Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA-09/01/2022 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 September 1, 2022 10:08 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—Acting Town Attorney DAMON HAGAN —Assistant Town Attorney ELIZABETH SAKARELLOS—Office Assistant September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting INDEX OF HEARINGS Hearing Page Roland Grant#7669 4- 17 465 Brown Street Greenport, LLC and 711 Linnet St. Greenport, LLC#7674 17 - 26 Antonios and Stella Biniaris# 7671 26- 30 Serge Appel and Eve Bates Appel #7673 30- 33 John and Patricia Stack#7675 33 -36 Elyse James and John Sinning, Et Al #7677 36-38 John Smyth and Margaret Smyth #7678 38-40 Allison Uklanska and Piotr Uklanski #7679 41 -45 Lorelei and Leif Gobel #7690 45 -47 16125 Soundview Realty, LLC#7670 48 - 54 Daniel and Linda Lynch #7659SE 54-57 Melissa Hobley#7645 S8 -61 Melissa Hobley and Paul Yau #7646SE 58- 61 160 Route 25, LLC#7598SE 62 -88 September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Good morning everyone and welcome to the Board of Appeals Public Hearings for September 15Y, I guess it's fall. Would you all please rise and join me for the Pledge of Allegiance. Thank you very much. We begin the meeting with Resolution on SEAR 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 (SEQR) 6 NYCCRR Part 617.5 c including the following: Roland Grant, 465 Brown Street Greenport LLC and 711 Linnet Street Greenport LLC, Antonios and Stella Biniaris, Serge Appel and Eve Bates Appel, John and Patricia Stack, Elyse James and John Sinning, John Smyth and Margaret Smyth, Allison Uklanska and Piotr Uklanski, Lorelei and Leif Gobel so moved. Is there a second? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Second CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER DANTES : Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye. This is not really a Resolution this is to inform the public that and there is an application that will be before us today from 160 Route 25 LLC, there is no SEQR determination at this time but the Planning Board will be conducting that as Lead Agency and so we will be hearing that application and adjourning without a date because we can't make any decision without a SEQR determination. Theodore and Carissa Stratigos, we have a draft before us but we are waiting for Nigel Williamson to submit his drawing that we closed subject to receipt of and we don't have them yet so I'm going to make a motion to table that decision to the Special Meeting. Is there a second? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Second CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER DANTES : Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye. HEARING#7669—ROLAND GRANT CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :The first public hearing before the Board is for Roland Grant#7669. This is a request for variances under Article XV Section 280-62C, 280-63, 280-64B and 280-64C and the Building Inspector's February 24, 2022 Notice of Disapproval based on an application to demolish existing buildings and construct a public self-storage building with an accessory apartment on the second floor and to maintain the existing 26.8 feet by 37 feet garage/storage building at 1) proposed storage building measuring more than the minimum permitted 60 linear feet of frontage on one street, 2) the proposed accessory apartment use is not permitted, 3) existing storage building located less than the code required minimum front yard setback of 100 feet, 4) existing storage building located less than the code required minimum side yard setback of 20 feet located at 800 Horton Lane in Southold. PAT MOORE : Good morning on behalf of Roland Grant, I have Mr. Grant here with me so that if there are any issues that I can't address or you have question I can refer them to Mr. Grant. This application has numerous variances because of the dimensions of the property. The zoning is Limited Business the uses are permitted but when it's trying to place-the buildings on the property unfortunately we're dealing with the very long road frontage and more narrow parcel. So the placement of the building has been pushed back towards the back of the property increasing the front yard as much as possible but since we are getting variances on those dimensions both the rear and the front there's flexibility if the Board feels that it needs to be.further from the back than the front, this is what was proposed. I would also.I want to make sure I point out that through the site plan process we'll ultimately deal with these issues but Roland Grant has very large evergreens that he planted right away to give time this has been a long goal of his but he planted the evergreens in such a way that by now they're quite tall over eighteen feet in height and he has additional evergreens that ultimately would go in the front. So in addition to the trees that he would like to preserve as much as possible also adding evergreens. So ultimately the volumes of this building will be hidden since the property will be surrounded by evergreens. As you know when you're dealing with the variances on the width of buildings some of you may remember others if you are younger, the sixty foot rule was added many years ago in the, eighties primarily to address strip malls. It was a very simplistic attempt before zoning was updated when the zoning code was modified I think also later early nineties. That provision of the code always remained just to give some control to the Board and to review applications obviously but we have to take a look at the use that is September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting being proposed. Obviously to split buildings up the sixty foot rule creates an enormous amount of infrastructure expense. In this case adding elevators we have an elevator proposed cause ultimately the second floor down the line my client would like to consider making affordable senior housing for the second floor but obviously you can't make that application until the building is built. So that's down the line, in any case to get'use of the second floor of this building you need elevators so to the extent the buildings are split up in width or size everything including elevators that's added on so you have cost of electric, plumbing, infrastructure, walls everything just gets significantly increased on the building. The design of the building will go to Architectural Review, it's pretty straightforward pretty simplistic at this point and it would ARC might have comments on it. Again we're focusing on the LI zoning here, the property to the back of this surrounding this property on the west excuse me south side is the Long Island Railroad so we have no neighbors there. We have behind us the storage facility which is just one very long storage facility so again the similar issue well I guess it didn't need a variance for length because it's behind the property and it had the two buildings the Grattan building on the north side and then the (inaudible)the other building on the south side and so it had two front buildings and then it had a very long building behind it. So you have an area here that is. on the same side of the road commercialized quiet but in" commercialized use. Again we propose the placement of the building further back on the property to maintain the quite residential across the street. My client will come before you know speak to the Board he did approach his neighbors and let them (inaudible). I'd like to address any questions the Board has rather than going through my outline if you prefer only because you can have this in writing and it's already part of the record. So any specific questions the Board has? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well I just to make one comment, the existing storage facility that you made reference to was built prior to that code being in place. PAT MOORE : Oh okay. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : That's why it is longer, it was not a code requirement at the time. There are it has of course been brought to our attention and of.course we all live here so we know Horton is a very historic street and that the house that has been I think has not been lived in for some time is on the SPLIA list, it is not on the national registry but there are historic.homes all around it and that house is proposed to be demolished. That's something the Board is very aware of are concerned about. It has the ability to be historic and renovated but the applicant is choosing to do otherwise. PAT MOORE : I will let my client speak on that because he had investigated (inaudible) if you'd like to hear that. September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Does the Board want to.hear that now?Yeah sure. ROLAND GRANT : Good morning I'm Roland Grant and I live at (inaudible). When I first came to and bought the property my first ideal was to renovate that house so I had an engineer come and look at the house and determine what had to be done to renovate the house. The foundation because they had never maintained the gutter system had leaked down and cracked all of the foundation so the foundation had to be replaced and (inaudible). They because of the water there that was accumulating (inaudible) beetles are in all the beams there so they're all gone the main structure of the house is gone. The first floor is completely overrun with termites. So the dilemma was and he said sure you can renovate this building but what you basically have to do is cut the first floor off demolish that, raise the second floor of the building up, re-dig the foundation, rebuild the first floor and then put the top of the building back on. So we were looking at a little bit over a million dollars for that process before you had anything built. It was extremely expensive. So unfortunately and believe me it (inaudible) I've been a longtime resident out here seeing the building that was built in the sixties to be demolished but there isn't really anyway to save the building unfortunately. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay thank you for your testimony. Does the Board have any questions at this point, comments? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I'm curious for one thing, Pat can you delineate or tell us I wasn't able to find it on line the Southold National Historic District is this property included in it? PAT MOORE : I know the Main Rd. is but I don't know that Horton is to be honest. My office was added in when the town not national there is no national, did you ask national or the town? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Isn't it national? PAT MOORE : No not to my knowledge. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : In either case, there's a map that outlines and I do know it runs up Hortons Lane the house that Meryll Kramer the architect was part of that so I don't know how far up Hortons Lane it goes but there are multiple historic properties on Hortons Lane as evidenced by the SPLIA file for this particular property. So it sounds like you and the applicant are not familiar with the boundaries. PAT MOORE : No I haven't but as far as national I can tell you I'm not familiar with national being anywhere in the Southold area because I was actually looking to make a national registry of a-particular property and the Building Department didn't have it according to the Building Department. September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting MEMBER PLANAMENTO : There is a sign on Main Rd. to the west of your property your office I thought it said national. Does it say national? So whether it's national whether it's state PAT MOORE : Well national would be typically it's an application process of the individual to become a national landmark, it's not (inaudible) unless_ theTown Board were to incorporate but not to my knowledge. MEMBER PLANAMENTO There is a specific map because I've seen 'it in the past that follows west of Main Rd. from where your office is all theway through Southold and climbs up various or down various (inaudible). PAT MOORE : If you have it and you want to send it to me that would be great. I'm not familiar with that but I do know that you'd have to make specific application for a particular structure to become part of the national registry. This property has not been nor to my knowledge any. of them in Southold. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I just realized, I need to enter into the record especially for public benefit exactly what variances are before us there are several. First, the rear yard setback is proposed at 20 foot 4 and 1/8th inch where the code requires a minimum of 70 feet in the LI zone. Secondly, there's 199 feet 4 inches of lineal footage of the fagade fronting on Horton in the HALO zone where, the code permits a maximum of. 60 feet. Three, the accessory apartment is not a permitted use however I will say we have granted those as long as the tenant is managing the storage facility and is in residence full time. Fourth, the existing storage building has a front yard setback at,29 feet 13/8 inch,.the code requires a minimum of 100.feet, the side yard setback is 3 feet, the code requires a.minimum of 20 feet. Finally.this application should the Board approve it requires site plan approval from the Planning Board. That covers everything. Kim do you have a cursor available? Can you outline on that screen where the boundaries of the I�uilding are? It's very difficult to see. PAT MOORE : I know it's very busy. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN Yes there's a lot going on here. So Kim will start there, her cursor will move across that's the part that will be facing Hortons okay. PAT MOORE : Sorry-I can't see it oh there it is. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Can you highlight it? BOARD SECRETARY : So this is what's facing Horton right now. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : What's proposed then it goes back, then it goes- along the back edge (inaudible). That's very helpful you did a good job. Okay at least you can see a little bit of September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting the footprint that's being proposed there. Then the garage is over there on the right facing very close to Horton very,,very close;to the property line. PAT MOORE : That's the existing garage. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The cinderblock garage that's on the property. PAT MOORE : When I first got the,Notice of Disapproval it didn't make sense to me that.a pre- existing cause we have a C.O. for the,garage it's a pre-existing structure and we want to retain it. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Funny cause we looked for it and couldn't find one. If you've got a copy of the C.0? PAT MOORE : Unless I'm misrernembering MEMBER PLANAMENTO : There's was a Pre C of 0 on the house but nothing on the garage. PAT MOORE.: Yeah there's a Pre C.O. , CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN '.There's no C.O. ROLAND GRANT : There's a C.O. on that not on the house but on that (inaudible). PAT MOORE : We'll double check our records. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN However the Planning Board tells us that when the uses are proposed to be changed that the relief that was pre-existing non-conforming goes 'away. Everything needs to be conforming or obtain you know variance I guess. PAT MOORE : But that makes no sense because we,want to keep it as a garage so the use isn't changing. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I'm just saying what the law requires that's all. PAT MOORE : Well it seems to me that I'll leave'it to the Board's determination but the garage is going to remain a garage and we actually want to use it as a garage for the person who is on site cause they'll need they can use it as their own individual vehicle storage. So right now it has electric for Mr. Grant's electric vehicle, it's got a charging station there everything so we'd like to keep it just as it is. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Pat since you brought up the C of 0 issue, we didn't see a C of 0 for the garage. . a September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting PAT MOORE : I'll double check. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Would you share the C of 0's or walk us through all the existing improvements as the property is right now. MEMBER DANTES : Here I found it, it says.accessory garage repairs, window replacement (inaudible) CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :That's a.permit. MEMBER DANTES : Yeah I mean there's some sort of legal status. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I mean we all know it's been there a long time I mean no one'is questioning that. You know what,'why don't we do this unless the Board has any immediate questions or comments, do you have a copy of the Planning Board',s comments? PAT MOORE : No I asked for it but when I asked it had not yet been received so I did not receive it. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN Kim is going to'make sure to make you a copy cause there's a-lot of very substantive comments in there. PAT MOORE : Can you give me a copy? BOARD SECRETARY : Yeah I can give you a copy. PAT MOORE : I imagine that we're going to be here again so CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well I think what's going to be helpful is let's open this to the public and before we do that I do want Liz to review with anybody that might be on Zoom how they can participate if they wish to. SENIOR OFFICE ASSISTANT SAKARELLOS : Thank you Leslie, if anyone on Zoom would like to participate and make a comment on an application CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : We can't hear you Liz. BOARD SECRETARY : I can hear you through the computer. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The speakers are turned up so,we don't know exactly What's going on here. Indulge us and be patient, we're trying to do the best we can we're short one person here today so I want to thank Liz and Kim for their herculean effort in trying to make this happen. Let me do this, for everyone that is on Zoom and you want to.participate what you September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting need to do is raise your hand, Liz will then admit you into as a panelist instead of an attendee so you will then be able to speak and you will be able to say whatever it is you want to say. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Leslie I have the telephone number here. So if somebody wants to join by telephone you're able to dial 16465588656 you enter the webinar i.d. 87830242616 and the passcode 254731 lots of numbers. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Alright thank you. So let's keep going here. I think it's time to open this up to the public for comments now. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Leslie before we open it up to the public if I can just answer the question about the C of 0 on the structures, I know that the house had a Pre C of 0 and there's a debate about the garage structure whether it has a C of 0 or not but there is a building permit CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It's an open permit. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I believe there's a C of 0 on the mobile home, so my question is does the temporary office have a C of 0?There's some sort of an office CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :There's an office building of some sort what's it called? PAT MOORE : That's the owner's trailer that he operates his business from there it's just a MEMBER PLANAMENTO : But doesn't it need a C of 0 to be there? ROLAND GRANT : It's a mobile office like you would pull up to any site (inaudible). MEMBER PLANAMENTO : You're using it as your office? ROLAND GRANT : Yeah it's a mobile office yes. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : So the other question is, wouldn't it need site plan approval to go from a residential use property to CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yes it would. PAT MOORE : It's not residential. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : It's a C of 0 for a house not an office. PAT MOORE : But it's an LI the zoning is the (inaudible) CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It still would need to have also there's a wood business of some sort operating on that property. Is that his also? September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting ROLAND GRANT : Yes CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : So there's two different business uses operating on the property in addition to a dwelling which Js historic but abandoned and in disrepair and your home sir in the back. PAT MOORE : I mean ultimately the 'site plan is going to eliminate and clean up that entire property so there's a benefit to having this at least the project get.through the process so everything here on the-site will be cleaned up and eliminated so it doesn't make sense to go through site plan when we're actively trying to build a new building. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay well the.purpose here is to,get all the issues out, make sure we understand everything that's going on that property, what's proposed and so on. Alright is there anyone of the public who wants to address the application? Please just come to that podium use that mic over there.you have to stand up and state your name. WILLIAM WURTZ : My name is William Wurtz a nearby neighbor of the property. I sympathize with the issue.of the historic house with all the problems, I definitely sympathize with that but in reading about this many variances to me it seems to be going against the whole point of having zoning codes. I mean when I see the and that building is enormous in the back. The other thing is I don't know if it's directly relevant but it seems worth considering that this historic district stops right across Travelers St. to my knowledge. So this is directly adjacent to the historic district so it seems like important to be really careful what it looks like what gets built there. As I said my main red flag is to read about all these variances it just seems to be against the whole principle of a zoning code so that would be my comment but like I said I sympathize with the problem of that historic house, that's really tragic but anyway so that's my comment. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay thank you very much appreciate it. Anyone else would like to address the'Board? Please come up and state your name. ANN BOBCO : Hi I'm Ann Bobco and I'm also an adjacent neighbor. Sol just have a questions about the proposed.accessory apartments, is that something. that once a permit would be given then that would be applied for? I'm not really clear about that? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yes the, code allows apartments, affordable apartments up to a maximum of six to be added to an existing building that was recently changed. So let's say you have abouse and..you want you have a big lot and you want to turn it into rental apartments you can do so with or without variances depending on the size of the lot, you can'expand up to six. To start from scratch you can also convert existing space this was the older code,,if a building was built and you wish to convert the use to apartments for affordable or workforce September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting housing you can do that but you need to have a legal established existing building1n order to convert. That's what counsel was referring to once the building is built and has a C 0 their intent is to add apartments to the second floor but that would be a Special Exception Permit application for the conversion of an existing building on the second floor to apartments. Now the caretakers apartment that is included in this application is designed because we have .been told many times from people who do storage facilities all throughout the Town of Southold that security is very, very important for their business and that they need an on-site live in manager to make sure that nothing goes wrong and that they have security on the property 24/7. So the Board even though it's not a permitted use by, code the Board hasa precedent of permitting as long as there's a year round rental with verification, affidavits and so on that this is an employee of that business it can't be just anybody. So they are applying now for what is really three floors,, below grade is a applied as (inaudible) storage not a parking lot it's to store cars in. The ground 'level is regular storage, conditioned storage and the second floor is proposed to be a caretakers additional storage until such time but there's •'-no guarantee they'll do that. I mean they have the right to do that but right now what we're looking at is storage. ANN BOBCO : Okay so then my question becomes cause I'm all for affordable. housing in this area, so is that will that be another process f CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yes ANN BOBCO : if at a later date that was a decision? