORA : Well you have the big one up there with the tennis court. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Right but that's like from the eighties. MIKE KIMACK : I did the one to the west Pat that you basically standing on the staircase (inaudible) and I was amazing because at that time the eroding already started. We got an approval from D.E.C. and Trustees for the staircase. May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : These folks are never going down to the water that's for sure. MIKE KIMACK : This is all about the view and (inaudible) bluff and the bluff be stabilized MEMBER ACAMPORA : Unless they fly. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Mike, did the applicant build the sort of sitting platform that's right at the bluff edge? MIKE KIMACK : I believe they did because it was fairly new however the Trustees MEMBER PLANAMENTO : The footings look new MIKE KIMACK : said get rid of it the platform is coming out. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It has to. MIKE KIMACK : As a matter of fact I had it on the original survey with them and my client asked me and I said leave it in until they tell us to take it out cause if I took it out and then they wanted to put it back in we would require a whole different one. It was less than the 200 sq. ft. (inaudible) but at the same time I left it in the Trustees told me to take it out so we did the survey and the site plan MEMBER PLANAMENTO : But that was built without a permit and all the footings under the house was also done without a permits correct? MIKE KIMACK : No the footing on the house I think was permitted to be pulled back. Originally the house was forward about 20 feet or so if I remember correctly and I wasn't involved exactly how they hired a contractor to get it up on steel beams and pull it back and then it was determined to be non-habitable and the power had to be cut to it and it's just been sitting there for some years now. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : But it seems like somebody's been living in there. MIKE KIMACK : They might have Nick at one time but not in the course of the time that I have been doing this permit application. God help them you'd be sitting over there and half of that's a steep slope. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Tell me about it. MIKE KIMACK : I went up to the end of it and I got within 5 feet and that's as close as I wanted to get because you don't know what's underneath it. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : You walk right off. May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting MIKE KIMACK : Well'because it's like this. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yes. MIKE KIMACK : She recognized it I pointed it out for them. Look to protect your own property you have to look at it from the point of view does the distance in a sense meet the criteria of setting it back far enough to make sure that the property is going to be preserved if erosion gets extensive. The Trustees found that to be the case, 80 feet in their minds 67 was not 80 fit the bill and pull it back and created the extra variance as a result. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :Anything from anybody else? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Mike I thought I saw on the application somewhere I didn't go back after the site visit, there was a discussion about the garage underneath the house but on the plans it might seem that MIKE KIMACK : There's no garage. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : It was written somewhere garage underneath, we'll look at that separately but there is no proposed garage? MIKE KIMACK : No, no garage everything is outside. I think it's a crawl space it's not a foundation at all it's a crawl space under there. And the parking, that's one of the reasons we looped the road Nick in order to have parking you know that way and that would be in and out (inaudible) but there's no garage. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN Alright anything else? MIKE KIMACK : I will get you a copy Kim I'll CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Of the Trustees thing yeah. I presume nobody is on Zoom. Okay 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 May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye. Motion to recess for lunch. All in favor? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Second CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER DANTES : Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Motion to reconvene, 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#7630,#7631 &7632 SV GREENPORT LLC, dba SOUND VIEW GREENPORT CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Good afternoon, we have three applications in a row for signs from the same applicant and so I'm going to actually open all three and read them at once it makes more sense instead of one by one by one, they're all interrelated. The first one is for SV Greenport LLC dba Sound View Greenport#7631.This a request for a variance from Article XIX Section 280-851)(5) and Section 280-851)(7) and the Building Inspector's October 20, 2021 amended December 2, 2021 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for a permit to remove an existing freestanding sign and install a new 72 sq. ft. freestanding sign identifying May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting business name at 1) sign shall not be more than 24 sq. ft. in size, 2) sign shall not be located less than 15 feet from the pavement or five feet from the sidewalk and shall not be placed in the public right of way located at 58855 CR 48 (adj. to Long Island Sound) in Greenport. The next one is at the same location under the same name, this is application #7632 and this is a request for variance from the same section of the code. The Building Inspector's January 4, 2022 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for a permit to install a 54 sq. ft. freestanding sign identifying business logo at 1) sign shall not be more than 24 sq. ft. located at 59725 CR 48 in Greenport. The third again the same applicant application #763. This is a request for variances for an application to install a new 54 sq. ft. freestanding sign, sign shall not be more than 24 sq. ft. Did I get that right? The one before that I knew that I was repeating. Application #7630 is a request for a variance from Section 280-86A(4) and in this case it's a permit to install a new 28 sq. ft. freestanding sign identifying the parking area as may be authorized by the Zoning Board of Appeals at the same location. Alright, is someone here to represent the applications? Please state your name for the record.. TOMMY NAPLES : I'm Tommy Naples with SV Greenport LLC. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Now I just want to ask you, did you get a copy of this Planning Board memorandum that was sent to the Zoning Board? It's basically we ask them for comments TOMMY NAPLES : No CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay then we're going to make sure you get it. It was sent on April 26th actually no it was sent earlier than that but we received a memorandum from them from the Chair of the Planning Board on April 26th. We send these out routinely for comments to related agencies so it went to the Planning Board it's all site plan (inaudible) I'll read you just for the record their comments. All they did was site the legal decisions, the Planning Board has reviewed to request for comments regarding the above referenced applications, the Board is in active discussions with the applicant to make the area as safe as possible for pedestrians. The proposed sign placement, size and wording may contribute to this effort and therefore the Planning Board would like to request more time to comment on these applications. I think when were they meeting?They were meeting I think Monday. MEMBER LEHNERT : This week some time. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : This week, so we should be getting them soon but the point is we'll hear whatever it is that you have to say that you would like us to consider and then we will adjourn until we get their comments and then we'll (inaudible). Then you'll have an opportunity to respond. If we have more questions as a result we'll just roll this over to the May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting next hearing which would be about a month from now so we can address whatever issues come up with you and the Planning Board. TOMMY NAPLES : Yea so just a couple of comments, we are in active discussions with the Planning Department. I haven't seen the specific letter but we've been in communication regarding items to make the area safer in terms of like other signage and asphalt line stripping things of that sort that are I guess to tie it all together but they're not related. They're not on these three signs so that's why I'm particularly interested in the letter that you might have form them. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I read you exactly what it says. They want more time because we asked them for comments. These are not their comments it's just saying we are looking at it, we need to send you written and you'll get a copy of those written comments. TOMMY NAPLES : So they had a number of other comments regarding not the ZBA type stuff that we're working together with and we also need some more time as it involves third parties and things of that sort but on these three particular signs yes they are requiring a variance. We've spoken to various agencies at Suffolk County and the Town of Southold but the Planning Department is just simply asked for mock ups of these signs which I guess have requested of other applicants in the past. So we did have (inaudible) a few months ago where we did have these (inaudible) and walked the whole property with them for over an hour and they took pictures. It helped us as well as them to understand placement and all sorts of things so there was three variances and I guess 7630 which would be the one on the south side that's where all of our parking is. Because of its zoning you're not permitted any type of signage over there but a lot,of our parking is on the south side of the street and so when you're driving on CR 48 its 55 miles per hour. Some of these other crosswalk signs and things of that sort we really need to draw awareness to the south side parking, without the sign there I'm not sure how people would know it's available. So that is why we're disapproved for the first one and obviously it's just going back to pedestrian safety creating awareness type thing for why we would like to proceed with that. The next one was 7631, this is the larger sign it's basically right outside where our hotel lobby yes that one there that's the design. So again it's the 24 sq. ft. which is the max. required we just our signage design we played around with all different sorts of configurations and we feel that this is what we're most comfortable with and what would be the most value for our money to construct these type of signs. So again we've played with this, we've moved it around this is where it finally landed after our mock up date with the Planning Board but it's again larger than what the town permits but we think that its relevant here because of the road, it will draw awareness and help people get to where they need to with their turn essentially. There's the valet lot on the left, there's parking on the right we also have another lot further down the street. So then the May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting third one is very similar to that sign just a little smaller but it's at you know we have four tax lots here. At the other end of the property going east is another sign very similar, similar scenario we just felt the sign didn't need to be as large because really it's when you're driving westward it helps there's actually a parking right before the sign but it also helps you to like oh here's the hotel, here's the restaurant let's start to slow down now we see where the property is and then up ahead is where you would turn right to go to the valet lot or turn left to go into the parking. So those are the three variances, our highest level are two of them are notably larger than what is written in the code and the other one just doesn't permit signs on a lot that we have parking that we would like to include there. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well if we look at the last one that you're talking about that's 8 foot 3 inches tall. TOMMY NAPLES : Yes it's I mean the structures sizes are 72 on largest and 54 on the medium. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :That's the square footage. TOMMY NAPLES : The square footage yeah. They're notably high to a accommodate all the language and (inaudible) include but yeah the large one is 12 feet and the second one is MEMBER DANTES :Twelve feet tall? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yeah look MEMBER DANTES : That's almost a 1 % story(inaudible) CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : And they're meant to be illuminated, shielded lighting underneath that canopy on the top? TOMMY NAPLES : It's all described in the Plan docs but you can see it in the upper right, the light will come down„and it would be picture of the (inaudible) shine down all three will be illuminated the same way. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well one of the things that you're saying in your application is that because 48 is basically a fast road people need to have something really large to catch their attention. I've lived here for thirty five years and I've never once well actually forty five years I've never once missed the Sound View with its awning, with the name on the building because it stops you by virtue of what it is and then there's a big open parking lot. It's a completely open visible area. I certainly think it would improve safety for pedestrians and drivers is important but you are asking for massive variances. I don't have a problem with putting a sign at the parking you know even though it's not permitted except by ZBA approval that makes perfectly good sense. They'll know that it's related to your business operation and May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting that's where they can park their car cause it is other than kind of two story units that you've got it's hard to figure it out now that you've landscaped and all that but these are really, really major and that's why in part we're waiting for comments from the Planning Board, certainly we want to promote safety and the way you have it designed it still complies it looks like it to me to dark sky requirements it's shielded lighting. I don't mind that it's lit either because you won't see it at night if it's not but you know they're very close to the road, they're very, very tall and they're very big. If your justification is that's the font size you wanted to get all the wording you wanted on it maybe you should simplify the wording and reduce the size of the sign a bit. MEMBER ACAMORA : Maybe this sign shouldn't be dark, it's actually dark. TOMMY NAPLES : Is it the height itself or is it the structure itself? MEMBER DANTES : We never approved a sign variance TOMMY NAPLES : Oh it's always been to code. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : We have done one or two very minor ones, we mostly disapprove them Eric is right but we actually approved a wall mural for a fish a while ago as you recall which has not appeared. Are you planning to how many signs do you need for the Halyard and for the restaurant and you know the hotel TOMMY NAPLES : Aside from the letters on the there's like four tax lots there's no signs on the south side,there's the basically the only thing we have right now is the CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The awning well TOMMY NAPLES : Yeah the awning and then the letters on the top of a very long building. MEMBER LEHNERT : We are saying we've basically agreed that they should have a sign on the south side (inaudible) additional signs and it has to comply. Like Eric already said we've never really approved sign variances. So is there any precedent you can quote, any past variances I mean anything? TOMMY NAPLES : I'm not familiar with the Town of Southold I'm not familiar with the history of what you approved or not approved in terms of signage. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I think you can look around if you drive around town you'll get a pretty good sense of signage. May 5,2022 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Where signs appear to be greater are like at shopping malls like King Kullen where there's several names listed on a larger sign because there's multiple businesses but we turned down for Capital Bank cause they had too many on the property. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : and the gas station. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The gas station that wanted to eliminate from inside a very tall sign, it's intrusive and you know we're trying to preserve what scenic vistas we have left in the town as best we can. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : So I heard the Chairperson ask you a question relative to the ridge sign the standing letters and the Halyard fish, are you still proposing to install the signs? TOMMY NAPLES : The letters were done years ago those are on the very long CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN .:Jack Levin did those letters. TOMMY NAPLES : So that says Sound View and then the fish is more like an artistic thing it's going to be outside the main restaurant building it's just like a painted some artist is going to come in and paint it. It just needs some prep work so it's been kind of on hold we still have like another year and a half to get it done. So the fish there's a little awning that says Halyard you don't really see this when you're driving by and then there's the Sound View letters which if you're coming west I think they appear more. There used to be an old sign there that was pretty large and it was on close if you guys remember I don't know the exact dimensions of that one but it was also very tall maybe probably in like 9 feet it was like on posts and then it had a smaller still large but MEMBER LEHNERT : Do you have any documentation of that, old permit? TOMMY NAPLES : No we acquired the property we didn't have that was we have pictures of it or if you look at old pictures of the Sound View you'll see a sign and it's a typical post with a sign on it. Unfortunately we don't have like the height dimensions on that one. I mean we would we just felt that the 24 sq. ft. is a little small for our specific property I mean maybe if you're not comfortable with this size in don't know if there's an up to that you can approve but really like especially that main one the ones on the north side like 24 sq. ft. there would be I mean I'm not sure you're going to see that. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I don't know how you can miss the hotel there's plenty of signage. I understand you want to make things under the new (inaudible) but it just seems excessive I mean what is the hardship you can't miss the hotel. May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting TOMMY NAPLES : (inaudible) past the property then you got people trying to go into that next street or into people's parking lots and turning around and coming back so if you're comfortable with that but otherwise (inaudible) slow down like you see like you're coming west or going east you see the sign (inaudible) to slow down there's the valet lot, there's parking, there's that and then you're easing your turn otherwise you might see all this new landscaping and the roof of the building and glimpses of the water you need some sign and we just felt that it should be a little larger than what's there. When the Planning Board we had five or six people there that day they took a bunch of pictures and notes so I'm sure their feedback CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yeah that's going to be very helpful. Well the first variance for the parking lot okay there's no sign over there, it's about 7 feet high is what you're proposing. However not I don't know how this works how can it be about 7 feet high maybe I'm wrong on the parking it's 28 sq. ft. instead of 24 sq. ft. so it can't be 7 feet high, I got something wrong here. I mean that's not that big of a variance. TOMMY NAPLES : It's because it's kind like if you see the sign like (inaudible) somewhere else so it's for whatever reason the Building Department's Disapproval I guess they only listed the one but I mean if it's still just about the required dimensions. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN .: The first one, parking lot 1 yes it's 28 instead of 24 sq. ft. that's not a huge variance and it's not permitted on that lot unless we authorize it. That one is kind of clear. Now the visual impact we're going to wait and see what the Planning Board says. You see the scale over there way on the right that's very different that's way over on the left. MEMBER DANTES : (inaudible) parking lot is that the registration? MEMBER LEHNERT : Across the street on the south side. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : No it's the one that's on the south side. MEMBER LEHNERT : I would say you know 28 sq. ft. it needs to be 24 sq. ft. why can't it be 24? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It possibly could be, I'm just saying I'm trying to get clear (inaudible) variances are so let's just review that for the record for clarity that's application 7630 that's the parking. So there's two things that need to happen there, a size variance and an approval to locate,a sign on that side. MEMBER DANTES : You said that that one is 28 sq. ft., I'm just thumbing through the packet it says 12 X 6. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : No that's a different that's not May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting MEMBER LEHNERT : No 4 X 7 TOMMY NAPLES (inaudible) slightly larger the Building Department only listed the one variance I guess (inaudible) but that's also one that CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Which one are you talking about 7630? TOMMY NAPLES : The parking lot. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : They listed two things, well one was the size and then the other is as may be authorized as a variance. So in other words we really have to look at two things, a. you can have a sign and be at that size. TOMMY NAPLES : (inaudible) and it be slightly larger. MEMBER DANTES : If they can have a sign is an easy question. MEMBER LEHNERT : Yes I agree. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I think it's perfectly appropriate to have a parking sign it's just a matter of where you're putting it and how big is it? MEMBER DANTES : Why not slide it back 5 more feet and conform to the 24 sq. ft.? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well it's not a setback variance. MEMBER DANTES :That was the other one that was a setback? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : That's why I'm going through this one at a time okay. So we got the first one the parking,' it's not a setback it's just can they have the sign and it is okay to be 28 instead of 24 sq. ft. The second one is 7631 okay and this one is 24 sq. ft. is allowed it's 72 sq. ft. and it's located 10 feet from the edge of the pavement instead of 15 feet okay and it's 12 feet high. Let me go on to the next one to make sure we're all understanding what's being TOMMY NAPLES :The third one is for size. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The third one is 54 sq. ft. instead of 24 sq. ft. but that one is 8 foot 3 inches tall. I don't know that there's what did someone say 9 feet? BOARD ASSISTANT FUENTES : 9 feet CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The 54 sq. ft. sign is 9 feet tall? MEMBER LEHNERT : Yeah 9 feet. May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : There were so many repeated drawings in each one that I had to kind of sort them out to see which one was which application because they're all kind of the same.Alright well those are the three and are you planning to remove other than the one that you got now that just says SV Greenport that's kind of like at the western end of the property on the north side, that one you're planning to remove? TOMMY NAPLES : There's only like-today there's just the awning, there's the letters and then like at the far east end by what turns into the condos or whatever there's a little sign CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yes TOMMY NAPLES : I think you said no one sees it that's very small. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Your application says you're planning to remove them, is that correct? TOMMY NAPLES : Yes there's no need for that. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Alright I'm just asking. TOMMY NAPLES : This is what we would like to do you know once you receive feedback from Planning I mean if there is some we had a lot of feedback over the last year but I mean if there is some like up to like 24 you know (inaudible) prior instances cause I guess it sounds like there might have been one you approved on signage variances but like it could be if you feel comfortable going a little bigger than 24 but maybe not what we propose I think that would still be valuable to us. It's just we would have to I think (inaudible) of this scale you probably have to go back to a post probably and then the sign I guess itself is what your code is it can only be 24 sq. ft. that's like where the problem starts now so that's what we would see how much larger we can go. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay well we will you know just wait for their comments. We've all seen the property we've all been there and have gone past a million times for many years enjoying the food and all that. Are you planning to leave the letters on the top of the building? TOMMY NAPLES : Yes, in the end aside from these three signs and I mean the two signs on the inevitably we will have two signs on the north side where we're proposing whether the bigger one you know if we can't do 10 it'll be 15 but ultimately we will have two signs there you know it'll be whether it's what we want or allowed to do and then the south side if we are approved it'll be that sign and then the letters Sound View which on that building is just (inaudible) there's not even parking there. Then there's the awning outside the restaurant, hotel lobby that says Halyard, then (inaudible) traffic which is also all of this still fits conforms May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting to like having two or three signs on our tax lot or whatever so we don't run into that issue but then there would be no other signs. The only other signs are all the different Planning Board, Suffolk County type yield to pedestrian, crosswalk those type of signs. What you see there now are what they would like to put in the median and that sort. MEMBER ACAMPORA : This is the problem in the town and this is what people yes you know we welcome the businesses and everything else but you're going to have signs for the business, then you're going to have signs for yielding for the crosswalk, then there's going to be speed limit signs -it becomes sign pollution and this is what people don't want to see. So you really have to kind of think about it in the whole of what you're going to have. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : You certainly are going to whatever signs you put up you're going to have to remove some of that landscaping that you put in. Those trees are way too tall, they're interfering with site lines. TOMMY NAPLES : We identified that when we did the markups of the plan. The bigger sign regardless of what ends up there, I think all the ones we've put like a little red line on the one page that shows like we're going we have a landscape architect and all that that can help us identify what exactly it's like SLO-3 at the bottom right of the page the very end almost, they identified that where the placement of the sign there's going to be some of the berm and landscaping would need to we're going to replace it with something shorter and move it things of that sort. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : That's what site planning is all about when you do one thing and it messes up the plans for the future to do something else. Okay is there anyone in the audience who wants to address the application? Is there anyone on Zoom Liz? Okay I'm just going to make a motion to adjourn let me indicate the numbers, application #7630, application #7631 and application #7632 I'll adjourn it to the Special Meeting which is in two weeks. We'll see if we get comments by then, then we'll see if we need to adjourn it to the next hearing date so that we can discuss it or on the other hand I can just adjourn this to next month's hearing. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Maybe next month's to give more time. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : That might be better cause that way when we get the comments then we make sure you get a copy and you can be prepared and you can address all of this all at once. MEMBER LEHNERT : And in the meantime if you can find any background information that helps your case, old variances you know anything any sort of precedent. May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Alright I'm going to make a motion then to adjourn this hearing to June 2nd. Kim would you please make sure that the applicant has a copy of this from the Planning Board and then we'll make sure that when we get comments from them they'll probably give them to you as well but its addressed to us so we'll make sure you get a copy. TOMMY NAPPLES : Normally they send us but we didn't receive that one we received other letters. So I assume CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : They're only asking for more time basically. TOMMY NAPLES : Okay so I assume they needed more time so they just don't have to roll over but (inaudible) CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Is there a second on the motion? MEMBER LEHNERT : Second CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER DANTES : Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye. HEARING#7623—RICHARD and SUZANNE ROTHWELL CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next application before the Board is for Richard and Suzanne Rothwell #7623. This is a request for variances from Article III Section 280-15, Article XXIII Section 280-124 and the Building Inspector's December 5, 2021 amended December 29, 2021 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for a permit to demolish and construct an accessory garage and construct an accessory in-ground swimming pool at 1) garage located less than the code required minimum side yard setback of 5 feet, 2) garage located less than the code required minimum rear yard setback of 3 feet, 3) more than the code permitted maximum lot coverage of 20% located at 1255 Hobart Rd. in Southold. Is there someone here to represent the application? Please come to the podium and state your name for us. May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting RICHARD ROTHWELL : Thank you everyone, good afternoon my name is Richard Rothwell I'm here with my wife Suzanne. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Nice to meet you both. So we have an accessory garage with a 3 foot setback where the code requires a minimum of 5 this is the new one you're proposing and lot coverage of 23.5% where the code allows a maximum of 20%.We have three letters of support from your neighbors just so you know they're part of our record we did get them. You're going to remove the current garage and shed is that correct? RICHARD ROTHWELL : Yes CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay just so you know we've all been out individually and visited your property, we've inspected what's around it what's next to it, what's on the other side of the fence and let's see what questions is there anything you'd like to tell us before we see what questions the Board might have? RICHARD ROTHEWELL : Well our present garage is not repairable we looked at it and tried to believe me if I could fix it up I would have done it but the bottom plates are all rotted and the whole concrete foundation falling apart. We looked at it and said well let's try and put the garage kind of one project because our grandchildren enjoy coming out going to the beach and said we'll do something else and have a pool. We have a pool in Massapequa but it's an above ground and ready to go. We love Southold, we come out here and so enjoy it, it's beautiful and what we want to do is put in a small pool an in-ground pool so I was trying to keep the garage over as much as I could and yet respecting the code (inaudible) so I was (inaudible) with like 3 feet I know they want 5 feet but my neighbors are all about 3 feet in fact my current garage in the back is only 1 % feet away from there I don'tknow if you had a chance to go back there. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : We did I snuck through that little sideways but I got through. RICHARD ROTHWELL : Oh it's very tight. So all that would be better because what actually because the 3 foot on one side and we move the shed and put the garage in, the garage almost stays the same footprint it just comes over a little bit and the back will actually come back a little bit cause it's 1 % it'll go to 3 feet. I'm trying to squeeze everything there and make it as you see from the other renovations I've done to the house it was originally we bought in 2011 we really fixed it up. Again the grandchildren come out, my children so we had to go a four bedroom and two baths in the house and yet keep the character of the house as we did with the round door. My neighbors requested that we have a round door so we did that. So we tried to make it and keep the character of the neighborhood. The garage is going to be the same way, we're going to try to do cedar shake, we're maintaining the height of the 18 feet I May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting think it might be 17 or 18 feet. The pool we're trying to keep it as small as we can and yet still have safety waking around the entire pool and respect our neighbors. I have a 10 foot setback from the rear Charles he's the owner of the back house and the side the (inaudible) Helen and Tom we're going to have 12 feet on that side, so maintaining the perimeter requirements there. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : So on that property line where you know it's a side yard everything else is very screened I mean there's a massive hedgerow in the back there provides a lot of privacy. I'm just wondering are you planning to do any landscaping along that edge cause it's pretty open to your neighbor's view? RICHARD ROTHWELL : On the north side yeah I've talked Helen CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The top where the 10 foot setback RICHARD ROTHWELL : and Tom about that and they rather just have cause they don't want. anything against the garage there's actually 3 fee there that's why it's 3 feet plus 12 is actually 15 feet and I discussed that with them and whatever they want me to do but you know again we're thinking of putting a little umbrella there and some chairs to sit on that side cause that'll be the sunny side of the pool there. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yeah I'm not talking about where the garage is cause that's already the garage itself shields the pool. RICHARD ROTHWELL : The top part. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I'm talking about if you go down that side property line toward the front of your house on the rear property line right in there it gets pretty sparse and open. I was just wondering if you had any thoughts about for your own privacy sticking in some more RICHARD ROTHWELL : Oh I kind of wanted that for the children to play the grandchildren if they wanted to play. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It's not going to take up any room I'm talking about just putting in you know small hedge or something like that. RICHARD ROTHWELL : I can do that my wife actually mentioned that on the side I think that you're talking about looking from my porch to the left. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yeah RICHARD ROTHWELL : You're talking about looking from my porch to the left? May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yeah RICHARD ROTHWELL : Okay yes my wife actually mentioned we have some privacy there so I would put some CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Cause it's pretty open I mean for your sakes SUZANNE ROTHWELL : We discussed putting some I'm sorry Suzanne Rothwell, we discussed putting some bushes to give each of us privacy. RICHARD ROTHWELL : Again I would discuss with Helen and Tom and make sure that they're happy with that. Everything we've done with the house we've always discussed with the neighbors and tried to keep everything and everyone happy. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well we know that it's an older neighborhood, there's a lot of non- conformities, there's a lot of accessory structures there with non-conforming setbacks. In fact it looks like the one behind you is even closer I mean it's like on top of that fence. RICHARD ROTHWELL : That's Charles again he years ago we discussed that with when we first moved there that's when we put some of those bushes up. I actually put a new fence I got to know him when we put the fence up. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : On your other side yard you see on the bottom here that fencing is on your property isn't it the stockade fence? RICHARD ROTHWELL : It's on both its kind of mixed. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Some is on yours and some is on the neighbors? MEMBER LEHNERT : (inaudible) survey CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yeah that's why I was wondering whose it is. RICHARD ROTHWELL : Yeah well actually next to the Smiths it's the Smiths he's talking about replacing that I just saw him the other day he talked about replacing it. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yeah caused some of is real dilapidated part of it is over by your garage, existing garage that thing is falling apart. RICHARD ROTHWELL,: Yes we're going to work on that. I guess if he can't do it I'll do it. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well just do yourself and us a favor, put it on either his property and it belongs to him or your property and it belongs to you because when things straddle that's when we get into all kinds of issues with if you ever want to sell the house I mean May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting anything that's before the Zoning Board we try to help neighbors become conforming and make sure that everything is accurately noticed with Certificates of Occupancy and all of that so that we don't run into trouble down the line. Alright let's see any questions Pat? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Yea there's nothing on the survey showing where the pool mechanicals and the de-watering would be. RICHARD ROTHWELL : The de-watering I understand if you have a filter system you know to take (inaudible) you don't need one of them that's what I was told but that's what I asked (inaudible). We were thinking of placing it on the side of the house I think that maybe (inaudible) doing in there in the package but they were going to be CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I think there was something in there. RICHARD ROTHWELL : That's going on how do I say the north side of the house against our house. I was thinking of putting it in the garage if the pool will let me do MEMBER DANTES : You can. MEMBER ACAMPORA : Yeah you put the mechanicals in there. RICHARD ROTHWELL : I was trying to say that was another reason why I was expanding the garage to think about putting it in there but there were pros and cons about that. I was thinking I was going to have what do you call heater. MEMBER DANTES : Electric? RICHARD ROTHWELL : Electric heater I don't know if you put it it's a heat pump I don't know if you can put that inside.That's my question, I have to make sure of that. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : This is your no it doesn't show RICHARD ROTHWELL : Off to that side of the house is where I'm thinking of putting it. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : On the side of your house. RICHARD ROTHWELL : Yeah right on the side of the house which still gives us over 20 feet of I thought it was only 10 feet the zoning code I see sometimes it's funny. MEMBER DANTES : For what? RICHARD ROTHWELL': To keep the pool off your property line the pool pump. MEMBER DANTES : Each (inaudible) May 5,2022'Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It depends on that but here's what we've been doing, one big problem neighbors always have with pools aside from things we can't fix which are grandchildren laughing and screaming because we all have screaming grandchildren so many of us do that's what they do for a living make noise. We can't do anything about that that's just what it is. With:the pump equipment it used to be that the pump equipment was pretty noisy you know it was like an air conditioner going off and if it was really close to the neighbors it can get,very annoying you know sometimes it goes off in two in the morning, you backwash and all that stuff. So we have for a long time been requiring that they either the equipment be contained in a sound deadening container, it could be in the garage, it could be in a box that was built something to just soften that for your sake so you can sleep at night as well as the neighbor. We have now been informed by the Building Department that if you are set back a certain number of feet from a property line it will do the same job. So that's a standard kind of condition that the Board imposes on any swimming pool. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : May I ask a quick question, when you expanded the house did you put a new sanitary or septic system in? RICHARD ROTHWELL : Yes we did do that yes. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Where is the septic system? RICHARD ROTHWELL : On the side away from the MEMBER PLANAMENTO : On the side with your neighbor that you call Tom and Mary the north side? RICHARD ROTHWELL : Yea on that side. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : And where is it exactly? RICHARD ROTHWELL : It comes off before the porch where the first room is down there the first room off the house the main house off of that and then down the side. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : It probably should be shown- on the survey. RICHARD ROTHWELL;: Can I come over there and look? Keep going that way where the house is over here. Yes, yes over there. I do have similar requests other appeals, I did my research on like one grant was ZBA 7564 and that had a 2.75 foot in the side yard and then I have down a few other ones I don't know if you want me to read them all. MEMBER DANTES : Please. RICHARD ROTHWELL : I can give you a copy of it. May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Alright why don't you just do that just submit a copy. That's very helpful RICHARD ROTHWELL : It's on my speaking points but I really didn't follow it. Then the same thing with grant relief for lot coverages. It was very hard cause a lot of different things I was looking up (inaudible) but there was a lot of I saw a lot of them was 25%, 23%, 27.3%, 22%, 23% all of which required 20%. All was in the R-40 zoning which you know CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Same as yours. Well right in that whole neighborhood which is an old neighborhood RICHARD ROTHWELL : It's a great neighborhood. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yeah it's a wonderful well established neighborhood and you know a lot of those houses pre-date zoning, I mean zoning was in 1957. RICHARD ROTHWELL : That's what I said I think the garage was 1950 and it was if I could have saved it I just it's not safe so I want to make that and I want to get rid of the sheds and the square footage actually will be a little less than what I have but it's enough to put the bicycles in and all the toys to keep everybody happy. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : While you're on the garage, do you propose any utilities not utilities any plumbing in the garage? RICHARD ROTHWELL : No, no. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Any conditioned space? RICHARD ROTHWELL : No it's all going to be just what it is today that's a good idea but CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : You are allowed as of right to have a half bathroom in a garage. RICHARD ROTHWELL : Oh really? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Not a shower but you can have a toilet and a sink in a garage, you can apply for a building permit and you can get a building permit and you can have it in there. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : You also need Suffolk County Board of Health approval. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : You need Health approval yes from the Health Department because of the septic. MEMBER LEHNERT : You have to tie into it's like a May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Cause you have a toilet in there and a sink but just so you know. Also be very careful with the pool person you have to be set back a certain number of feet a swimming pool from the existing septic. RICHARD ROTHWELL : Yes MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Well that's why I was asking for the location. On the side it seems like it exceeds 25 feet. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It's not a ton of distance but there's so many regulations that we try to be to the extent that we can help applicants to let you know to make sure that you're all conforming to whatever you have to do cause people don't know. RICHARD ROTHWELL : We looked at all of that. The pool company came and looked that's why the pool is only 6 feet by CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It's a very modestly sized pool and we appreciate that cause some people ask for a whole lot more assuming they're going to get a whole lot with us. It's better to ask for what you really need RICHARD ROTHWELL : Well we tried to be reasonable, everything we did we tried to be reasonable. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : And then you'll have basic electricity in the garage? RICHARD ROTHWELL : Yes it will have basic there's a circuit there now. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Then the question that I have I know that you addressed your neighbors and you know just the site constrictions but why can't you make the garage conform by moving it back 2 feet from the side lot line and from the rear yard it really doesn't impact anything? RICHARD ROTHWELL : The front rear yard is 1 %foot now so I'm actually moving it back a little bit it'll be actually helping it building it 3 foot and I'm trying to keep it from coming too far forward so we have a nice entrance. The (inaudible) gate if you look at that survey where it shows proposed pool MEMBER PLANAMENTO : It shows proposed pool gate. RICHARD ROTHWELL : Yeah there's a pool gate it's kind of tight as it is now it's not really open to the porch so we're trying to do that and by moving it over the other way where the side yard I'm just taking away from that area. It's 26 now with the pool I'm trying to keep some space there to have like a little sitting area every foot is valuable. May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting MEMBER PLANAMENTO : (inaudible) 12 foot side of the pool it would just seem to me there's no reason why you couldn't make the garage conform which would take away two of the three variances you're seeking. RICHARD ROTHWELL : If I could then I wouldn't be here today cause I'm trying to you know maximize the use of the yard to (inaudible) and keep in mind the neighbors are all within 2 feet and whatever so I thought it would be reasonable to just ask for 2 feet. I saw the requirement and in fact you know originally they said you had to be 10 feet and I looked up the code myself and got it down to 5 cause I'm just over 10,000 square footage I'm 10,000 and change that's why I'm here today because I'm just trying to maximize the little space. Every foot helps you know real estate is valuable and trying to move it over would be useful. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : And then what about reducing the garage from the 17 feet to 15? RICHARD ROTHWELL : I thought of that but then you know what happens is, what do people do let's see they want to put stuff in the sheds but the (inaudible) sheds you look at some of the pictures I put in there but you tend to put junk on the side of the house or the side of the garage so I'm trying to keep that path clean because if you look the way it is now well you saw a three foot is a nice reasonable distance I feel and yet compromise (inaudible) with the code and everything and what we have today. I mean if all the garages were like 5 to 10 feet away it would probably but because they're all in that time frame of the fifties you know they were all built at 2 feet and yet reasonable and you put a fence up around it so you're hiding everything anyway that is there. Like I said it was granted previous ones similar appeals I thought that would be the best way to approach it. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay just submit the list of prior ZBA decisions, we can make a copy so you can have it yourself if you want. RICHARD ROTHWELL : No I have a copy. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay, anything else from the Board on this? Anybody on Zoom Liz? 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 PLANAMENTO : Second CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER DANTES : Aye May 5,2022 Regular Meeting MEMBER LEHNERT: Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye. HEARING#7618— ESTATE OF CHARLOTTE PENZA CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next application before the Board is for the Estate of Charlotte Penza #7618. This is a request for a waiver of merger petition under Article II Section 280-10A to unmerge land identified as SCTM #1000-78-3-56 which has merged with SUM #1000-78-3- 57 based on the Building Inspector's November 9, 2021 Notice of Disapproval which states that a non-conforming lot shall merge with an adjacent conforming or non-conforming lot held in common ownership with the first lot at any time after July 1, 1983 and that non- conforming lots shall merge until the total lot size conforms to the current bulk schedule requirements (minimum 40,000 sq. ft. in the R-40 Residential Zoning District) located at 1395 Hiawatha's Path in Southold. Would you state your name for the record. CARL LAWRENCE : Good afternoon, my name is Carl Lawrence I am the attorney for the applicant the Estate of Charlotte Penza. As you say we are seeking a waiver of merger under Section 280-10A. Firstly I'd like to state that I submitted a green return receipt card hopefully that is now part of the record. I have a number of exhibits that I'm going to ask to introduce and I have all the copies for the Board. Should I hand that up now? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Give it to Kim and she'll distribute it to us. CARL LAWRENCE : So the two lots involved in the application are vacant lot at 1395 Hiawatha's Path which is tax lot 56 and the adjoining improved lot with a single family dwelling at 1505 Hiawatha's Path tax lot 57. I'm present on behalf of the owner is Ellen Krakenbush she is the executor of the estate of Charlotte Penza. She is a daughter of Charlotte Penza and William Penza and the granddaughter of Joseph Beck and Mercedes Beck and they are the only property owners of these two lots since 1965. 1 ask the Board to look at the single and separate title searches. When I submitted the application it was identified I believe is number four and along with that I'm submitting (inaudible) the death certificate (inaudible) Penza for her parents it shows (inaudible) and it has merged (inaudible) which was her maiden name but that shows that she was the daughter of Joseph and Mercedes Beck. So the progression of the deeds is that the vacant lot was deeded to Joseph Beck and Mercedes Beck May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting in 1965 and then that lot was deeded to their daughter and her husband Charlotte Penza and William Penza in 1971 and then just to Charlotte Penza alone in 2005.The improved lot tax lot 57 was separately deeded to Joseph Beck and Mercedes Beck in 1965 and then deeded to their daughter and her husband Charlotte Penza and William Penza in 1989 and then just solely to Charlotte Penza in 2005. So each of the lots has always been held in single and separate ownerships since 1965 and neither lot has ever been transferred out of the family since 1965 and on that (inaudible) I believe that it's eligible for a waiver of merger. Then the code has a three part test, one that the waiver would recognize the lot comparable in size for majority of improved lots in the neighborhood. So the second exhibit that I handed out is a section of the Suffolk County property tax map and this shows essentially this portion of Hiawatha's Path as well as the adjoining street Wabbasso St. So the two lots that are the subject of this application both have 105 foot frontage and approximately 137 foot depth and those dimensions are extremely comparable to almost of the other lots on this portion of Hiawatha's Path as well as to the lots on Wabasso St. which are sort of to the rear of the other side of Hiawatha's Path and so if we did the calculations I think the 105 by 137 is essentially the same as almost all of those lots. Number two, that the proposed lots be unmerged it's vacant and has historically been treated and maintained as a separate and independent residential lot since it was created. So we do have some photos that were submitted with the application as well as the photos submitted with the posting of the signs and we also have as part of the application the surveys which are that is of the improved lot and we also have the Assessor's property cards which show that these two lots have been maintained but listed with the Town of Southold that's separate and (inaudible) residential lots since 1965. I've also just submitted four sets or four different years of real estate tax rolls for the two properties going back to 1968, 1988, 1996 and 2017 which reflect that they've been listed as separate individual residential tax lots throughout that time. So tax lot 56 which is the unimproved lot has always been an undeveloped vacant scrub woodland. There is a small shed tool shed which is near the northeast along the boundary Line of the improved lot at 1505 Hiawatha's Path and the owner has agreed that they would remove that shed if the waiver of merger is granted. Number three, that the proposed lot and its recognition will not create an adverse impact on the physical and environmental conditions in the neighborhood or the district. There are no environmental issues that pertain to these two lots (inaudible) wetlands anything of that kind and I think as we've already said and shown that the unmerger would recognize the lot that is substantially similar to the bulk of the lots in the (inaudible). Finally, I had submitted a list and the actual decisions of prior ZBA grants of waiver of mergers which I believe support the application here and particularly I ask the Board to look at ZBA #7523 from 2021 which also involved a property which had a shed on the unimproved lot where the waiver of merger was granted. So I ask the Board to grant the application respectfully and we can answer any questions you may have. May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Nick let's start with you. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I didn't realize that the Becks were I guess Mrs. Krakensbush's grandparents. CARL LAWRENCE : Yes MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Just so that I can understand this, I was just flipping through the title report again, on July 1, 1983 that's the date that the merger occurred because both properties were in fact owned by the Becks or at the time were alive. CARL LAWRENCE : I believe actually 1971 was the deed to William and Charlotte Penza of the vacant lot. So if we look at the single and separate searches which I believe was item number four in the application MEMBER PLANAMENTO : So the Penza's owned it in 1971 you're correct on that. CARL LAWRENCE : The Becks still owned the improved lot. In 1989 the improved lot with the house was deeded to Charlotte and William Penza. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :Then to Charlotte Penza in 2005. CARL LAWRENCE : Correct actually in 2005 it was sort of senior planning you might call it. Mr. Penza passed away a couple of years after. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : So it seemed then the waiver rather the merger actually occurred when the Penza's acquired the house in 1989. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Do we want to ask John about this, there was a quirky little law that happened when the merger thing took when the merger law went into effect which is pretty unique to Southold Town. There were subdivisions that were exempt and we're checking the old, old code to see if Laughing Waters was among them. We don't see it in here. CARL LAWRENCE : I know that I spoke to a real estate broker prior to you know a good number of months ago who gave me sort of a copy of a page that I believe had a list of those subdivisions CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Probably this? CARL LAWRENCE : It was different from that page, it was I don't know with ten or twelve subdivisions and it did not include Laughing Waters and so I did not make an application that we don't need the approval. May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well you know sometimes the Building Department makes a determination of merger and they haven't really done the background research on every piece of property and we have not that often but on occasion there's been an error. There has been some exemptions either merger by death which is an exemption you know if something is in husbands or wife's name one was the husband one was the wife, husband dies suddenly both lots are in the wife's name that then merges. That's exempt now the code was modified in order to say that's not fair. They did their due diligence they put it in the right names, they checker boarded it and now because one died and the other inherited in one name only you know that wasn't fair. Then there was the subdivision so we try to really be careful with these applications cause we know there's a lot at stake for people, you know the property is valuable and also we have to be careful about overdevelopment, septic systems and all that other stuff there's two side to that. I just wanted to let you know we did look into this. John I think if you're there I think that is correct information? A.T.A. BURKE : I don't see them on the exemption list that we pulled out of 112 of the old code. I don't see them as being an exempt property. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Alright well counsel agrees with that so CARL LAWRENCE : I would like to make that application but I didn't believe we had CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : You would duke it out with the Building Department at that point. Eric how about you any questions at this point? MEMBER DANTES : No I mean it's the same size as the other lots (inaudible) ownership. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Pat. MEMBER ACAMPORA : No CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Rob MEMBER LEHNERT : No I agree with Eric it's the same size as undeveloped I have no more questions. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It doesn't look like anybody in the audience wants to talk but I have to ask, anybody want to say anything on this application? I don't think there's anybody on Zoom is that right? Okay nobody is on Zoom. Are we ready to close, Nick you okay with doing that? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I didn't look at the documents that were just provided but would you have death certificates indicating the family lineage? May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting CARL LAWRENCE : I did submit I think the first exhibit is a death certificate of Charlotte Penza and so if you look at the (inaudible) for a father and the list is mother is Joseph Beck and Mercedes Foley which was Mercedes maiden name and the informant is actually Ellen Krackenbush which is the daughter of CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The executrix. Alright, motion to close the hearing reserve decision to a later date, is there a second? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Second MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER DANTES : Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye. We have a meeting in two weeks where we deliberate on draft decisions it's not a public hearing it's open to the public you can listen if you want to Zoom in and hear us deliberate but you can also call the office the next day and they'll let you know what happened and we will mail you the decision so hopefully in two weeks we'll have it all done for you. HEARING#7662— MODERN AGE HOME BUILDERS CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next application before the Board is for Modern Age Home Builders #7662. This is a request for a variance from Article XXII Section 280-105C and the Building Inspector's March 3, 2022 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for a permit to legalize an "as built" six (6) foot metal fence at 1) six (6) foot high fencing is set back less than the permitted minimum 10 feet from the secondary front yard property line located at 2135 Willow Drive in East Marion. Member Planamento has recused himself from this application. We have here it says it's a 6 foot high fence. We've all gone out to see it and inspected it, it's a secondary front yard it's a corner lot. It says it's a 6 foot high fence it doesn't even look it's exactly 6 feet to tell you the truth. It's set back at what is it the code requires 10 feet and it says the fence has a 6 inch front yard setback from the property line. It is an open fence it's not a solid metal fence it's picket basically and there's a swimming pool in that back yard. The fence is along Cedar Drive you can see the pool in the rear yard and it was May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting located very close to the road because of the desire to avoid cutting down all the trees that actually act as a visual buffer for the swimming pool. If the agent is here what else would you like us to know? JENNIFER LEEDS : Good afternoon everyone I'm Jennifer Leeds I'm here for Modern Age Builders. You pretty much said it all already, originally this was built not realizing by the builder that he should have been set back 10 feet. He just put it up against the woods thinking that he was allowed to have that there because it was a secondary front yard so that's really the only reason that there's the 6 inch distance. We feel that it's still 13 feet from the curb, we're far enough back from the corner of the property where cars would have their view obstructed, it doesn't obstruct the view as you mentioned earlier. This is an ornamental metal fence, it's just posts you can see through it. There's about thirty, forty feet of woods behind it and then there's the pool. The reasoning for the fence is that it's the barrier for the pool and we're just asking for the Board today for permission to let that fence remain as is. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : So that is the pool fence in other words it's not an additional fence around the pool it's a perimeter fence. JENNIFER LEEDS : That's correct. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay, Rob do you have any questions on this one? MEMBER LEHNERT : I have no questions on this one. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Eric MEMBER DANTES : No CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN Come on somebody's gotta have a question. Why are we here? Listen I'm very grateful that finally at the behest of the Zoning Board the Town Board who writes the legislation finally did something about recognizing corner lots have a particular hardship with front yard setbacks and it's addressed now called secondary front yard which allows a bit more flexibility for property owners. Well there's nobody in the audience left, there's,nobody on Zoom oh there is but no hand raised. I think the Board has gotten all the information we need. It's an attractive fence by the way beautifully maintained and it's a required pool fence. Alright I'm going to make a motion to close the hearing reserve decision to a later date. Is there a second? MEMBER DANTES : Second CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor? May 5,2022 Regular Meeting MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER DANTES : Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye. The motion carries, we'll have a decision in two weeks. JENNIFER LEEDS : Thank you have a nice afternoon everyone. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Thunk you, you too. Nick we're done. I'm going to make a motion to close we've done-the resolutions so I'm going to make a 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 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye. Stop the recording. May 5, 2022 Regular Meeting CERTIFICATION 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 : May 13, 2022