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yes MEMBER DANTES : Would they need,a hearing for the affordable or CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : They would need a hearing it's a Special Exception. Special Exception is a very strange term, because it really isn't it would be better for it to say special review. There are standards in the code in town code that describe what I guess they check boxes you have to conform to and if,you do by review with a public hearing before the Board of Appeals then that permit is granted.These-are uses that are already permitted in the zone district but only upon review by the Board of Appeals because we have to make sure that any adverse impacts are mitigated or don't exist. So that's what our review is about but that use is permitted in that zone but only upon,review by the Board of Appeals and approval. ANN BOBCO : Okay then another.question about this height of the proposed building because as adjacent neighbors we've been watching a couple of things underway but you know the landscaping is (inaudible) so how tall'is this supposed to be? September. 1, 2022 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN ; Well let's look at the you have that up? PAT MOORE : It can't be above 35 feet. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It's not sited in the Disapproval so the height maximum is going to be like a two story house, 35 foot maximum. PAT MOORE : It's on the last page 103 and it's showing 34 feet 9 inches to the (inaudible). CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : And also just again to reiterate; should this be approved by the Board of Appeals. It will go to the Planning Board for site plan approval and there may be changes made there as a result of site plan, the ingress, the egress the buffering, the design. They have something they call the ARC, Architectural Review Committee. Their commercial projects go to that committee. There are some architects sitting on it, they review it and they make comments and sometimes they say it's fine sometimes they say you need to change this and that and they send them back to Planning and they discuss it with the applicant. So that's a whole other second layer. So let's look at it three ways, first they're here if they go forward from here and we can condition approval if that's.granted with many different things, then they would also come back for the apartments. They would have to first obtain site plan approval before they can even apply for the apartments but they can do it concurrently. So there's like three steps in this process. ANN BOBCO : We were sent a notification so that's probably how that helped us so would we be made aware of this next step in that matter? -CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN Does the Planning Board send out BOARD SECRETARY : Yes PAT MOORE : There is a public hearing so site plan CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN. : Here's what happens, when anything comes before the Planning Board of the Board of Appeals, we have to do a couple of legal notices. Number one it has to be in the newspaper so that anybody reading the Suffolk Times which isn't the universe which some people do you know if you're into reading legal notices it's in there. Secondly there has to be a yellow card which our office prepares explaining when and where there will be a hearing and what exactly this he is for and thirdly we are required the applicant is required by our Board to notify adjacent neighbors because there are going to be impacts of concern to them or support for that matter and neighbors do both, they come in with concerns they come in with support. So those are the three legal responsibilities, the applicant has to post the notice which we give them and they have to do�the mailings and they have to September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting give us the green cards back to say we did this and it was received or their in Florida and they never got it or whatever it is but that's why you were noticed. ANN BOBCO : Two more questions, with regard to the open C of 0 permit for the existing garage, is that something that will be addressed and come back with a review process next time around or it's just open? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :Well it'will be part the first go around will be what this Board does and depending on what this Board-does whether the next step would or would not be taken. MEMER DANTES : (inaudible) replacing windows and some other items so they (inaudible) ANN BOBCO : So would it be grandfathered in? MEMBE DANTES : No they just have to go and show that they did the work and (inaudible) it's not going to require a hearing cause of CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : No, thus'far nothing is changed the garage is there they had a permit which was not closed out to do work'on'the garage improvements and the (inaudible) is still open because there was no inspection. It needed to be inspected by the Building Department to make sure it conformed and it was code compliant. ANN BOBCO : I guess my last question is about the access to the property cause I'm just looking at it (inaudible) down the road for people going in to the property so has it been set up that it will always be at the northern end? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It's proposed that way now but it doesn't mean if it gets through this Board (inaudible) Planning Board there'll be another hearing. All those kinds of things are what the Planning they do site planning. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Kim would you put that back up (inaudible) two sort of curb cuts or access points, one on the south end and one on the north end that's proposed. PAT MOORE : Right look at page A101 for reference that site plan shows there are two garage doors that are on either side of that stairway. It's easier to look at the interior layout so that's A101. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I understood the neighbor is inquiring about the road access. PAT MOORE : Oh the driveway access I didn't understand. BOARD ASSISTANT : Pat look at where I have my cursor at the access. September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting PAT MOORE : I don't have my glasses. MEMBER DANTES : Basically, at the north end and south end. PAT MOORE : Oh there's a driveway on CHAIRPERSON.WEISMAN : They're both on the south corners, they're right on the corners. ANN BOBCO : I mean I guess the thing is this is an ongoing process and my concern is that if they're accessory apartments and there's only six units eventually it's not like there's going to be traffic build and so far the business that's been going on with the logs or whatever there hasn't been an issue but I just you know you might.be (inaudible). CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Of course we understand. Is there anybody else in the audience who wants to address the Board? MEMBER DANTES : We should point out (inaudible) Notice if Disapproval talking about the house being on the SPLIA list that it'.s actually sited on the Disapproval so how much is it really (inaudible)? . CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The Board has the right to review absolutely everything and anything on a property when it's coming before this Board. It doesn't have to be sited, there's nothing to disapprove what would they disapprove? It's not a variance you know. MEMBER DANTES : I'm just saying he can as of right. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : He can yeah absolutely but anybody else? Does the Board have any questions at this point? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I have on and maybe Pat may be able to answer just given the number of variances requested, is there .any possibility for you to amend the application reduce the scale make the property more conforming or make the project more conforming? PAT MOORE : I did actually ask Mr. Grant if it would be possible to consider changing the building to two building rather than one long building. You still need the variance because to make a sixty foot conforming lbuildings you have three separate buildings and that's just financially impossible and unworkable as a storage facility. However two buildings it's more expensive but it's doable. So he would certainly if the Board granted the variances and said split it into two we can work with Planning on how those two are created. We haven't done any of the architecturals, nothing and maybe site plan wise it makes sense however it's broken up. I mean common sense to break the linear into two but maybe one is a little bigger than the other I don't know, that will require some architecture. September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : One other comment, sometimes people ask how is it in the middle of a residential area you have a light industrial zone and that goes back to the history of our town. Back in the day those zones were put there along the railroad tracks when zoning was implemented in 1957 because farmers would bring their produce right to the trains and load them up on the cars and so we still have these pieces along the railroad tracks even if they're surrounded by dwellings or farms most of them are that are zoned light industrial. They are not necessarily used that way anymore, I don't see any farmers trapesing around to cars with their potatoes but that's the reason that that parcel is zoned the way it is. PAT MOORE : I would 'point out though that he has been approached by vineyards that need storage. So there is a really just like there's a need for affordable housing-this (inaudible) would be on senior not families but there is a definite need for storage. Anybody who is in any business and is looking for storage buildings there just aren't any and most of them are tucked away illegally in barns and structures and they're under the radar but this is actually properly zoned and has stayed zoned for industrial use like this one. We're not asking for any use that's going to produce odors or any kind of processing, it's very quiet storage.,There is activity when you're coming in but no different that the storage facility behind that has a variety of uses by residences as well as businesses .that need storage space. So it's kind of equivalent in this case contractors also need, plumbers need supplies to be stored and so on. So there's flexibility in the light industrial for that and that's (inaudible). ANN BOBCO : I do have one more question, this brings up another point as a storage unit it's one thing but because we're close by as a neighbor we have heard a lot of sawing and is that another business that is part of this? . PAT MOORE : Not with this none at all. As I said this will eliminate pretty much everything that's there.now. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN 'Liz is there anybody on Zoom that wants to address the application? SENIOR OFFICE ASSISTANT SAKARELLOS : I do not have any hands up. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Alright, is the Board ready to close this? I'm going to make a motion to close the hearing reserve decision to a later date, is there a second? MEMBER LEHNERT : Second CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting MEMBER DANTES : Aye MEMBER'LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye. CHAIRPERSONWEISMAN Aye. Just because you probably want to know what the timeframe is, the Board has sixty two days from the close to render a decision a written decision. We very rarely take anything like that, we try very hard to have a decision at our next meeting and our next meeting is in two weeks from today and that will be in the Annex Conference Room the Board Room upstairs and on Zoom. This is not a Public Hearing this is an open meeting so that anyone can listen in while the Board deliberates on Board decisions and then votes. So that will be the very earliest if we manage to get it done if not it would be a month from now. HEARING ,# 7674 — 465 BROWN STREET GREENPORT, LLC and 711 LINNET STREET GREENPORT, LLC CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next application before the Board is for 465 Brown St. Greenport, LLC and 711 Linnet St. Greenport, LLC #7674. This is a request for variances under Article III Section 280-14, Article XXIJI Section 280-124 an&the Building Inspector's April 26, 2022 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for a two lot residential subdivision at 1) both lots having less than the code required minimum lot size of 40,000 sq. ft., 2) both lots having less than the code required lot width of 150 feet, 3) both lots having less than the code required lot depth of 175 feet, 4) proposed lot #2 less than the code required minimum front yard setback of 40 feet at 465 Brown St. in Greenport. So now we also got comments from the Planning Board on this one: PAT MOORE : I don't have that either. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay Kim will get that to you. PAT MOORE :.(inaudible) since its they never support variances. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well in this case your prediction would be wrong. PAT MOORE : I am shocked. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well don't be too overjoyed September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting PAT MOORE : I knew there was a but CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : There's a couple of things, let me enter into the record what the variances are. Lot 1 is 11,293 sq. ft. in lot area where the code requires 40,000 sq. ft. Secondly, lot width is 100 feet where the code requires a minimum of 150, lot depth is 112.5 feet where the code requires a minimum of 175 feet. The house on lot 1 has a front yard setback at 14.5 feet facing Linnet where the code requires a 40 foot setback. Lot 2, 11,231 sq. ft. where the code requires 30,000 sq. ft. Secondly, the lot .width is 100 the code requires 150 minimum. Three, lot depth is 112.5 feet the code requires 175 feet minimum. This is a through lot fronting on both Brown and Linnet, both lots are developed with dwellings. One is a single family dwelling, the other is labeled as multiple family but in fact that is an error it's a two family. These were permitted by ZBA decision 3303 in 1985 and they granted up to three dwellings on this parcel. Then ZBA 3303 granted approval for 114.5 foot front yard setback for the dwelling on Linnet. Subdividing these lots while they're non-conforming they are pretty much similar to other lots in the area so I think at this point I'm going to let you take over Pat. PAT MOORE : Thank you. So you already clarified for the record how these two structures came about and I would go back that in 1985 it was clear from the transcript of the hearing that there was a lot going on these properties and some of the additional structures that existed at the time in 1985 were somewhat dilapidated maybe trailer homes, an accessory or cottages there was a lot going on and it was not a very well maintained property. With that in mind the owner at the time who came in and bought it that way I believe he's not the one who created them (inaudible) he came into the Zoning Board and asked for relief to clean up as part of the conditions of the decision were to eliminate some structures and the Board allowed up to three as you pointed out, the Board also authorized a two family so one of the structures could be a two family house and as long there were no more than three dwellings which a two family would be considered a dwelling. So that occurred in 1985 and ever since the properties have remained that way. The Zoning Board decision in 1985 1 guess there had been some discussion of possible subdivision but that would have required an additional request that had not been made as part of the application so the Board wasn't really prepared to address it at that hearing and they left it a little bit vague a little carrot stick approach as I read the transcript which was let's see how you clean things up, you can come back if you so desire at a later date and go through the process of a subdivision. That's how I read the decision I think if you read between the lines it was let's see what you do and then we'll consider it. So my client purchased the property knowing of these decisions or of the decision and initially approached me and said well can I subdivide it to three lots and I said no. We're not going to try that because that's not what the Zoning Board had even considered in 1985 and that would certainly require the lot 2 to be split in two that would have been the request which I overrode any consideration of that and we came in with an application to place a September,l,-2022 Regular Meeting dwelling on each parcel making the parcel- more conforming. The two family is still non- conforming but it's actually with .the variance ,it makes it conforming. So that is a.conforming structure with the Zoning Board decision in 1985 and in order to request the third dwelling my client would have had to evict people that have lived in the two family for-a' long time and that's not his policy at all so we kept everything as is. Oftentimes when, you're splitting up a property like this that is developed gives flexibility, flexibility'of financing, it gives flexibility of ultimately two families being able to buy one.of the parcels..In all the time that I've reviewed I was approached by several people I get phone calls all the time about properties people are considering and every time somebody was looking at this property it was really for someone to do it as an investment because realistically'it was a pricey property and it was rental value. The subdivision gives opportunity to a family to come in and buy one of these parcels and treat it as for their home. So it made sense with respect to one, the,1985 decision provided that avenue we would have that relief anyway as a matter of law but-that was certainly in the pipe line in when the 1985 decision was rendered by the prior Board and we would create a conforming condition which is having a dwelling on each parcel rather than having multiple dwellings on one parcel. As you pointed out each has their own road frontage, one house faces Linnet the other houses faces Brown. I would also point out I gave it to you in writing as well which is the Linnet property is connected to the sewer distridthe Linnet property one of the two properties is connected to the sewer district. I take it back I think the Brown property is see WM which I think is the sewer connection on Brown that's showing,on the street I think that's sewer connection. But in any case CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : We need to make sure about that cause if you're going to separate these we need to know what's going on with the septic. Are they on one system or are they on two separate? PAT MOORE : .No, no right now they have two separate systems, one is a sewer, one has a sanitary an individual sanitary. What we'lre actually proposing 'to do is give an easement for the sewer line to run to give sewer connection to the other. It will all be dealt with the Health Department and through the Greenport Village sewer system. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN Can you be certain, we want to know which properties are connected. .PAT MOORE : Okay. I think I wrote it in the application. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I didn't see it maybe I PAT MOORE : I mean I think that that information would be September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN There's nothing on the survey and the survey needs to be corrected by the way Pat. The label that says multi-family needs to be changed to two family. PAT MOORE :,Getting survey from surveyors I can try to get that correction right away. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I don't want to stamp a drawing a survey that's incorrect because that's going to create problems down the line. It would appear that we have approved a three or more unit which is what multi-family is defined by so I can't stamp it. PAT MOORE : No problem I will do that it shouldn't be that hard for him. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN. : Actually while you're doing it, it would be very good to show which property was connected to the sewer and where you're proposing an easement for the other dwelling to connect to the sewer. PAT MOORE : I can show it but it will be subject up.to.the Health Department to allow that so I can show it here on our plan but it's always subject to Health Department review so I don't you know that would be our preference but until the Health Department blesses it I can't MEMBER DANTES : By code if you're in a sewer district the Building Department might not send you to the Health Department. PAT MOORE : Yeah but the subdivision'still need the�yes and no I've actually the village has required us to go to the Health Department. Health. Department does have jurisdiction even with sewers they just do it it's a much more simplified because you only have to do is show you're connected to the sewer. I think we're in the sewer district but the line doesn't run that's the problem. They require a sewer extension the village might not be ready to do and that's why-we would be able to do it as an easement and run the sewer line for access and' . again if the Building Department will allow us to do that. Alternatively there's an existing sanitary system here if the Health Department says we can't connect.to sewer you might condition on upgrading the sanitary which is not CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : We would do that we would condition on an IA system. PAT MOORE : Yea exactly so one way or another we're going to have an upgraded system I just don't know which way it will be the final. So you want me to include the easement now? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : If that's what you're proposing. PAT MOORE : I just can't make it a condition of the approval only because as I said it's out of our hands. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : We can always condition one or the other. September 1; 2022 Regular Meeting PAT MOORE : Oh then that's fine. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I have to look into whether or not we really need to amend the original decision, I think not. I think what we're doing is to make sure it's very clear that no separate third dwelling is permitted on this property because the intent was again a two family in olne building and a single family. So that does not mean a third dwelling. PAT MOORE : Correct CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : So we-gotta make sure that that's clear put it as a condition we'll do it that way otherwise I have to go back and look at the original approval. PAT MOORE : The way I read the decision it was, if you.wanted a third dwelling let's say we weren't subdividing we just wanted to put in a third dwelling you'd have to make what is now a two family,a one family and then you can build a third one. That's how the 1985 decision reads but CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Sort of, it's very it's very (inaudible) PAT MOORE : It's a little rough CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yes it is I've read it. The intent here was to allow two buildings, one for two families and the other one for one. If in future anything that needed to be demolished it's gonna have to be going back to a single family dwelling. If the PAT MOORE : If the two family was to be demolished? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :]f in future there was a demolition then you would have to make it conforming put it back to a single family. The whole thing is extinguished. PAT MOORE : I think that variances run with the land so I would respectfully disagree with that but we're not dealing with that. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It's not a variance, it wasn't really a variance. PAT MOORE : 1985? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : For the number of units yes. I'm just laying out to you if you'see it. in the Planning Board comments okay cause you're going to get their approval anyway so we're trying to work with them on making sure that it's seamless that there.are no you know that we're not counteracting each other's work. Anything else from the Board? Pat any questions from you, anybody else over here?-Let's see if the public has anything to say. Please come up to the podium and state your name. September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting PAUL'DINIZIO : Hi, my name is Paul Dinizio I live at 637 Brown St. diagonally across from the property. This is the third time I've been here for this piece of property, once in 1985 and once I don't know the date you can look back at your records Habitat for Humanity. Mr. Fields wanted to break off that separate lot and donate to Habitat for Humanity, what the problem was there's no sewer no municipal sewer on Brown St. The municipal sewer is on Linnet St. and the municipal I might stand corrected on this but the sewer line for the house on Brown St. runs through the property that goes to Linnet St. so you're going to end up with two lots if somebody buys the one on Linnet St, they're going to have to be dealing with the sewer that people on Brown St. own. Now these properties were merged you know the date more than I do, years ago Mr. Fields got lucky that he was able to build a two family house there. He did clean up, there was I lived across the street from it so it was a mess but I think he sacrificed the three families the three residence I think I should say on one piece of property he sacrificed that other lot I think with the sewer line. I stand corrected on that but I think the sewer line runs through that second lot and given that there's three residences on a piece of ,property that you couldn't even you're lucky that you could even get variances to build one house on now. I think leaving it the way it is the 'residence them three residences have use of that separate piece of property whatever, children playing whatever. I can understand from a financial point of view I've invested in real estate and the value was splitting the lots okay but ruining our neighborhood is not in our financial interest. That's all I have to say, I'm against the application.Thank you. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Anybody; else, please come forward to the podium state your name. DOUGLAS MORRIS : Hi I'm Douglas Morris I'm the neighbor directly next to this property. My understanding in '85 (inaudible) tore down three dwellings, there were two houses and a trailer and the town gave him permission to put the two family in the back and he had a covenant that he couldn't do anything else with it. Now is there a covenant on that property? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : If there is we don't have a copy of it. DOUGLAS MORRIS : As far as I know [was under the understanding the town granted him that two family (inaudible) demolish the three and he would not do anything else because they granted him the two family. MEMBER DANTES : That's true but one Board can't (inaudible) so he still has the right to ask for the removal (inaudible). DOUGLAS MORRIS :,Really? Well like I said I thought there was a covenant on there. September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The covenant would then have to say that it has to remain as one piece of property probably and we don't have anything of a record nor is it described in the 1985 prior Board's decision. It just simply says, two family one two family and it says three dwellings three dwelling units, one single family and one two'family. What we want to make sure of is that there is not third separate building built there as a third dwelling cause one is supposed to be two units in the one building. Now if in fact prior testimony was that the sewer system is on Linnet and that the Brown St. dwelling is connected to that sewer.through Linnet. PAUL DINIZIO : I might stand corrected on that I'm not sure of DOUGLAS MORRIS : Paul I'm in the.cesspool business (inaudible) do come through but it's not in the sewer district. I think they might of just let him do it (inaudible). Most of the houses over there in Linnet St. have cesspools. I have a cesspool' and most of the houses have cesspools because we're not in the village. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : But the sewer is DOUGLAS,MORRIS : The sewer runs down there because of Driftwood Cove. Way, way back in _ the forties whenever they built Driftwood Cove the sewer came down Ninth and went down Linnet and connected the sewer on Sixth St. but it's out of the village and they even had moratoriums over the years where outside of the village couldn't even hook up to the sewer. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Right DOUGLAS MORRIS : There are a few houses I think it's about four houses that are hooked up to the sewer. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : So even though Linnet is not.in the sewer district there is a sewer line on DOUGLAS MORRIS :There is a sewer line CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : on Linnet'St. and the property facing on Linnet is hooked up to it and somehow they just ran it through that property to the back of the property so that the house facing Brown St. is also on that,line. Have I got, that right? I'm seeing nods so I would say yes. If you want to come to the we're recording this so you have to speak into a mic. PAUL DINIZIO : I just want to say-one thing, it would be very easy to find out just contact the Village of Greenport Sewer Department and I'm sure they have a map,of it. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I'm sure they do. September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting PAUL DINIZIO : To give you an exact line where it crosses the property and measurements and DOUGLAS MORRIS : Cause even the single family has a cesspool and when they put that house on Brown St. they connected to the sewer so that leaves the house in the back is hooked to the sewer. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : If a property is to be separated into two lots that could present a problem for one of them probably the Brown St. one I would imagine. They have to be able to operate independently. Counsel was suggesting an easement but you know the sewer district would kind of have to approve that. That's really a Health Department issue. Is the Brown St. property within the sewer district? DOUGLAS MORRIS : Technically I would say no but it is now one lot and the Linnet St. side is well it's not even in the sewer district we're not in the village. We're not in the village but they have what outside the village hook up. The house across the street from us they did a small subdivision and he bought fifteen feet off the property on the corner and when he bought this property they called it a subdivision. I said fifteen feet but he was allowed to hook to the sewer but also as a condition he had to put in cesspools for the house he bought the property from the fifteen feet and I didn't understand why he can get sewer and his neighbor has to put cesspool. The house on the corner of Ninth and Linnet they put cesspools, the house next door they hooked to the sewer and that was part of the condition they have to buy in this fifteen feet cause the lot was so small. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well we can get the information from the Greenport Village but it seems to me that if we're going to bless this it's actually more conforming if in fact it's two lots there and one dwelling on each. However they really have to have operating sanitary systems and the Health Department has to weigh in and it may just be wiser to simply leave Linnet the way it is which is a legal hookup and simply put an IA system on the other dwelling. The Board will have to come to grips with how to best do this. All of us need to upgrade our sanitary we all know that. When changes are made the Health Department requires it, I mean you know now they do. DOUGLAS MORRIS : (inaudible) CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Thank you, anything from the Board? Is there anybody on Zoom? Please come forward if you have something to say. BARRY LATNEY : Hi my name is Barry Latney and I live on Linnet St. in Greenport and I just think this is blatant attempt to usurp the code that (inaudible). CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :Thank you. September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting LORENZO HEIT : I'm Lorenzo Heit and I also live on Linnet St. I'm one of the sewer right next to the (inaudible). I just think the (inaudible) I've only moved there three years but within the three years they have now just opened up three lots at the end of Linnet and they rebuilt and increased actually the occupancy just down the street on Linnet which is only two and half blocks long and I think the changes to the neighborhood are really going to be overwhelming in terms of it going from a sparsely populated street to being a heavily populated street and many of the people park on the street and that's,going to become an issue the more places we bring on. So I too am opposed to the subdivision. SUSAN REEVES My name is Susan Reeves and I live at-704 Brown St. and my house is right next to that (inaudible). I open my back door and that piece of property is right behind me. I'm totally against it, I'm totally against it because I don't believe this is'going to be the end of it, it's going to be a separate property and that we're going to have our duplex and we're going to have our house in the back. I've already heard I don't know if I'm supposed to speak about it now but they want to add another bedroom to be duplexes that's what was told to the tenants in the house. Whether he's going to do it or not I don't know. My property is fifty by a hundred and (inaudible) very nice maintained piece of property. Those pieces of property now look a little bit better than what they did but I don't believe that this is going to be let's separate the property and that's going to be the end of-it. I believe, it's going to be let's separate the property, let's try to put another little house again behind me there could be maybe a third structure, the duplex, the house and then another structure. I think that's what he's heading for. I can't even imagine what it's going to be like for me in the next six months or four months or whatever it is what's going to be going on over there. So it's small it's tiny over there it's not huge our road aren't huge. On Brown St. you can get two cars down there, there's really no parking on the side so I'm very opposed to it because I don't think it's going to be the end of it there's going to be a lot more coming down the road so that's why I'm opposed. ROBERT CHAUSOW : My name is Robert Chausow and I live directly across the street. I also have concerns about automobiles, traffic and parking. There are already a lot of cars .on .the street and a lot of cars are parked on the lot and all those cars have to move on the street 9 more house more cars it's a situation that (inaudible). CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Anybody else, anything from the Board? I will say that the level of occupancy on those properties would by this Board's action will not be increased. If any additions are proposed in the future they would have to come back before this Board for variances because the property is so small 1 can't imagine-they would be conforming'in-any way but that would be down the line.:No one is proposing at least to my understanding increasing the occupancy of either building but it is a great benefit financially to the owner to September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting be separating these two lots, we are aware of that. So should this Board look favorably upon it with the Planning Board's comments it would be subject to a range of conditions to keep control of what happens on that property. SUSAN REEVES : I understand financially and I understand (inaudible) many, many pieces of property, I understand you own a lot.of properties between like sixteen pieces of property in Greenport. I understand that it's not,affordable housing that's he's bringing out there I know because I know the neighbors that live next to me. It's not like hey let's do this and this is great-because I'm all the people that Ineed a home to live in are going to be live in here, that's not that's what it is it's all financial for him along with his other sixteen or eighteen pieces of properties he has (inaudible) Southold town and the village. So when we think oh yes it's financially great for him the impact on us and maybe my family it's not. Like I said I live on a 50 by 112 very well maintained piece of property. So I you know it's not as if the man doesn't have many, many properties and it's not (inaudible) affordable housing and that's another thing I'm opposed to.Thank you. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Is there anyone else? There's nobody on Zoom either. If there's nothing more from the Board 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? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER DANTES : Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye. HEARING#7671—ANTONIOS and STELLA BINIARIS CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next;application before the Board is for Antonios and Stella Biniaris. This is a request for variances from Article III Section 280-15 and the Building Inspector's March 22, 2022 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for a permit to September 1; 2022 Regular Meeting construct an accessory in-ground swimming pool and an accessory,garage at 1) swimming pool is located in other than the code permitted rear yard, 2) accessory garage is located in other than the code permitted rear yard located at 673 Summit Drive in Mattituck. So this pool is technically in the side yard the code requiring the rear yard. It has proposed with both conforming 10 foot side yard and rear yard setbacks. The pool is 12 feet by 20, the accessory garage is in the front yard the code requires rear yard and it's a rather unique piece of property and some of those are. It's a bluff really it's�a land bluff there's no water down there but you know we've seen many Eileen what do you want to tell us? EILEEN WINGATE : Eileen Wingate 2805 West Mill Rd. Mattituck, New York. We tried very hard to work with what we've got. There is no rear yard that's usable so it made sense to put the swimming pool in the side yard, it happens a lot in that neighborhood there's lots and lots of swimming pools around. As far as the garage goes (inaudible) a very tiny one car garage it meets all the requirements, if it had a rear yard and I'm very,sorry that I didn't get to mark the garage out. There was a little sports car sitting exactly where the garage belongs and I didn't dare'take out my spray paint. I hope you all got to see where the garage was located. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yes we did. EILEEN WINGATE : The hardships speak for themselves. I don't believe that we're asking for a lot. Does the Board have any questions? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yeah I mean the only thing that I, the drop off from those walls is really dangerous. I mean you know it's scary. Many, many, many foot drop all the way around, I think they should probably have fencing up or something. TONY BINIARIS ' Hi my name is Tony Biniaris. So we did put.the fence up to a certain point so we're waiting to see what happens here because the type of fence we'll use we're planning to use glass four foot glass around there because of the pool: if the pool doesn't go in then the plan. is to use something less expensive. So we stopped at-a certain point with the fence on purpose because we just want to know what the next step might be so that's the'reason for it. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well you'll have to put around the pool you have.to put a fence. I'm just talking about (inaudible) if you have dog that chases a squirrel that dog is dead. TONY BINIARIS,: Well we have an electric fence right now on purpose because he,goes after the turkeys. So that was really the reason, we just bought you know like the.because it was the deck that recently was completed as well and you know we were going to connect the fencing to that deck we just need to know what that fencing would be based on the decision. September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well you know you're setback from the street by what is it a 252 foot long right of way it's still your front yard, for all intents and purposes you're behind another house. So it's just an odd technical definition. TONY BINIARIS :.It's a weird property. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN Nobody-will be seeing this at all it's going to be screened with evergreens and trees and . TONY BINIARIS : No if anything it's done environmentally you know friendly and the pool size if small. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It's very modest. Anything from the Board? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Just where will the pool'equipment will go? TONY BINIARIS Right now the plan would be the access is going to be the house here,the plumbing somewhere here. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : So close to the proposed garage area. TONY BINIARIS : It will probably be ten or twelve feet away from there. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yeah you; need to probably just add where your proposed pool equipment is. It needs to be setback;you'll see the condition on your it either has to setback certain feet from other property lines for noise in a sound deadening container plus you're going to need a drywell for pool de-watering also located on TONY BINIARIS : Yeah and as we go through the permit for that we will obviously design and (inaudible) pool company that we're probably going to go with hopefully here in Southold and you know obviously do that. We don't expect any variances related to the fencing We have plenty of room to play around in (inaudible). CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well we don't want to hold off your application so I'm not going to say we're going to .close it subject to receipt with a revised survey because surveyors are taking three hundred days to even .get it on their desks but because it's a pretty benign application so what with conditioned approval based upon submission prior to obtaining a C.O. on the survey that shows the; location of pump equipment or it can be a licensed engineer. EILLEEN WINGATE : I was going to say will you accept a site plan as opposed to a survey? Z September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yeah as long as it's stamped by a licensed professional we're fine with that. EILEEN WINGATE : We need that for the Building Department. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Does anybody in the audience want to address the application? Please come forward and state your name. JAMES NOTIAS : Hi my name is James Notias and our family owns the lot to the right it's a vacant lot so I'm just curious, where is the proposal? What's unclear to us is where the pool and the garage are proposed. So are we looking at the pool and the garage? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yes you are. The house is the big thing in the middle with all the hatch marks on it and the decking goes around it. There's the pool and the garage is right in the parking area. JAMES NOTIAS : So is that our lot right next to you? TONY BINIARIS : So it's going to be pulled back I think within code. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yes it needs to be setback 10 feet from the property line. TONY BINIARIS : So it's going to be pulled back 10 feet from the property as (inaudible) and it'll be one (inaudible) driveway and one I can show you. EILEEN WINGATE : You see th'e.circle on the right?Just forward of that. You're down and off to the right. That's your adjacent property line. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Why don't you do that out there. I don't think anybody is,objecting he just wants to know where. JAMES NOTIAS : So the reason that it would have been originally denied was because CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It's supposed to be in a rear yard but they do.n't have a rear yard. TONY BINIARIS : So to be honest with you if I could I would put it behind because I have a better view.The drop off is just so CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN Oh'you don't have any room there unless you really-like diving.- MEMBER ACAMPORA : I have a question, their house faces.your backyard, is that where your house is? TONY BINIARIS : I believe their house is on the side. September 1,2022 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON .WEISMAN :- What's-important .is that there is no objection they just want to know where it is. We're running behind, you guys can work this out yourself. I'm sure you'll figure out he'll show where everything. I'm going to make a motion to close the hearing reserve decision to a later date. Is there a second? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Second CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER DANTES : Aye MEMBER LEHNERT: Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye. HEARING#7673—SERGE APPEL and EVE BATES APPEL CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next application before the Board is for Serge Appel and Eve Bates Appel #7673. This is'a request for variances from Article XXIII Section 280-124 and the Building Inspector's March 11, 2022 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for a permit to construct additions to an 'existing single family dwelling at 1) less than the code required minimum front yard setback of 40 feet, 2) less than the code required minimum side yard setback of 15 feet, 3) less than the code required minimum combined side yard setback of 35 feet located at 8520 Main Road in East Marion. While you're getting yourself ready there, this proposed additions will have a front yard setback of 29.4 feet the code requiring a minimum of 40, side yard setback at'9.5 feet where the code requires a minimum of 15 feet and a combined side yard setback of 27 foot 4 inches where the code requires a minimum of 35 feet.This is for a new screened porch? JOAN CHAMBERS : Yes.joan.Chambers, I live on Main Rd. in Southold. The required front yard setback on the property is 40 feet and the proposed entry porch has been set at 29 but it should be noted that the proposed porch will align with the front line of the residence which being built prior to 1957 is at its greatest dimension only set back 32 feet. The proposed addition on the southeast corner of the house also follows the line of the existing residence although the angle of the property line reduces the setback from the current 12 feet. It should September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting be noted that in the area between. Old Orchard Lane to:the"west and Bay Ave. to the east along only the south side of the Main Rd. there are eleven houses and according to the information on the town website of those eleven three have been granted area variances. The files numbers are 1654, 5551 and 4679. This neighborhood_ has been developed .in a residential area for more than a century possibly two. I hope that the Board Members will recognize the restraint and careful design that these additions will allow the family to reconfigure the house and make a twenty (inaudible) without altering the essential character of the neighborhood. I'm here and I believe the homeowner is here too if you have any questions. MEMBER DANTES : Do you have copies of the variances in our file? JOAN CHAMBERS : I don't believe so no.J MEMBER DANTES : What were those numbers again? JOAN CHAMBERS : 1654 MEMBER DANTES : What year was that? JOAN CHAMBERS : I don't have that in front of me I don't have it in my notes. I can give these to you if you'd like. MEMBER DANTES : Perfect CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN.: Well look it's a real modest it's five-foot in depth I mean you can't get any smaller (inaudible). There is a lot of non=conformity there, it's an old historic (inaudible) most pre dating zoning. JOAN CHAMBERS : Looking at that and just looking at the 'map you have many houses this house is about as far away from the road as every other house along there. As I said we're not going any closer we're just following the line of the house and then the addition in the rear they're both following the line of the house'although because the house is tilted on the survey on the east side it increases the variance we're asking for and the,west side improves the setback. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It's a new second floor bedroom and bathroom and a first floor is that on the southeast corner? JOAN CHAMBERS : That's like a den or a TV room on the first floor. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I don't have any questions, anything from you Eric? September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting MEMBER DANTES : No it's pretty straightforward. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Pat? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Nope CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Nick, Rob? No, anyone in the audience who wants to address the application? Is there anybody on Zoom Liz, no. I'm going to make a motion to close the hearing reserve decision to a later date. JOAN CHAMBERS : Excuse me Leslie I had one question. We had an application in to relocate and put in a septic system for this house and when I approached the Building Department and asked them whether we needed to put in an IA system or a standard system they said that that decision was up to you which sort of surprised me but I'm just asking now cause we made the application. At this point we can change to one or the other with revisions. MEMBER DANTES : You're not putting in a bedroom so for us (inaudible) CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : They are putting in a bedroom. JOAN CHAMBERS : We're putting in a bedroom on the second floor. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The Department of Health now requires IA systems. We've been conditioning them now for a couple of years cause it's the right thing to do whether it's a new house or a very, very major renovation or when bedrooms were added. Now I think the Department of Health simply requires it but this is a pre-existing non-conforming dwelling. What's the current septic? Are you saying you propose to update it? JOAN CHAMBERS : The current septic is according to the engineer is adequate but when the Building Department said that they will require a septic upgrade on this property because we're adding a second floor with a den and a bedroom and when I said we're nowhere near water or wetlands do we need to put in the IA system they basically Amanda said that's up to the Zoning Board. So we kind of hesitated, we put the application in for a standard system. MEMBER DANTES : How many bedrooms are there? JOAN CHAMBERS : How many bedrooms are there?There are three. MEMBER DANTES : I would defer to the Department of Health. Once you go over five yes you need an IA system. JOAN CHAMBERS : Over five you need an IA okay. September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN Well what we can do is simply condition it based upon Health Department approval for the sanitary system. You can duke it out with them. MEMBER DANTES : Well no they have their codes and it's all written in there and which standards apply to you. I believe it's on line. JOAN CHAMBERS : Thank you. MEMBER DANTES : More environmentally sensitive areas sometimes we will require an IA for lower bedroom counts. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : So Leslie you have a motion to close, I'll second that. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER DANTES : Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye,the motion carries. HEARING#7675—JOHN and PATRICIA STACK CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next application before the Board is for John and Patricia Stack #7675. Request for variances from Article IV Section 280-18 and the Building Inspector's May 3, 2022 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for a permit to construct additions to ,an existing single family dwelling at 1) less than the code) required minimum front yard setback of 50 feet located at 7650 Nassau Point Rd. in.Cutchogue. So this is a side yard setback for an addition, front yard setback at 13 feet 1 inch the code requiring 50 feet. It looks like the existing current -setback is 8 foot 5 .inches. You're adding a second story addition and basement to the existing two story house. Is there someone here to oh there you are. How much demolition is actually going on here? Please state your name. WILLIAM BARBA Bill Barba P. 0. Box (inaudible) New York the architect on behalf of the owners Stack. There is going to be some additions obviously alterations on the inside are to be minimized as much as possible. (inaudible) slightly (inaudible) we have actually gone through September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting this process with (inaudible) the zoning application process depending on how much demolition (inaudible). SENIOR OFFICE ASSISTANT SAKARELLOS : Excuse me Leslie, Bill can you speak up we're losing you on Zoom. Come closer thank you. WILLIAM BARBA : So we did go through this process a little bit we wrote a letter I believe and was deemed (inaudible)that it was not going to be a substantial improvement. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : They're not calling it a demolition they're calling it additions and alterations. WILLIAM BARBA : Correct we did end up falling under that. So the proposed addition that we're talking about obviously Nassau Point Rd. is an eclectic road with lots of different architectures with the vast majority of the homes non-conforming in the front yard setback. We are required to have a 50 foot front yard and the existing house based on some of the structure was probably built sometime around the twenties. In addition to the (inaudible) front yard that's there the street is actually another 25 feet or so away from the property line so it's a little bit false perspective and we're doing our best to respect the non-conforming nature of the home and therefore we kept all the additions back an additional almost 5 feet. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : That was one of my questions, we all go out and inspect properties 1 heard a lot of swimming pool activities I went on the weekend but there's quite a big distance between the property line on the survey and the site plan and the edge of the road. WILLIAM BARBA : Yes CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Do you know exactly how many feet that is? WILLIAM BARBA : I think to the curb it's somewhere between 22 and 27 feet depending on where you take it from. We're aware that the house (inaudible) to its rear wall is non- conforming to the front yard. Ideally the house would be pushed back but there is a sanitary system between the existing pool and then (inaudible) so then that would require a large financial burden on the entire property to become fully compliant. MEMBER DANTES :The existing system is an IA system already is that what I'm reading? WILLIAM BARBA : No, no, the one that you're looking at is the proposed system. It actually in fact that system is being redesigned at the moment the Health Department gave us comments. There is a well on the south property and they had to sometimes they let you put it in the same location, they're actually forcing us to put it further back to be on the other side of the pool. September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting MEMBER DANTES : So you can put the system in the front yard because of the WILLIAM BARBA : Well there is no front yard it's only five feet. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yeah the property line is like an,8 foot front yard. It looks big but technically it's not WILLIAM BARBA : I believe the Health Department setbacks are 10 feet from the property lines and 10 feet from the house so we automatically,do not have space in the front yard to accomplish this. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : You're taking down some stuff aren't you? WILLIAM BARBA, Right so we're taking down the.detached garage and a shed., that shed was actually subject to a variance in the past so we are aware that we are,giving up that past decision but now it will be more conforming in that nature. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : So you're removing the shed and MEMBER DANTES :That's variance#5054? WILLIAM BARBA : Right CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Anything from the Board, Rob anything from you? MEMBER LEHNERT : No CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Nick? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : No CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Pat? - MEMBER ACAMPORA : No CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Anybody on Zoom Liz?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 i September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting MEMBER DANTES : Aye MEMBER LEHNERT: Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye. The motion carries, we'll have a decision in two weeks. i HEARING#7677—ELYSE JAMES and JOHN SINNING, ET AL CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next application before the Board is for Elyse James and John, Sinning et al #7677. Request for variances from Article III Section 280-14 and the Building Inspector's April 6, 2022 Notice of Disapproval based on an application to permit a lot line change to create a non-conforming lot, 1) proposed lot 1.4 at less than the code required lot size of 80,000 sq. ft., 2) proposed lot 1.4 less than the code required minimum lot depth of 250 feet located at 5000 Paradise Point Rd. and 5300 Paradise Point Rd. (adj. to Peconic Bay) in Southold. So this is a lot line change. Hi Rob. ROB HERRMANN : Rob Herrmann of En-Consultants on behalf of the applicant. The application proposes to transfer 5,183 sq. ft. of land area-from the undeveloped property that comprises the point of Paradise Point often referred to as the point property. The adjacent property owned by Elyse James known as 5000 Paradise Point Rd. As a result of the transfer of the area of the point property would decrease:from 3.03 acres to 2.91 acres or two acre zoning district and area of the James property would increase from 23,094 sq. ft. to 28,277 sq. ft. The purpose of the transfer is to provide` the James property an additional land buffer between the house and the severely eroding shoreline of the point property before the point property is forever sterilized which would happen upon completion of the lot line modification process. This,lot the point property was reserved from development. The reason we're before the Board today is because even though we're making a legally pre-existing non-conforming area of the James property less non-conforming by making it larger we cannot quote unquote create a non-conforming lot without variance relief. Also because of the sort of arrow like shape of the point property the legally pre-existing non-conforming 115 foot lot depth of the James property will be decreased 91 feet at its easterly property line where it meets the point property. The west side of the property which faces the rest of the community does not change. However the transfer will also result in the James properties legally pre-existing non- conforming 145 foot lot width increasing to a code conforming 203 feet. So in short the James property has three pre-existing non-conforming bulk schedule traits, one gets a little bit better September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting one gets a little bit worse and one is eliminated completely. Overall (inaudible) actually becomes more conforming as a result of the modification. I described in the application it brings the James property is and will remain consistent in character of the numerous undersized lots in the neighborhood that were created by the 1963-subdivision of Paradise Point nearly all of which have lot areas less than 80,000 sq. ft. width less than 175 feet and depths less than 250 feet. There will be no impact to the neighbors as,a result of the lot line change or environmental impacts. The wetlands permit for the lot line change was issued by the New York State DEC in July of 2021, we are, currently nearing the end of the Health Department review process and we have not yet filed an application with the Planning Board but have had preliminary conversations with the Planning staff with Mark and Heather and'we will file a formal application with the Board after hopefully securing this Board's approval to move ahead with the proposal. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Kim do you have a copy of the did you get copies from Planning? BOARD ASSISTANT : I just gave it to him. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Let me just enter into the record that the Planning Board you know when we have concurrent jurisdiction we do try to request comments from them a.nd they do support this application and the reasons are as indicated in the letter and mostly it's because it's creating greater conforming the other lot is the association on that? ROB HERRMANN' : It's not it's owned by a number of individuals all who are in.that association but it's not an association owned property. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It's a very unique yeah ROB HERRMANN : That's why it says Sinning et al cause it's James is actually one of the owners of the (inaudible) CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It's.an undevelopable beach access right at the tip. ROB HERRMANN :.It certainly is: CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Alright I don't have any other questions, Pat do you? MEMBER ACAMPORA : No CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Anything from you guys? I did see the damage I mean it's really there is none left. Okay anybody on Zoom Liz, no okay. Anyone in the audience that wants to address the application. Okay motion to close the hearing reserve decision to a later date. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Second September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER DANTES : Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye. HEARING#7678—JOHN SMYTH and MARGARET SMYTH CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next application before the Board is for John Smyth and Margaret Smyth #7678. Request for a waiver of merger petition under Article II Section 280- 10A to unmerge land identified as SCTM No. 1000-109-2-13.3 which has merged with SCTM No. 1000-109-2-13.4 or 13.6 based on the Building Inspector's Notice that merger had occurred based on non-conforming lots merging until they become conforming. I understand that you had requested an adjournment on this? MEMBER DANTES : At this time I would like to recuse myself from this application, they're my neighbors so. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Leslie I'm recusing also. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : We still have a quorum. BILL GOGGINS : William C. Goggins for the applicant, 13235 Main Rd. Mattituck, New York. Good morning yes we wanted to appear and make sure we have jurisdiction and then we request an adjournment. My client was seeking to get further evidence that we need for the hearing so I thought it appropriate to adjourn it. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay we don't have no problem with an adjournment, it's appropriate to be well prepared and have everything. I would hope that when you come back you want to adjourn without a date or do you want to adjourn to next month, how much time do you need? BILL GOGGINS : Next month is fine. September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well we're going to be crowded either way. BOARD ASSISTANT : We have to look at the agenda to see: CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : You know what we'll adjourn it to next-month we can possibly squeeze it in if not then it will be the following one but what I'd like to ask is that cause it was very hard for me to figure out what's going,on we did do the site inspection so (inaudible) undeveloped.lot but I want to know how it is that they all got merged'. There was a subdivision that Planning Board created and it's not real clear why the merger took place and exactly it appears you were asking for an,unmerger from one lot (inaudible) or the other but then it would still be merged to another one. There's two developed Pots so we need to know how come it got merged by force of law and what you know was it held single and separate or in common ownership and it's a little difficult with the information to figure out who owns what and,what you want unmerged. BILL GOGGINS : Yes I will separate and do a presentation for each,.it's a very strange situation. The subdivision was from 1971 October 5th and not to get too far into it,but it's always been thought of to be a separate lot pursuant to that subdivision. When my client bought it in 2011 now for the purpose at some point in the future of building a single family home there was no indication that it was merged and it just came up recently when they decided that they wanted to build a single family home there was an indication that it might be merged with two or three properties. I appreciate you granting the adjournment. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : You have a lot of digging to do to figure out what exactly happened here. BILL GOGGINS : (inaudible) case if it merged with two properties how is it merged. I mean we have a subdivision of properties CHAIRPERSON.WEISMAN : Yeah I.agree it's confusing as all get out. BILL GOGGINS : 1 don't think it's the intent of the code. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Alright thank you Bill. You want to vote on that you know what when an applicant requests an adjournment we don't even have to vote'on it we just say fine. BILL GOGGINS : Is there anyone here that wants to speak for or against it? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN I mean you're sitting here patiently so let's give you an opportunity. September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting THOMAS SANDERS : My name is Thomas Sanders my property is to the rear of their property. That's not it. I do have a deeded right of way to my property from the main road twenty five feet up and twenty five feet across the whole my front yard is the flagged lot so the twenty five feet is on their property which they're not allowed to touch. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It's on there. BILL GOGGINS : It is. THOMAS SANDERS : It shows the right of way on there? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yeah that has to remain in perpetuity. BILL GOGGINS : It does I can point it out. Those were all created (inaudible) THOMAS SANDERS : My property was a (inaudible), mine is four and five and I do have an active well on my property as well. BOARD ASSISTANT : Which is no 13.6 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The (inaudible) is more complicated, every time we turn around they change the lot number. THOMAS SANDERS : That's why I wanted to say to make sure the right of way was on there. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It's on there. THOMAS SANDERS : The owner had approached me asking me to dissolve that and I said no. Thank you. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : You're very welcome sorry you had to wait so long. Alright I think we're done here this is an adjournment. BOARD ASSISTANT : You have to vote. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : We didn't but I'll do it if you want it on the record. Now we had testimony so let me do that. I make a motion to adjourn to the next available date which we will determine in the office. Is there a second? MEMBER LEHNERT : Second CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye. Motion to recess for lunch. MEMBER LEHNERT : Second CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : 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#7679—ALLISON UKLANSKA and PIOTR UKLANSKI CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next application before the Board is for Allison Uklanska and Piotr Uklanski #7679. This is a request for variances under Article XXIII Section 280-124 and the Building Inspector's April 28, 2022 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for a permit to construct a deck addition to an existing single family dwelling at 1) deck located less than the code required minimum side yard setback of 10 feet, 2) deck addition places the existing swimming pool in other than the rear yard at 55 Knollwood Lane (adj. to the Mattituck Creek) in Mattituck. Is there someone here to represent the application? Let me just enter into the record what we're looking at. So you're doing a swimming pool, retaining wall and it's a side yard setback at 10 feet that's from your property line and the code requires September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting a minimum of 15 feet, the deck places the existing pool in a side yard where the code requires it to be placed in a rear yard and let's see what else we have. You're on a corner so you have two front yards, there were three C.O.'s submitted Certificates of Occupancy. Nothing for the pool, the pool is under construction it's not completed yet. ALLISON UKLANSKA : It is complete but we haven't closed the permit yet. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Would you just state your name for the record please we're recording this. ALLISON UKLANSKA : My name is Allison Uklanska PIOTR UKLANSKI : And I am Piotr Uklanski CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I was not able to completely access the site because there's fencing and so on around it. I went down a pebble path to see what I could see there. So there's an open permit for the deck and the pool. What happened here is the deck is connecting everything, everything on your house is pretty much connected. Without all the decking that pool would be in a rear yard but by attaching everything it became part of the house and that's what the dilemma is here. It says on your survey proposed privacy wall, it's already built we did PIOTR UKLANSKI : Yes and the permit is closed on that wall. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Closed PIOTR UKLANSKI : We passed inspection. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : How high is that wall? PIOTR UKLANSKI : I think it supposed to be five feet from the level of the deck. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : From the grade. ALLSION UKLANSKA : From the grade, it's six feet from the grade which is what the Buildings Department stipulated was required so we raised the grade on the interior part of the wall and the exterior they said could be what it currently is which I don't know the exact height of the wall. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It's very tall that's for sure. If you're standing on the pavers you know down closer to where the grade of the road is but you said you now have the permit for this September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting ALLISON UKLANSKA : Closed CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN-: Closed. So what would you like the Board to know in granting you your variances? ALLISON UKLANSKA : Well we purchased this home'where,.we live year round in September 2020. When we acquired the home we were aware of the architect who built it in 1962 and then expanded it and we studied his original drawings and the decking that he had proposed to build and we have been extremely conscientious because the house is significant home of Andrew Gellers it's the only,one of the North Fork. So we worked with a landscape architect who was recommended to.us by a local contractor in Cutchogue who apparently works with this person often and we.believe at the time in terms of the progress that we had done in terms of all these-renovations,and landscaping we've been doing since buying the home that we were following code. So we understood that the pool which we built first.was at a correct setback and we have always planned to do this deck that we wrap on two sides and unfortunately (inaudible) because this person is not from Southold town she did not realize that there was that additional setback because of the attachment as you explained. So in retrospect of course we regret that error of siting but I think are the same 3 feet from the code required so we're hoping that the Board will take that into consideration as a very minimal violation of the code and again I think that what we're proposing really adds to the beauty of the property and respects the original architecture and is not at all invasive to our neighbors or to the quality of life of those who live in the community. So we hope that you'll take that into consideration in terms of granting what (inaudible). CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Let's see'if the Board has any questions. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Leslie I would like to ask a question. It's unclear to me, and I don't know if this is a clerical error, the Notice of Disapproval sites a minimum side yard setback of 15 feet where the applicant proposes-10 feet but the Legal Notice says 10 ,and I'm just . wondering that might be a clerical issue. MEMBER DANTES :The requested relief is 10 feet. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : They have a proposed side yard setback of 10 feet. The code requires a minimum single side yard of 15 feet. MEMBER DANTES : It is a clerical issue. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : So it should have been 15 feet. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well the pool is legal they got a permit for it in that location. September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting PIOTR UKLANSKI : (inaudible) because pool is not part of the fence it's only really one corner because the other corner is 16 feet away. MEMBER DANTES : (inaudible) CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : No they wouldn't-but they weren't aware of that and- went with the aesthetic that sensitive to the original architect. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : So just to be clear then because the deck is attached to the house it's the house's side yard setback which is supposed to be 15 feet (inaudible) for 10 but the pool really is that then still in other than the rear yard? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : We had this before when the deck wraps around it it's now putting it in a side yard. It's a weird code. If you think it's the back of your house because the front of your house is here, why is it'in my back yard but you have this MEMBER DANTES : The pool is attached to the deck then the deck is attached to the house (inaudible) r MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I mean either way it still needs variance relief. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well they're not asking for a rear yard setback, it's a side yard setback and a pool in the side yard. MEMBER DANTES : Will you accept the condition that you can't enclose the deck and keep it open to the sky? ALLISON UKLANSKA . Oh yes we don't have plans to enclose the deck. MEMBER DANTES : That's my only question. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Pat anything from you? MEMBER ACAMPORA : No CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN Nick MEMBER PLANAMENTO : No CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Rob MEMBER LEHNERT : No I'm good. j CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Anyone ini the audience wanting to address the application? Liz is there anybody on Zoom? There are people on Zoom but not for this application. Hearing no 4 September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting 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 MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye. We should have a decision for you in two weeks at our next meeting which is usually around 5 o'clock over at the Annex Building upstairs in the Board Room. It's available on Zoom, it's not a hearing there's no testimony but you can hear us talk about the decision if you want. It will be mailed to you I'll go in the next day and sign it. HEARING#7690— LORELEI and LEIF GOBEL CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next application before the Board is for Lorelei and Leif Gobel #7690. This is a request for variances from Article III Section 280-15 and the Building Inspector's May 27, 2022 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for a permit to legalize an "as built" accessory shed and construct a sunroom addition to an existing single family dwelling at 1) located in other than the code permitted rear yard, 2) reverse a prior variance condition on Appeal No. 5696 that requires the deck to remain open to the sky located at 1100 North Sea Drive in Orient. Would you state your name please. LORELEI GOBEL : Yes my name is Lorelei Gobel I live in Orient. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : So this "as built" shed is partially in a side yard where the code requires a rear yard location and then the proposed sunroom addition is over your existing rear yard deck which you received a variance for from the Board of Appeals, that was ZBA 5696 in 2005 it looks like. LORELEI GOBEL : That was not from me but from the previous owner. September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay, so now they conditioned that deck by saying you could not build a mass on top of it. It looks like you're proposing not to heat the sunroom. LORELEI GOBEL : Right CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : You're not enclosing all of the deck section something was added in 2005 so LORELEI GOBEL : If I can explain I would be glad to. When you walk out of the house the back deck was built with the house and it,was I didn't realize it already was too close to the rear yard it makes it 26 feet instead of I think the required now is 30 and I guess one of the other owners added the deck that's.a step down and when they got the variance for that part of the deck that's when the condition went in for remain open to the sky. On our initial title paperwork you know how you have all of that it says that there was a variance for the deck but it doesn't continue to say that contingency so originally I didn't realize that that was an issue but we are not enclosing that part of the deck we only want to enclose the original part that was approved with the house so we're not extending anywhere closer to the property line at all. Because of the deck being too close that made our shed I was told not in the back yard, they put it in the side yard where it originally would have been and the reason we placed the shed that way instead of facing the other way was we would have lost another tree, two have. already died on us and we would have lost that huge maple tree if I had turned it sideways and put it from five feet or whatever from the property line then we would have had to take down the tree and we didn't want to kill the tree. I. do have for you I think when I turned in the paperwork only five of the seven return receipts came back so if you'd like this for the record.The mail person did not they just through the mail in with the other mail,this is one and this is the elderly lady that went to the trust that shows she received it. There is a reason for the sunroom when you're ready if you want to hear that. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Sure LORELEI GOBEL : Besides the silly fact'that I would like the space to do my jigsaw puzzles while my husband is listening to the news 24/7 my husband and I did make an application and passed the class to take in foster children and the back bedroom currently also doubles as my office that we kind of want to use so I kind of want to move my desk and put a play area out on you know this area even though it's not going-to be heated okay for the most part we'd make it useful for me to be able to not have everything on my dining room table and we have to clear out that stuff from that room in order to be able to accommodate a foster child or two. So it's kind of pushed it to more of a little bit more of a need if we're going to do this (inaudible) than just the want. We figured that was the least intrusive way to you know not make a lot of changes to the house. September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN Okay, let's see if anybody has any questions, Pat anything from you? MEMBER ACAMPORA : No CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Eric MEMBER DANTES : How close is your rear yard neighbor to the property line? LORELEI GOBEL : 26 feet MEMBER DANTES :To your neighbors is he close to the property line or is he far? LORELEI GOBEL : He's pretty close to the property line and he just put in a pool which is pretty close to the property line. We have no problems with them what's done on.their house and you know they have no problems with us. We're actually very friendly with all of our neighbors even though they're not always here but we watch out for them we are year round people. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Nick anything? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : No CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN Rob MEMBER LEHNERT : No questions. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Liz is there anybody on Zoom? SENIOR OFFICE ASSISTANT SAKARELLOS : No one with a hand up. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Thank you, is there anybody in the audience who wants to testify? Okay hearing no further questions or comments I'm going to make a motion to close the hearing reserve decision to a later date. We-should have a decision in two weeks. MEMBER DANTES : Second CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER DANTES :Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye 47 September 1,2022 Regular Meeting MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye. HEARING#7670—16125 SOUNDVIEW REALTY, LLC CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next application before the Board is for 16125 Soundview Realty, LLC #7670. This is a request for a variance from Article XXII Section 280-116A(1) and the Building Inspector's April 13, 2022 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for a permit to construct an accessory in-ground swimming pool at 1) less than the code required 100 feet from the top of the bluff located at 16125 Soundview Ave. (adj. to the Long Island Sound) in Southold. Is someone here to represent the application? I just read the legal notice Martin, this is a swimming pool the bulkhead setback proposed as 59.3 feet from the top of the bluff where the code requires a minimum of a 100 foot setback. We got one letter of support from the neighbor. MARTIN FINNEGAN : I actually have a second if I can hand up a copy? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :The (inaudible) was really small very, very hard to read it. MARTIN FINNEGAN : Good afternoon, Martin Finnegan 155 Main Rd. Mattituck for the applicant which is once again which is 16125 Soundview Realty, LLC. It's pretty straightforward as Leslie mentioned we're here seeking bluff setback relief to construct a 20 by 40 swimming pool about 60 feet from the top of bluff. The location of the pool was selected to be as conforming as possible in consideration of the location of the existing sanitary system which is about 22 feet to the west of where the pool is. Right now at the rear of the house there is a patio area a raised concrete wall around it and that will be removed to make way for the pool and it's kind of tucked in as close as possible to the house to minimize the relief being requested here. Just to get right into the criteria, the property as a whole is about one and a quarter acre in the (inaudible) zoning district. The house is located only 110.6 feet on the survey from the bluff so there's obviously that is the factor of where the pool can be placed as well. As you undoubtedly aware this neighborhood is characterized by houses of this size with bluff pools. I did reference a series of decisions similar to this application for properties along Soundview that have been granted bluff setback relief or some kind of relief to have a pool so in terms of character having a pool bluff (inaudible) is you know well within the neighborhood. We don't believe that granting of the relief would have any impact on the character of the neighborhood or detriment. The property is substantially screened on either 48 t September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting side so that looking at (inaudible) the pool would be buffered. I did by the way submit the two letters of support which of-course would further bolster the fact that this is in character of the neighborhood and no detriment. Really in terms of do we need variance relief, we do because as I mentioned the location of the house and the septic system. So there's really no way to do the horizontal configuration based on.that. We are seeking forty percent relief but we would argue that that is not (inaudible) substantial because the applicant is willing to_place the pool in the most conforming,location possible on Ahe property due to the existing constraints. There really is no perceivable physical impacts (inaudible) placing the pool here. I want to note that obviously we have an application pending with the Trustees for this, we did a pre submission conference with the Trustees walked the property. They had no concern about the location of the pool or any impacts on the integrity of the bluff for erosion or anything of that nature. I did just yesterday got to see the LWRP, I just wanted to briefly address that. It appears that your being asked to consider requiring the applicant to remove and upgrade the sanitary system so the pool can be pivoted horizontally. Reference is made to further (inaudible) policies four; five and six which speak to erosion, water quality, protecting the eco systems but there's absolutely no substance or explanation or justification (inaudible) to impose such action. (inaudible) installing the pool 60 feet from the back of the bluff in a .neighborhood that has pools all over the place on top of the bluff some at distances much closer to the bluff. There's nothing in the sanitary code that would require an upgrade of the sanitary system for the installation of a pool. There's no explanation for how the proposed location is going to cause any erosion, (inaudible) quality or any eco system. This is nothing more than (inaudible) it does not support the suggested mitigation. As I mentioned the Trustees went out there, they looked at this they would be the guys that would be the first ones to say this doesn't work and there was no indication of any concerns. I understand that you are required by the code to consider it what was suggested for consistency you are certainly not required to impose and I would ask that you consider it or dismiss those concerns as inapplicable to this property and, this application. So with that I agree that the applicant has got the criteria for issuance for the requested variance relief and I'm happy to answer any questions you might have. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Do you have copies of those priors, the prior decisions that you said all along there? MARTIN FINNEGAN : I do not have copies but I can send them to you. I just referenced them in my memo of law. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yeah I think we want to see them if you wouldn't mind, submit them. Can we discuss the applicant's possibility of oh by the way I should also say we do have a letter from a neighbor objecting to the pool based upon concern for bluff erosion, damaging September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting the neighboring properties. That's in our file, I don't know if you got a copy of that.The pool is proposed at 20 X 40 feet, have you thought about cutting it back to maybe 30 feet or 32 feet to increase the setback if you can't rotate it? MARTIN FINNEGAN : Obviously they were applying for the size they applied for I will certainly take that back to my client if that's something that the Board would like them to consider. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well you know any way we can increase that setback. MARTIN FINNEGAN : (inaudible) of a pool I think eventually we would have (inaudible) CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Rob, questions? MEMBER LEHNERT : Just one, have you guys thought of putting it in the front yard which is allowed by code? MARTIN FINNEGAN : I don't believe that was considered. I think it's pretty open there I think for privacy reasons and honestly there are some side yard pools along there but they are in the rear yard and just based on the configuration of the house and access and safety for children or what not I think they want to have it in that location. I mean this application has been going on for quite some time and so everything was thought out and considered in this location. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Nick MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I was just going to ask about the front yard location also. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Eric MEMBER DANTES : I don't have any questions. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Pat MEMBER ACAMPORA : No CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Anyone in the audience who wants to address the application? Come to the podium please and state your name. SUSAN PETRIE : Hi my name is Susan Petrie, I'm just going to read what I wrote. My name is Susan Petrie and my family has a home immediately to the east of 16125 Soundview Ave. at 16215 Soundview Ave. for forty five years. Our house and land is deeply personal and special to us all. The serenity, nature, beauty and local community are all factors that keep us coming back generation after generation. We all want to maintain the integrity of the Long Island September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting shoreline and as such want to'discuss the submitted variance and some of our concerns. We noticed the survey for 16125 Soundview Ave seems to be missing some pertinent information. It does not include a plan that reflects .the actual conditions along the east property line. It incorrectly.lists wrong owners to the east and west, is missing a scale and north arrow.or orientation. The pool edge seems to be shown only 12 feet it's very hard to read like you said from the property line meaning it's much closer to the east property line. The variance documents and site plan do not reflect security fencing and surrounding pavement around the pool perimeter which would encroach towards the setback and that is crucial. As noted, the pool as shown in the,current plan is less than 60 feet from the top of the bluff and 12 feet we think from our property line. The town code states the pool should be 100 feet from the bluff and 20 feet from our property line. Regarding environmental conditions and local ecosystem, the bluff is eroding at a rapid pace and I have photos to show you of the existing bluff. The disruption of the land can increase the potential for erosion and damage to the wetlands can physically alter the appearance and stability of the cliff that is already in jeopardy. For example, how will the additional runoff from this project be handled? No grades or elevations are shown and we are concerned that additional runoff would drain not only towards our property but more importantly towards and over the vulnerable bluff. This project changes a turf back yard condition into an impervious condition and runoff will increase. 617.20 Appendix B Short Environmental Assessment Form, includes boxes to that seem to be incorrectly checked. For example Item 15 does the project area contain species listed as state or federally threatened is checked no. This property and many surrounding it around the Horton Point lighthouse contain critical habitat for protected species including ospreys, hawks, migratory birds and owls that live and feed off the bluff species that are known to be vulnerable to construction impacts. Strong consideration regarding the potential impact to the integrity of not just the wildlife but the bluff is detrimental as an undesirable change will affect the overall character of the land and surrounding wildlife. Our property` line contains many indigenous large trees that could have root zones seriously impacted by construction trucks, concrete trucks, and excavation equipment required to excavate the in=ground pool. We recommend that should the variance be granted that construction be on the west side of the residence only. Another recommendation fora conforming pool location is to reposition and resize it with the long side parallel to the residence and moving it slightly west. If the dimensions are changed to 16 feet by 32 or 30 feet you gain footage from the bluff and on the sides of the structure. By moving the septic system to the west 5 feet from the western property line allowing for the required 20 foot from the pool and the utility area to the west the distance would increase the bluff footage setback and lessen the setback issue to our property. While the supplied survey shows a rough drawing of the pool it does not include the following that need to be factored into the overall construction and space variables. Speaker system, will this be part of the plan? Lighting, what additional lighting in addition to what is September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting shown? Fencing, should require a fence that is at least 8 feet in height for safety, noise reduction and protection from small children and pet and animals. Pavers, what concrete material will be surrounding the pool? Utility, pumps, heaters, etc. where is this positioned? How many feet is the current pool form our east property line? Water source, what is the water source to and from the pool? How does the wastewater drain and where? How is the pool being filled and emptied? The current drought situation should be considered as our respective water wells are in close proximity. The variance application overstates the existing vegetation screening and privacy landscaping. This can be seen by reviewing updated photos which were taken yesterday that show the deterioration and lack of planting. Our Southold property means everything to us and we would like to work together with our neighbors and the community to find a common ground. We feel our concerns can be and should be mitigated by more careful site planning, screening and construction access. Thank you for our time and consideration. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Do you want to submit your letter? SUSAN PETRIE : Did you want to see the photos or no? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : You can submit them that would be fine. Just give them to Kim, she'll make copies and send them over..Do we have Soil and Water on this? BOARD ASSISTANT : No CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I didn't think so. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Is there a bulkhead? I couldn't see any when I looked down the stair. SUSAN PETRIE : Yeah at the base (inaudible). MARTIN FINNEGAN : The applicants are not intending to be bad neighbors here, obviously this whole application is subject to Trustees and most of them if not all of those concerns will be addressed in that review. We're here for (inaudible) setback relief and setbacks as noted on the survey are correct the Building Department reviewed it and we're here (inaudible). The relief is for the bluff setback. I assure you that whatever construction methodology is required to you know protect different properties will be incorporated in this project. So I feel like this is a very straightforward application 60 feet from the top of the bluff based on the reason we had the pre-submission with the Trustees was to address that issue and they felt like it'll all be taken care of. So we still have to go back to them once we finish here and I assure that they will condition any approval on addressing those concerns. Fencing obviously is a code issue September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting that will be complied with or we wouldn't get a C.O. for a pool so I'm happy to I haven't had a chance to review this in detail but I will certainly discuss it and I'm happy to (inaudible). CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well having said that do you want to adjourn this to the Special Meeting so you can have that opportunity to talk to the neighbors and to discuss this with your client further about perhaps reducing the size so you know we don't have to make a determination without giving you a chance to take this information back to your client to see what you can work out? MARTIN FINNEGAN : Sure I'd be happy to do that. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Does that make sense Board? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Martin a separate question if I may, (inaudible) interaction with the applicant on my site inspection I believe a couple of the members met some of the (inaudible) tenants, does the house have a rental permit? MARTIN FINNEGAN : I don't know Nick. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Would you find out? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : When I went there I announced that we were there not to invade people's property we usually say Zoning Board or something (inaudible) trespassing and they knew nothing. They said oh we're renting we don't know anything about this pool but we'd be interested as to where they thing they want to put it so yeah there's currently renters in there and of course that brings to mind if they're renting do they have a permit which is sort of a separate thing from the pool but nevertheless PAT ACAMPORA : They clearly admitted we're renters We don't know what they're doing. MARTIN FINNEGAN : Okay CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : And you're going to submit prior decisions for pools in the neighborhood? MARTIN FINNEGAN : (inaudible) CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay so then I'm going to make is there anybody else in the audience wishing to address the application? Anybody on Zoom Liz? Okay so I'm going to make a motion to adjourn this hearing to the Special Meeting on September 15tH SUSAN PETRIE : May I ask a question, does this take place here? September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : No that meeting will be in the Board Annex Room on the second floor of the Annex Building Bank building and it's not a hearing so there won't be any testimony. It's going to be available on Zoom it's an open meeting with the public, you can listen and attend and if we have what we need from counsel and at that point we just close it. We won't have a decision that night because you know we need the information beforehand and if the Board is satisfied we'll close it and that'll be that. If not we will adjourn this to another hearing. That's how the process works. Okay hearing no further questions or comments I'll make a motion to adjourn I think I made the motion but 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#76595E—DANIEL and LINDA LYNCH CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next application before the Board is for Daniel and Linda Lynch #7659SE. Applicant requests a Special Exception under Article III Section 280-13B(13). The applicant is owner of subject property requesting authorization to establish an accessory apartment in an existing accessory structure at 2070 Grathwhohl Rd. in New Suffolk. This was a previously adjourned so is now back before the Board. We heard it in August and it was adjourned to today. Is someone here to represent the application? BOARD ASSISTANT : The representative is Jennifer Wicks and she is on Zoom and we're asking her to unmute. JENNIFER WICKS : I'm here. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : So Jennifer what's changed since last month if anything?A September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting JENNIFER WICKS : Nothing has changed since last month, it's still there no. renters just time to get it approved. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN This is a little confusing because even though there was we have information actually from a previous owner that there was a space-above the garage there was according to this information we had from the previous owner'an open stair and there was no bathroom and that appears to be something the Lynch's added. JENNIFER WICKS : No, no this was sold with a second floor studio, it was sold this way. This is how they purchased it they didn't do anything to the home. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay so they must have been an in between there or something who did that. The people we talked to had the house quite a long time though and said that they had put in a second floor but there was no bathroom it.was just an open stair. So clearly we'll have to check the property records, somebody must have purchased it in between, done that work and JENNIFER WICKS : No it was it went from Elizabeth Cantrell to the Lynchs' so unless there was somebody in between there or we're talking about the purchaser before Elizabeth Cantrell the previous owner was Elizabeth Cantrell. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : That is the person we spoke to and she took the plans and marked up what was not put in by her family and that was the enclosed stair and bathroom. There's another issue though, this is really not an apartment, an apartment requires a kitchen it is a full complete living space. This is a bedroom and full bathroom in an accessory garage. So it doesn't meet the standards for a Special Exception for an apartment cause you have to you know be a maximum of 750 sq. ft., you have to have a kitchen, it all has to be omone floor, you can have one full bathroom in it but it is meant to be inhabited by a full time renter whether it's a family member or JENNIFER WICKS : I'm sorry when this was noticed or came up this is what she was told to do apply for this permit. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay I understand. I mean because it's kind of an anomalous situation I don't know what you would call it, I guess what you would have to do in order to qualify would be to draw up floor plans to propose converting and:possibly expanding this thing with a bedroom and a kitchen and a full bathroom and a sitting area. We can show.you countless plans of accessory apartments in accessory structures.They would also have to have that principle residence as their full time year round principle residence and need documentation of that. Then they would have to, provide information on who they were going to rent it to year round with a lease whether it was a' family member, we need birth September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting certificates and so on and it's a much more involved procedure than what our application is at the moment that you submitted. JENNIFER WICKS : Okay can I ask you, what is it that she can do to end this? Her husband is terminally ill, she just wants to rectify the situation? What can we do to just stop this? I mean she is saying this is how she purchased the home. I understand what Elizabeth is claiming, no that that isn't the way but she's insisting it is which is you know it's not even the point. What can she do to legalize it, get rid of it she just needs to know. Like I said her husband is terminally ill, she's struggling so if she just wants this over with. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I suppose the easiest answer is remove the sleeping space the habitable space and call it garage storage. JENNIFER WICKS : Okay and the bed just remove it? MEMBER DANTES : Well you're allowed to have a half bath you're just not allowed to have a shower. JENNIFER WICKS : Okay so I'll have her remove the shower and remove the bed? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yep and it's gotta be unconditioned. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : The sheetrock has to come down also. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : You can sheetrock it, it cannot it should not be conditioned space. It shouldn't be heated or air conditioned if it's storage space. JENNIFER WICKS : Okay so remove the shower,the bed and the heat? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yep to garage storage. JENNIFER WICKS : Alright I will speak to her and have her do that and then do I come in with a new floor plan? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : No we will have to deny the application for an apartment which it isn't an apartment and then when you do those changes you go into the Building Department and they will give you an updated Certificate of Occupancy for a garage with storage on the second floor. JENNIFER WICKS : Okay CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : You know what Jennifer, what I think what you probably should do is go in and you know sketch out what you're going to do and go talk to the Building September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting Department before you invest any more effort into this just to make sure that they're on board with this. We don't want you or your client have to go through any unnecessary confusion. So they are the people that make those decisions, they will be doing the building inspection and particularly if you have to speak to John Jarski and say I really would like to make an appointment for you to come out here and tell us exactly what we would have to do to convert this to a legal use. He'll tell you exactly what you have to do. He'll say you have to take the shower out, I don't think I don't know about the heat I think that you will have to remove that but they would I would rather have you get that information from them so there's no miscommunication. I don't want to speak on their behalf. JENNIFER WICKS : Thank you. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Is there anyone in the audience who wishes to address the application? Is there anybody on Zoom Liz? Okay what do we want to do? MEMBER PLANAMENTO,: Question, do we want her to withdraw or do we close it? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Jennifer do you want to just go and take this a resolve with the Building Department and withdraw this application? JENNIFER WICKS : Yes please. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Based on the application the Board is going to have to write a denial. JENNIFER WICKS : Okay so yeah. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : (inaudible) voluntarily withdrew this. JENNIFER WICKS : Okay I will withdraw the application. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : We will need that in writing. JENNIFER WICKS : Okay CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : So I'm going to close the hearing. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Do you want to adjourn it to allow her client to speak to her client? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Motion to close, is there a second? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Second CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor? 7 September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER DANTES : Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye. HEARING#7645 &7646SE—MELISSA HOBLEY and PAUL YAU CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next application if for Melissa Hobley #7645 and #7646SE. These were opened and closed together and adjourned from a prior time so there's no need to read the Notice of Disapproval again. Hi Anthony so the Board did receive a plans again from you but it would appear that there were no changes from the previous plans I didn't see any changes and we did get as of August 311t a memorandum from the Building Department indicating that the livable floor area is determined by them to be 797 sq. ft. and is not allowed pursuant to Section 28-13B(13)A of the code which states, accessory structure shall contain no less 450 sq. ft. and shall not exceed 750 sq. ft. of livable floor area. It would appear that you are 797 instead of 750. ANTHONY PORTILLO : Alright I'll respond to both those comments, yes we made some revisions to the plans. One was that we made the building we made the accessory apartment smaller so I don't know where those calculations are coming from, I actually laid it out on the table and I thought it reflected what we discussed with the Building Department. That includes the staircase, it includes the landing at the bottom of the staircase and all the space in the interior. We removed the floor system on that storage space so it's basically open not just opened to below. What we discussed at the last meeting we reduced the height per some of the requests from neighbors that'came in. We also met with the neighbors and discussed the project and there was an agreement. One of the major concerns which I don't think was really brought up to the Board probably not necessarily a Board thing but it was the access to the beach and having you know possible renters accessing their private beach area. So there were some deed restrictions that the Hobleys agreed to with the neighbors and the neighbors have reviewed our drawings. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I think there was a great concern about the second floor apartment that you were proposing and a three,car garage and 4 feet from the property line.They didn't September 1,2022 Regular Meeting have a problem with the existing one story building at 4 feet but adding a second story 4 feet from the neighbor's property line and also visually something that people would pass by and see it rather prominently was a great concern. So did you make any progress on that, cause it looks like you presented the same second floor (inaudible). ANTHONY PORTILLO : So we actually lowered the roof by a foot which I mean there's really not much which we discussed with them and like I said they understood that you know the internal meeting that we had was they were basically on board like not changing the architecture and they understood what (inaudible) and they just asked to get it lower-so I got it as low as possible cause I'm at 7'6" plate height and we're angling up to an 8 foot ceiling height where before it was an 8 foot plate height and up to a 9 foot ceiling height. We played a little bit with the pitch. Again we don't have much room because we're at a 2 % pitch which allows us to still use asphalt shingles and honestly I really don't want to go lower than that. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Did you at any point discuss the possibility of using the existing garage as the accessory apartment. I mean you actually have to put in an elevator to accommodate the applicant's mother so (inaudible). ANTHONY PORTILLO : It was discussed by again the Hobleys explaining how they need the apartment space to the neighbors, the neighbors understood that, they asked them to get the building as low as we can get it we presented these revised drawings to them. We currently don't have any resistance from the neighbors they were in agreeance. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Do you have any neighbors here to , ANTHONY PORTILLO : I don't know if they actually came the Hobleys are here if you'd like to speak to them they can explain. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : We want to get this confirmed either by the neighbors or something in writing that they're no longer in objection to the second story because that was a very large rejection. ANTHONY PORTILLO : I figured their not coming was indicating that there's no further objections but CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :That's not adequate. ANTHONY PORTILLO : We can probably get a letter from them. Would you guys like to talk to Melissa Hobley. MELISSA HOBLEY : Hi how are you? We were away and were not here the last time and we were really surprised by the objections, we want to be great neighbors. We're also the only September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting family within many houses that's year round so we've really become members of the community. We were surprised at the objections, we took the time as you probably noticed we even withdrew so that we could take the time to address all their concerns. The main issue that the neighbors and we do have in writing lots of emails some meetings over beer and wine and their main objection their concern is more the shared beach was that some future owner of the home we never rent we never rented we have two little kids we're year round I couldn't rent (inaudible) or our house there's too much stuff that other people would be there. So we met with them and we really got an idea of what their concerns were. We wouldn't have come before you having known that. They said it's really about those shared pieces of the shared beach so we've amended or (inaudible) in the covenant (inaudible) so they wrote to us yesterday saying we have no objection and we feel good you all proceeding. We can get I guess more. PAUL YAU : We'd be happy to submit that email as confirmation from them, we have from all three neighbors. MELISSA HOBLEY : And they were happy we lowered the apartment by a full foot, we took out what was going to be kind of storage and made it open so there's no chance that's another bedroom. We also went ahead and removed trees that were blocking one of the views so we tried to take extra steps to say you know we want to be great neighbors and you know make you all feel CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Let me remind you if you're not aware of this fact and remind your neighbors of the same thing, you are not permitted to rent that apartment to anyone other than your mother. MELISSA HOBLEY : Yes we're aware. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Or someone who is on the affordable housing registry. MELISSA HOBLEY : Yes we're totally aware. PAUL YAU : That's subject to a special permit which we're not asking for. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : No by virtue of our approval we are approving this for your mother to rent. No future this will not transfer automatically to new owners because they would have to verify a year round principle dwelling is the primary house, they're going to have someone in there that is either eligible for workforce apartment housing or a family relative. So they would have to go through the same process you are, not the construction process but you know so there are some assurances in place because this code was intended to create September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting intergenerational housing and workforce housing. I do want to ask Anthony to address the differences between your calculation of livable floor area and the Building Departments. ANTHONY PORTILLO : So again I wanted to make it very clear and (inaudible) that the stairs last time so I actually had a meeting with Mike on this project and another one so there is confirmation that Mike would be calculating the stair and the landing at the bottom of the stair. So what we did was make the landing smaller at the bottom of the stair before it encroached into the garage and we provided a pretty clear break down so I'm not sure. We even labeled the rooms the footage. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I don't know if it's the vaulted space. ANTHONY PORTILLO : I don't know if he's calculating that open space. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I'll tell you what, should the Board decide to approve it we want to approve a maximum of 750 sq. ft. of livable floor area and you could work it out with Mike cause this back and forth is getting nowhere. MEMBER LEHNERT : It looks like you took the rooms themselves and (inaudible) so take the width of the walls out, there's probably a little difference. ANTHONY PORTILLO : Okay but it's interior dimensions that were provided. I don't know where he's getting it. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well I'm going to let you figure that out. ANTHONY PORTILLO : If I have to draw a little bit to get it (inaudible) I'll work that out with Mike. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : You're not going to get a building permit until that's all resolved you know that. ANTHONY PORTILLO : I understand. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Is there anyone in the audience who wants to address the application? Is there anybody on Zoom Liz? I'm going to make a motion to close subject to receipt of confirmation in written form from neighbors with no objections. ANTHONY PORTILLO : You got it. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Is there a second? MEMBER DANTES : Second September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER DANTES : Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye. BOARD ASSISTANT : This is on both applications? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yes. I'm going to make a motion to recess for five minutes to get some water and be prepared for the next application. 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. HEARING#7598SE—160 ROUTE 25, LLC CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Before we get started I'm just going to read the Legal Notice into the public record and then-I'm going;to ask Liz to explain to anybody that's on Zoom how they can participate when it's their turn to be heard from. This is an application for 160 Route 25, LLC #7598SE. The applicant requests a Special Exception pursuant to Article VIII Section 280- 386(3) stating that special exception approval from the Board of Appeals is required to construct apartments over businesses and professional offices consisting of four (4) buildings to contain medical offices on the first floor with forty (40) apartments on the second floor located at 160 Route 25 in Greenport. The applicant is represented by Martin Finnegan the September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting Attorney and before we get started on listening to him I'm just going to give you a quick overview of what exactly is going to happen this afternoon. First of all the lead agency on this coordinated review is the Planning Board. Planning Board will be determining a state environmental review finding. No decision can be made by any Board without a SEQR determination. So today we're here really fundamentally to.listen to the public, we will not be making a decision and we will not be closing this hearing. We will adjourn without a date subject to SEAR, Planning Board will hold public hearings relative to that and once that decision has been made then it will come back before this Board. So this is an opening because both the Planning Department and the Zoning Board and the Planning Board are very interested .to make sure that every single concern that-the public has both in support and perhaps with questions and objections is properly ,addressed and that our decisions any decision is based upon complete information from the public and from all required agencies. So today is mostly a.listening session. We have received several letters. I'm'going to just let a couple enter a little bit from a couple of them. We have received a request from the Planning Board this is a letter from the Planning Board basically saying that we have asked them for comments and they need more-time. They need to actually have more information so they requested that we continue with this hearing what we-gather today and what will be available to them it will help them with their SEAR determination. So we're just going to hold this open. We have received two letters from neighbors I'll summarize, by the way all of these letters are on Laser Fiche on our website the town's website available in detail for any of you to look at or anyone else who wants to, it's a completely transparent process. We have one letter from a neighbor nearby neighbors voicing some concerns about accidents and traffic, scenic view sheds, lack of (inaudible) buffers, impact on drainage and nearby wetlands and the scale of the project. The other one basically says similar things, concern for additional traffic, concern over traffic exiting and entering on Knapp Place on a small residential street, night lighting, destruction of the wooded lot, construction and noise. Again the details are available for you to look at. We have a letter from Group for the East End, I'll read you a very brief excerpt. There are strong thinking that the application does require an in depth review in the form of a draft environmental impact statement, DEIS pursuant to SEAR. We will support the town Planning Board's issuance of a positive declaration to ensure that the project is given an appropriate review that provides for an opportunity to address potential impacts and discuss possible mitigation measures and alternatives in a transparent and comprehensive manner. In our view the following have the potential to create moderate to large environmental impacts traffic conform to the zoning code, wastewater management density, affordability and the transformation to our highly visible undeveloped parcel located at the corner of two scenic byways. Again the details of what they're talking about are available in the letter. The final letter that I want to enter is from the Southold Town-Housing Advisory Commission. I'm writing in support of the above reference proposed workforce housing project not simply 63 September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting because it will meet the dire need in this town but because I believe that this project stands on its own merit as meeting stringent requirements. The project will result in creation of according with workforce housing apartments along with medical offices on a five acre parcel . (inaudible). This proposal encompasses an allowable use of the parcel zoned for office residential. The developed space less 'than the allowable density will be connected to Greenport sewer, will utilize Suffolk County water, is located close to the village and pedestrian sidewalks will mitigate traffic concerns by conforming to the D.O.T's design of a planned round about in that area slated for 2023 and then she just concludes. Having entered those into the record first we will hear from the applicant's attorney and any particular people you wish to have testify on your behalf. Then we will have some questions from Board Members and then we'll open this up to the public for your comments. If you want to make comments we respectfully as that you try and keep it to three minutes or so, there's a lot of people I'm sure that want to say things and if you hear something that somebody already said that you agree with, rather than repeating the same thing just stand up state your name and say I agree with the last person. All if this by the way is being recorded and will be transcribed in a written document a transcription of this hearing will also be available cause sometimes you.forget things so we have it all written out. Liz I want you to explain now how people can participate on Zoom if they wish to provide testimony. SENIOR OFFICE ASSISTANT SAKARELL;OS : Thank you Leslie, for those on Zoom who would like to make a comment please raise your hand and we'll give you further instructions on how you will be able to speak. If you're using a phone please press *9 and we will let you know what to do next. For those speaking in person at the Meeting Hall at the podium we have papers if you can please put down your names, please print them for me so that I will be able to type them up when the transcript is done. Thank you. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Thank you Liz. Okay I think let's get started. MARTIN FINNEGAN : Martin Finnegan 13250 Main Rd. Mattituck for the applicant 160 Route 25, LLC and on behalf of that and the owner is Paul Pawlowski the owner who is here with me today. I'm pleased to present this application for Special Exception approval required under the residential office zoning (inaudible) to create forty units of desperately needed workforce housing for essential workers in our town and the Village of Greenport. This project will move the town one step closer to achieving the number one goal of the housing chapter of the town's Comprehensive Plan which is to create affordable housing. The site plan which is up on the screen and I have another one here for the Board's review shows the location of the premises which is at the intersection of Main St. and CR 48 in Greenport across from the old Shady Lady and property is a limited business zoned property it also lies just north of that place. The majority of the surrounding properties to the west and to the east and to the south September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting are residentially zoned. This parcel is R zoned which is indicative of the Town Board's recognition of the parcel (inaudible), the parcel is suitable as a transition area between the residential uses and the business property across the street. The proposed development consists of four campus style mixed use buildings. The three units of medical office space on the first level and ten work force apartments on the second level of each building including five studios and five one bedroom apartments. The studios are proposed to be 350 sq. ft. which is minimum requirement under the Town Code, the one bedrooms will be approximately 525 sq. ft. The apartments will not comprise more than fifty percent of each building. There will be ample parking on site for the units as you can see. So the project satisfies all of the use regulations for apartments in the RO zone as per the reference regulations in the hamlet business code. In fact this project is designed to be entirely compliant with the bulk schedule requirements for the RO zoning district as can be found by the site data chart on the site plan and the Notice of Disapproval that did not require any ancillary dimensional variance relief. It's also noteworthy that this property has access to town water and to the village sewer with an approved (inaudible). As the Board may be aware the New York State Department of Transportation has (inaudible) to construct a new roundabout at the intersection of Rt. 25 and CR48 which is slated to be completed prior to or simultaneously with this project in late 2023. The roundabout is designed to provide significant traffic calming at the intersection. So having established that the proposed construction is compliant with the applicable zoning regulations and I wanted to address the Special Exception criteria and matters to be considered in the town code by this Board. As you're aware Special Exception approval is available for apartments above professional offices on a determination by this Board that the project as proposed satisfies the criteria in Section 280-142 of the Town Code for prior consideration of a sixteen matters to be considered in Section 280-143. The proposed project is also subject or will be the subject of a full site plan review by the Planning Board staff who are special (inaudible) here today. I previously submitted a memorandum of law you did receive that? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yes MARTIN FINNEGAN : Okay, that addresses the reasons why the applicant is confident in that the project satisfies all of the criteria for the issuance of a Special Exception, I would just like to underscore a few points. The first two criteria are similar and ask you to find the proposed apartments above medical offices will not prevent the orderly and reasonable use of any adjacent property or other uses in the RO zoning district or surrounding zoning districts. This RO zoned parcel is a corner lot on the edge of the village and in close proximity to the hospital, San Simeon, Peconic Landing, Greenport High School and the Greenport and East Marion Fire Department. All of those institutions are vital to our town. They all need employees to operate and all employees need a home. We submit that this is the ideal September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting location for medical office space which is a permitted use as of right and for the establishment of second level apartments there as well. The property is amply sized to accommodate the proposed use as depicted on the site. Access as you can see is limited to the western and northern sides of the property. The tail section of this property that juts down to Knapp Place will remain undisturbed and that-is intended to avoid any impacts to the neighboring homes along that. So there was a concern you mentioned out the outset Leslie in the letter you have and there will be no access to the site from Knapp Place and that entire strip will just remain as it is. The facades of both buildings of a residential design is intended to blend in to the surrounding community. The site plan proposes significant (inaudible) screening to buffer the use neighboring residences as well. As previously stated the proposed apartments are consistent with the Town's Comprehensive Plan and stated purpose of the RO zoning district. The third criteria ask you to find the health, safety, welfare, order and convenience of the town will not be adversely affected by the addition of apartments to this site..The applicant submits that all of these things will be in fact enhanced by this project. The project is entirely conforming to the zoning regulations and the bulk schedule for the RO zone district. The property will have minimal if any adverse environmental impacts as it has access to town, water, village sewer and all storm water runoff will be managed on site in accordance to Chapter 236. Yes there will be cars coming and going from the site but the proposed round about and the limited access points will minimize potential traffic, impacts and ensure safe ingress and egress. The extent that there is any impacts from the proposed development the applicant stands ready to address and to mitigate them through the site plan process. With respect to the fourth criteria the applicant submits that the proposed-use is in complete harmony with the purpose of the RO zoning district, all applicable zoning regulations and will undoubtedly further one of paramount goals of the town's Comprehensive Plan. As for the fifth criteria you can plainly see from your review of the renderings they are on the title sheet of the plan but I just brought those so you can see a little closer. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I think we should have the public take a look at them. MARTIN FINNEGAN : The renderings depict the proposed workforce apartments above medical office space and thoughtfully designed to be compatible to surrounding residents. It uses the substantial green space and, natural screening.The scale of the development it totally compliant with the bulk schedule and will look a lot better than what is there now. This is not a pristine woodland, there are mounds of dirt and debris and old foundation there and I don't think this is a property in the slightest bit (inaudible) converted to a park. This project will vastly improve the (inaudible) Greenport village. As for the remaining criteria, the review of the site plan confirms that the property will be readily accessible for first responders and compliance of Chapter 236 as I've already mentioned. To the extent that they are applicable the matters to be considered under Section 280-143 have been addressed in our September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting memorandum of law so I'm not,reiterating it here but I submit you will find upon review of them that they both serve and support the project's compliance with the Special Exception criteria. Therefore I respectfully request that the applicant be granted the Special Exception for the construction of the proposed apartments over the permitted medical office space. We welcome any questions from the Board. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I do want to say because people get very confused about what is a Special Exception exactly. It's a weird title, it's rather misleading. What it really should say it's a special review because the uses have already been determined to be acceptable to the zoning district. They are permitted in that zoning district. The difference is, the Board of Appels reviews it to make sure it complies to the standards Martin just outlined and that adverse impacts are mitigated or non-existent or minimized to the greatest extent possible. So it's sort of like checking the boxes, you comply or you don't comply. It's not'like a variance those are very different set of standards. So I just want to make sure that the public understands the uses are already deemed to be acceptable for that zoning district so we're here just to make sure that the standards he reviewed about the impacts and that's what SEAR does also.That is exactly what that particular review intends to accomplish to make sure that there are no adverse impacts or that they are really only minimal, that they don't rise to moderate to severe or large impacts. During the site plan process there will no doubt be changes made that is what most commonly happens. That's another reason why the Board of Appeals is listening today and not making decisions because when we stamp something as approved that's what's approved and nothing else. So we have to kind of coordinate this carefully between the Boards for the sake of the applicant and for the sake of the public and both Boards make sure that we're in a collaborative mode with each.other. I actually did have a question Martin, maybe Paul can answer I don't know, people are very , very concerned with two things in this town in my opinion. Preservation of water quality and wildlife habitat is of great concernto many as it should be. We need to preserve our water quality. The real fact is employers need places for their employees to live, families need places for their kids to live, we all know the prices of housing out here are going out just skyrocketed out of control. We have to do both, we have to have to do both. We can't politicize this and pick one against the other it makes no sense. How do you make a priority of one or the other? One thing that people do want to know is,,is this going to benefit people who live here because we talk about affordables and then suddenly we don't have, people who live here qualifying for them and that depends on the way in which the model was developed with fundingand so on. We also know that the BMI that's applied in this town meaning the standard by which rents are set are really out of wack with the incomes that people make out here._Our housing is much more expensive than up island. I would like the applicant to think about how that might work to let September 1;2022 Regular Meeting the public and this Board understand more about exactly who is going to be allowed to live in these places. Can you do that Martin or Paul? PAUL PAWLOWSKI : Paul Pawlowski owner of 160 Main Rd. Greenport. I believe there was two questions, one was about water quality and the second one was about affordability and who is going to live there. As far as environmental impact and water quality that's a strong argument and we feel this application where it sits and the ability to connect to the sewer and town water is as ideal as' it gets. There's no perfect application when it comes to environmental impacts but what makes this application better as ideal as it gets are those two resources that we have exposure and that's very rare anywhere in Southold town. This is a Southold town property that's in proximity to the Village of Greenport sewer district and it's almost five acres. There's no other piece of property like this in all of Southold Town that has that ability here. One of the reasons that the Affordable Housing Committee and the Town Liaison at the time came to me and we looked at several properties where could we help with this affordable housing crisis. That one major ingredient sewer connection made it very pal able for us to apply knowing what we're proposing. As far as the other environmental impacts, this is not a pristine property by any means. Whoever owned it years ago went in and put in a foundation roughly 100 by 300 feet whatever it is and it's still there, pushed all the dirt up to the west side of the property and all the mature trees that have been there prior to that developer at the time are still going to exist around the whole perimeter to the south and the east but if you walk into those properties this is not a pristine wooded property and technically right now has no water retention. We will meet the code on water retention and we will improve that water quality we feel in terms of storm water runoff than what's currently there. As far as this project which is again very different than other ones that have been proposed, this is all privately funded. We will not be asking for any federal grant money whatsoever, this is privately funded. We are guided by the fair housing clause, fair housing rules but we feel that working with the Affordable Housing Committee and knowing other projects were done with private funding in East Hampton or South Hampton we feel our percentage of locals residing at,-this project is much greater than those that that use federal funding. We are going to we hope that first responders get first crack at this in Southold Town, the Village of Greenport and we feel a large majority of those first responders will be lining up here. That's the best way I can put it is, private funding gives us a little bit more level movement with fair housing and with local advertising and our campaign with the Affordable Housing Committee we feel that we'll achieve a very high percentage much greater than others that have been done in the past. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Thank you Paul. Do you want to say something Martin? MARTIN FINNEGAN : No I just didn't know if there were any more questions. September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting ' a CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN Let me see ,if at the moment if anybody else on the Board has anything to say or questions they'd like to ask. MEMBER DANTES : The only thing I'll say is at some point we would like to see what income levels you guys plan on servicing, workforce housing and what the rentals the definition of affordable rents you're proposing: MARTIN FINNEGAN : Okay MEMBER DANTES :There's a broad definition of what's affordable and what's not. It would be helpful to have a more specifics. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Out here the number is zero, that's what's affordable at this point. PAUL PAWLOWSKI : Paul Pawlowski, our goal with this again these technically going into this project, these technically could be market rate apartments defined by our (inaudible) that's not our goal. Our goal is to offer affordability in perpetuity. These rents will average around $1,400 a month and have a one percent increase a year. Roughly that number the area mean income levels we're looking at are roughly eighty, ninety percent area mean income. That number is much more ideal for potential local residents than other workforce housing projects that have already been done. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : While-you're there Paul, you said in perpetuity so again there won't be a sliding scale, it's not five or seven years the goal will be that these will be below market rate rentals for the lifetime of the structure. PAUL PAWLOWSKI : Yeah the one percent increase is just to go compared to inflation. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Thank you, that's good information to have. Anything else from the Board? Okay well we'll probably have some other questions later so why don't we MARTIN FINNEGAN : Okay so we're just going to standby. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yeah I think we'll just open this up for public comment at this time. MARTIN FINNEGAN : I would just ask I think when the,publie is,complete we will if the record is going to remain open we will be prepared to respond in writing or at a later date if any issues we would like to answer. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Fair enough. I'm going to ask if you are to say anything to testify we have at the podium both of them signup sheets. In our transcription we have to put down the names of who spoke and rather than asking to spell your name every single person that comes September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting up here we're just going to ask you to please jot your name down as someone who,has spoken and then we will be able to put it in the transcript. Who would like to go first? CAROL LINDLEY : My name is Carol Lindley, I live at 512 Sterling Place with my husband Rory Klinge. I'm a member of the Greenport North Neighborhood Association which consists of thirty seven families that live in the immediate neighborhood that that property is located. I'm speaking today on behalf of all the members of our association and our goal is to share with you our views on several of the significant impacts that this proposed development will have on our neighborhood as well as on the Town of Southold and the Village of Greenport. I mention the Village of Greenport because in addition to the properties location as a gateway to Greenport the village is also potentially the provider of the sewage system that will serve the development as Paul and Martin mentioned. It's our understanding that the Village Board confirmed last year prior to the submission of a site plan application that it had a capacity to provide the hook up and that Mr. Pawlowski was asked to resubmit the request when he was ready to move forward. At this time according to our sources in the village there is no contract in place with the village to provide that hookup. In a recent Suffolk Times article Mr. Pawlowski is quoted as saying that he does have in fact a letter of approval from the Village Trustees for the hookup and if that's the case it would be great if the letter can be presented and put into the public record for us all to be aware of. Without the commitment to provide the adequate sewer access which is essential and critical infrastructure component of this development it seems to us that it's not possible to afford with consideration a site plan application. So if that letter is available to the public it would really be important for us to see it. I want to just put a scenario out there in terms of if the letter does not exist or if that commitment is not yet in place. If I as a resident were to submit a building permit to the town to build a new home that did not include an achievable septic system plan the application would be deemed incomplete and the building on my home would not be approved. The purposes of this example let's assume I have a family of five, contrast this to the subject proposal which calls for twelve medical buildings each with multiple staff members, each serving probably dozens of people a day and forty individual apartments it is inconceivable that this application can be considered complete without a clear plan for how the septic needs of structural will be dealt with. A positive declaration will ensure that an appropriate sewage plan is in place prior to granting approval to move forward. Positive declaration is what our association is seeking from the Planning Department. Shifting to the affordable housing piece of development we're concerned that there currently is no A-Z ,plan for how this significant residential component will be managed. In a June 29th email to the Planning Department Mr. Pawlowski stated and these are quotes, we will mirror HUD guidelines, we will work with the Affordable Housing Committee on the process of eligibility, we will also have an on-site manager living there. He identified Fairfield Properties as the company that he would hire to 70 September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting manage the complex a company he says has extensive knowledge in affordable housing. These are all positive statements and they are a great starting point for developing a plan but there are a lot of additional details to be identified and surrounded. All the framework need to ensure that the apartments remain affordable in perpetuity. How will perspective renters be selected, how will eligible income brackets be determined? Ideally we'd like to see people who live and work in the town selected but how will that be managed given the federal and state fair housing laws? At Vineyard View we saw how challenging this kind of process could be. At 123 Sterling we saw how promises are very different in a transparent well documented plan. A positive declaration will ensure that a viable property management plan is in place prior to moving forward with this project. I want to close by thanking you all, thanking x members of the Planning Board as well as the Planning Department for scheduling this out of sequence public hearing. As you said it gives us an opportunity to speak and we really, really appreciate that and I also want to extend an invitation to everybody who is here and the Planning Board Members and the Planning Department to come visit the site and to come and visit our neighborhood. You'd be delighted to meet with you to host you to walk you around and just give you a feel of this really great place to live. If you have,any additional CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Would you like to submit that letter? CAROL LINDLEY : That'll be great. I do have an additional comment from one of our neighbors that I'd like to deliver later if that's okay? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :That's fine just be sure to sign the piece of paper. KIRSTEN DROSKOSKI : My name is Kirsten Droskoski and I just wanted to say that I agree with everything that she says. I live on the corner of Stirling and Knapp Place across from the lot they're planning. to keep wooded. I'm also a member of the association and I agree one hundred percent with what Carol said. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Thank you just sign your name. Anybody else? I just want to make sure that everyone who likes to speak gets a chance to. . SUE KREILING : My name'is Sue Kreiling and my house is right next door to that site plan and I agree with everything that has been said but I also am doubly impacted because my driveway is literally feet from the other driveway and when they say there's going to be a buffer I'd like to know how much of a buffer you can actually put in such a small space. I agree with everything else,thank you. MARGOT PERMAN : My name is Margo Perman and I reside on Main St. the corner of Knapp Place (inaudible) vicinity actually next to Sue's place and I'd like to personally thank you for hearing our concerns today and hearing our input and ensuring an open and transparent 711 September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting process, this is very important to all of us. I want to say that the proposal of this scale in one of the most highly trafficked intersections of Southold Town and the only corner between Greenport Village and the Cross Sound Ferry would certainly (inaudible) a careful planning consideration. Ensure the safety as well as respect was (inaudible) the corridor and residential neighborhood, this would best be done with a comprehensive environmental impact study. We need a DEIS report to ensure thorough safe and sustainable plan where all the information would be available in one document for public review. This is for the benefit for the town, the village, the residents, the developer and it would be a precedent for future development. The project of this density impact which simply no reason I can see not to do this study. Why wouldn't you take the right measures to get this right in a comprehensive way? While there are many aspects to be considered I will focus on traffic and visual impact. The DOT was required to do a comprehensive environment traffic study for their roundabout project. This study was based on existing conditions, it was done prior to Mr. Pawlowski's proposal and it does not take into consideration this proposal just to be clear. I quote from the DOT report, "there are no approved developments planned within the project area that will impact traffic operations, there are no known future projects planned at this location." So that was when they the DOT did their study. It is critical that Planning takes into consideration the increased traffic both residential and commercial as well as delivery trucks, service trucks for the proposed office residential project. While we do believe the roundabout will improve safety at this dangerous intersection the proposed development project will add to the traffic. As stated in the developers own estimates the proposed development will add a minimum of 1,075 daily trips. One must also imagine again the overall impact of the delivery trucks, waste management and maintenance vehicles associated with this development of this density. Again the development should require a thorough environmental and traffic study and that should be part of a separate (inaudible). The developer states that the NYSDOT has conducted a visual impact assessment and concluded that visual impacts at the intersection for the two roadways are low negative visual impacts. This is a misrepresentation, the DOT report refers to the visual impacts of the proposed roundabout. It does not refer to the visual impacts of this proposed project. In fact the DOT conducted a visual impact study because of the sites scenic quality. Again, the developer's statement seems to infer to my reading that his project will have low visual impacts which is not what the DOT report says. The addition of a highly traffic access road abutting the residential neighborhood on Main and Knapp Place that would serve a thousand plus trips daily would have significant impacts on the traffic between Greenport Village and North Rd. for the approved roundabout. A study of how this would be managed is critical to any projects and studies. The proposed development would have critical lasting impacts on the main access going from the Village of Greenport and extending beyond to the scenic corridor of Orient. It is a vital importance to address critical traffic and environmental issues to ensure the health and safety of the scenic gateway. We urge you to September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting do the right thing for the future of our town and conduct a DEIS Comprehensive Environmental Impact Study.Thank you. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Do you want to submit that? RANDY WADE : Randy Wade, Greenport. Just stepping back a minute, the big picture is that Southold has inadvertently (inaudible) for whatever reasons zoned certain parcels on the gateways to Greenport in ways that if you really thought about it you would really say no, no, no, no that's not appropriate. When the battery storage hearing when (inaudible) was going to go as of right and do an industrial zoned (inaudible) surrounded by wetlands and (inaudible) zoning and (inaudible) property already owned :by the public. On the north road the rural gateway to Greenport when everybody in Orient and East Marion and Greenport West which is really north and the east comes into Greenport they now experience Greenport as a rural village. The opposite that would be Riverhead as their gateway office 'buildings so the problem with this zoning RO is office buildings and if you look at the zoning which I've now spent a couple of days looking at the code, residential office is actually designed to fit into the residential character of a neighborhood and to not detract from the residential character and you know be kind of low key. 'I'll get into that a little bit later. What I first wanted to say is, I respect the developer and the intentions and it sounds really great and I think we can get the details and I appreciate the thoughtfulness and openness of the ZBA and you-underestimate yourselves because the code says, no Special Exception approval shall be granted unless the Zoning Board of Appeals specifically finds and (inaudible) the following. I went through and made a list of very many of the things that would have to happen for the Special Exception and it's basically the office is wrong there: Will the use prevent the orderly and reasonably use of adjacent properties or properties in adjacent use districts? Yes is this a residential district. except for the pre-existing non-conforming business across the street. The adjacent neighborhood is made up of single family homes with an occasional two family. The project could diminish the orderly and reasonably use of the surrounding homes with current density and uses being proposed. Number two, will the use prevent the orderly and reasonably use of permitted or legally established (inaudible)? It could be if not designed carefully with a reduced scale, natural buffers and much less paving. It would like the entrance to Greenport as Riverhead's extensive office buildings have done, the unique rural approach to Greenport deserves preservation as it impacts the residents and businesses throughout the village by giving us our unique character as well as residences of East Marion and Orient. I'm happy to go through all this because I'm going to give it to you so you can go through it and have justification to deny this Special Exception and it is not what I want. I want you to bargain hard and explain what would be acceptable so the developer can get on with it and do his wonderful project and know very clearly what you would accept and what the community maybe would accept I don't know I can't speak for them I live in a different neighborhood. So 3 September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting the logic, the logic of what I'm about to propose, eliminating the office use with less than the impact of the surrounding community conforming to the intent of RO zoning that buildings fit into the surrounding residential neighborhoods and appear to be residential in character. The best outcome would be for the buildings to be truly residential. If the ZBA wishes they can request the support of the Town Board or the Town Attorney but this should not require a re- zoning. If the applicant presents a plan that does not indeed serve a town or if does indeed serve a town wide need and does not just add residential density at market rate then the intent of the lot should be met. These are the proposed conditions that I would make if I was God and the ZBA. In deciding for the application for Special Exception the ZBA may impose such conditions and safeguards as it;deems necessary. The following suggestions, Forfeit the office use to allow for forty regulated various income level restricted affordable unites in perpetuity ensuring that an on-site manager lives -in one of the units. An informal survey actually I've asked around there's a very weak market for office space and especially medical offices. Without the office space the housing can be consolidated into fewer buildings and have some larger apartments. Parking stalls, you really only need one for each apartment, twenty for guests that leaves sixty spots that can be repurchased because frankly 4.7 acres and forty units of housing there needs to be some outdoor.space for resident use. It's completely unfair to think that in the Village of Greenport where everybody else has a back yard that the people in this complex would not have any landscape outdoor seating areas. Buffers, the Special Exception for AC and includes some of those also and I found the buffering very well for in Section 280-13 (7) & (5) for membership clubs and healthcare facilities and those buffers and I would ask that they be natural vegetated on the scenic byways on 25 and 48 which it looks like that's the intention so they should be 100 feet. Then next to any lot the part of the code would say SO feet adjacent to residential lots and so it's 10 feet to the road going in and even though the plan shows two roads of trees but that's you know to a single family home to put in a road that really needs to move 50 feet away. So one way I think it's so mean to ask the developer at this point to just rethink the whole thing but the good thing about our (inaudible) is it's very movable very, very movable. So anyway I would love you to save time Paul, I'd love for this to go smoothly, I'd like you to get exactly what you're saying you want and get it actually on paper as part of a Special Exception that disallows the office. Thank you so much for your time. SENIOR OFFICE ASSISTANT SAKARELLOS : Leslie excuse me, just to let you know we do have a hand up on Zoom if you want to take turns after. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay I'll let this woman speak first and then we'll go to Zoom. JOANNE GREENBAUM : I'm going to read a more personal statement, I think everyone else talked more technically I'm just going to read a personal statement as part of the community September 1,.2022 Regular Meeting around this project. My name is Joanne Greenbaum, l live at 519 Sterling Place. I am here to register my strongest disagreement about the development project proposal for this route corner of Greenport. After reading the notes and perspectives I want to say that this is devastating for the neighborhood.around ther project and to all of Greenport and especially parts east. The idea that this development will not impact the neighborhood is false. I read with amazement the developers statement that the project will not impact the residents of the neighborhood. A development with over 120 parking spaces, 40 apartments and medical offices will have significant and adverse impact on a very quiet and peaceful neighborhood. Furthermore the lovely (inaudible) at the end of my block at Knapp Place will be destroyed. At night we will see parking lights which will.impact anyone close, there will be car noise, there will be trucks, there is no community need for medical offices. I see a lot of empty storefronts all over the North Fork such as in Feather Hill go there. I go to doctors in the area, sometimes I'm the only person at the doctor's office and I see many, many empty storefronts and new medical offices all over the place. Once these storefronts sit empty and are unrented you can bet other non-essential business will rent there such as UPS offices, delis etc. As to the traffic this will be a delivery thoroughfare as well as a parking spot for this development no matter what the developer says. The disregard for the community is so high as to traffic on Rt. 48, 25 this corner is crowded is a terrible spot to dump a development in. The traffic on weekend days is not only dangerous but crowded with cars going into Greenport and the ferry traffic from Orient Point. Another thing about this juncture is that this is the scenic gateway into Greenport and the gateway to Orient, East Marion and the ferries. There is proximity to fifty seven steps beach and other nice peaceful places. I bought my home in the spring of 2020. 1 bought this home because it was on a quiet and out of the way, location but still close to town. I like the way I can walk to.the beach in the morning, walk my dog, pass foliage and trees. I work at home as an artist, quiet is my most priced art supply. If this project goes through I will not be able to work there during the day. I saved and worked my whole life in order to buy a house which I now live in practically full time. I will retire here. I have no interest in resale value or property values as I'm going nowhere. The Department of Transportation has already determined that views along the street have value and does require a DEIS survey. Please reconsider this development, insist on an environmental and traffic impact study to see the actual harm this will do visually and humanely. The most, important thing is listen to the residents'and community and not shrug this off.Thank you. PATRICIA HAMMES : My name is Patricia Hammes and I live on Main St. in Greenport. I just wanted to say that I'm in complete agreement that the Town of Southold and the Village are in dire need of workforce housing. Having said that I'm not convinced the current proposed project is the right project to address that need at least as currently structured and rather than reiterate a lot of things that have already been said I'd say I'm in agreement with all the 751 September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting points raised earlier by Carol, Randy and other as well as in the May 17th letter from the Northfork Environmental Counsel. The final point that I kind of wanted to raise was that I also have similar concerns-about how the,project will be managed on the workforce housing units. As you may be aware, the developer recently completed a development in the village which was supposed to provide five more or less affordable units for the local community. Once he completed the project he sold.it and those units still remain vacant and are being held open pending the current owners ability to successfully sell the market rate units. Now I understand Mr. Pawlowski doesn't own that anymore so he doesn't control it but it was really disappointing to see that happen. I think the community and I think there is a lot of angst over it and I think that the whole approach on that particular project does not establish a particularly-good track record in respect of the possibility that this will be affectively provide and offer affordable housing on a short term basis to the community. So I'want to thank you for all your hard work on this and consideration of all the comments made so far and I guess we'll see where you go from here. Thank you for listening. PAULA MUTH : My name is Paula Muth I live in (inaudible) and I also work at my (inaudible) on Knapp Place 213 Knapp Place. This would be the worst thing for my business. I don't think anyone is going to want to get a massage with heavy equipment and nail guns going and then ,once it's established all the noise, the traffic, the light pollution, I walk through that place thoroughly covered every inch of it the other day and it's a real loos to lose all of those trees. MARY DOWD : My name is Mary Dowd and I have signed the list. I live in Greenport and I will keep this short. I agree with all of the comments made earlier by Carol and Margot and others and I hope that you will request or require an in depth review pursuant to SEAR and also in independent and very current traffic study to also be required. Regarding affordable housing, I found it really strange that the Sterling Condominium project would allow those five units to be sold within two years. I mean"you win the lottery if you that's what I understood was the case, that's not'how it usually done it should be done in perpetuity and to actually be the winning person that won one of those affordable housing and to be able to sell it for a song two years later doesn't seem like a very fair way to do that. Another thing, is the elephant in the room is Air B&B's, that's what scuffled up a lot of these affordable housing and we're not enforcing (inaudible) you can get three, four, five hundred dollars a night for their (inaudible). So if there's programs that will actually track on Air B&B were that housing is being used but if it's not being enforced people are going to take advantage and they're going to get the maximum rent for their home so that's if that were tended to I think you would see a lot larger affordable housing pool then there is currently. Thank you for the opportunity to speak and thank you to everyone that attended. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Is there anybody on Zoom with their hand up? September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting DAVE MENDELSON : Hi my name is Dave Mendelson I Five at 455 Knapp Place so this proposed development wraps around two sides of my property. I'm a member of the Greenport North Neighborhood Association and I. agree with the comments that have been said so far. I think we need the DEIS. For the comments about this being the entry into Greenport and the scenic byways I'd like to point out that the current proposal has parking right on the main corner. It's the backs of the buildings that face the roads, their putting a dumpster out there. It does not seem to be treating that carefully. There are.walkways through the project but they don't even connect to the sidewalk on Main St. They've said they are not disturbing the part of the parcel that goes down to Knapp Place but if I'm reading these drawings correctly they're cutting about a third of the trees on that property I think to run utility lines through there covering them with grass which seems like it would become a walkway cutting right through the quiet'part of the neighborhood and right by my bedroom windows. If it's true that there's not much demand for the office spaces there I also wonder if there's a future idea about using this as an underused existing building which can be converted to additional housing kind of running around the maximum numbers through Section 280-38B(6)?Thank you. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :Thank you. MARYANN DELUCA : Good afternoon Chairwoman Weisman and Members of the Zoning Board, my name is Maryann Deluca and I'm an environmental associate for the Group for the East End and we appreciate the opportunity to comment today. For the record the Group for the East End is a professional conservation advocacy and educational organization and we're patented in 1972. 1 would like to begin by stating that the group is aware that there's a need for workforce housing in Southold. I'm a starting professional, 1 know firsthand the challenge of trying to find suitable affordable housing. I've been privileged enough that my parents will still have me but I would like to move out. However if you try to develop yourself out of a problem it is only a matter of time before Southold looks like Riverhead, Riverhead looks more like western Suffolk and the cycle continues and oftentimes many of the crises remain the same. There is a lack of affordable housing across most of Long Island. More,development and more building cannot be the only way in which we address our local housing challenges. Beyond that, any project that offers some affordable units should not be exempt from a thorough and substantive review process. Short term narrowly Jocused decision making continually leaves the general public bearing the costs for unintended consequences of such developments. The'State Environmental Quality Review Act or SEAR states that any action that may include the potential for at least one significant adverse environmental impact that an environmental impact statement must be prepared just one. Based on our review, this proposal we believe that this project is significantly unaligned with the parcels current RO zoning will negatively impact traffic, could have a negative effect on the view shed along two state designated scenic byways due to insufficient buffering and could negatively impact September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting surrounding wetlands and groundwater specifically through excess nitrogen loading given the project's significant density. Due to these potential implications this project is a prime candidate for all SEAR review, there is no reason that a project of this size, scale, visibility and complexity should be exempt from conducting a complete environmental impact statement. Right now this project does not even have a consistent name between the Board's reviewing it (inaudible) get us a name. SEQR allows the developer to put their best foot forward and provides the public with clarity about what the project actually is. It offers -the chance to determine the potential impacts of a project;and looks for ways to mitigate or adjust based on these impacts and concerns. It just makes sense. We'believe for these reasons that this project warrants a complete environmental review under SEAR and that the Planning Board should issue a positive declaration and we would appreciate if the Zoning Board would recommend such measures to the Planning Board. In addition for the need for this project to receive a positive declaration we believe that this project should not be given a Special Exception Permit in its current form. The current zoning of RO on parcel where the project is proposed currently states ,that the purpose of this zone is -to create well planned environmentally sensitive balanced development. We feel that this project does not embody this standard. While apartments over buildings are permitted in the RO zone the code clearly states that no more than six apartment units are permitted and while this aspect of the code pertains to the conversion of pre-existing buildings it is still clear that forty units is drastically out of line with the intention to the,density of this zone. In addition, it is clearly stated that the apartment use may not be changed to another permitted use for a minimum period of eight years from the time the user receives a Certificate of Occupancy. There's nothing to stop the developer from changing the use from affordable units to something else in eight years. On a previous project that was mentioned today it was sold to a different owner. What is there to stop somebody from changing this use eight years from now? They should not be given any approvals until the question of will these apartments be affordable in perpetuity is determined and finalized. We appreciate the applicant's testimony today but this critical issue needs to be confirmed. We need to know if these units will remain affordable beyond just eight years. This project strays significantly from the intention and requirements of RO zoning. Based on the information available we do not believe that the proposal can meet the criteria for the Special Exception Permit permitted within this zone. Conducting a full environmental review of this project provides a detailed and (inaudible) review of this proposal. This level of assessment can help the public and the town's land and use Boards determine the proposals compliance with the current code as well as understand the projects overall impact to the surrounding environment and ecosystems. In closing we ask that the Zoning Board in its referral in comments to the Planning Board request for a positive declaration (inaudible) and a draft environmental impact statement is required. Thank you very much for your time and consideration of these comments. Based on listening today there are two additional September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting comments I would like to offer. The developer talks.about how this area of woodland is not pristine. From a scientific perspective most green space is not a pristine ecosystem. That does not mean that wooded landscapes don't inherently.have an ecological value to many of the different insects, animals and other organisms that inhabit them. So whether it's pristine or not there will be an environmental impact to all of the organisms living there. Secondly, I know people don't like to talk about money. This is a personal anecdote and I'd like to remove that from the groups testimony. I'm a young professional,'I have two bachelor's degrees in two different subjects from a university. My starting income is $40,000 a year. Most of my peers starting income after being college graduates is 440,000 a year. Rent of $1,400 is sixty five percent of my monthly income. I know many of you have gone on with your lives, have established careers, own property, many of my peers don't have that yet. It used to be old advice that twenty five percent of your income should go to rent. Fifty percent if you live in a city.-We're not a city it would be sixty five percent of my income. When we talk about what is affordable to our workforce to young professionals the number value plays into what that is because that housing would be unattainable for me. Thank you very much. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Anybody else in the audience? JOHN EUSTICE : Hello my name is John Eustice my wife Lucy and I bought our 305 Bridge St. in 2018. We spent twenty summers in Orient Point, fell in love with Greenport, the walkability the village atmosphere,'friendly neighbors, small homes and some of you have gone so brilliantly granular on this I'm not going to try and mimic you. I agree with much of what's been said. For me the main issue is the Northfork is a tiny little sliver of land, it's tiny it's not very wide what's it a mile wide something like that a bit more it depends on where you are. There are a hundred plus parking spaces there, a thousand trips a day where are all these cars going to go? How are we going to fit all this in there?The two ferries, people going all over the place, it's really going to radically change the character of this town and the atmosphere of this town on this project. I'm not against affordable housing although without this it's not so affordable the $1,400 rents but I guess that's what it is today okay I'm not a developer but I do think that at the very least the studies that were spoken of the positive declarations the DEIS if something that's this impactful for this historic beautifully established old community this putting of an industrial of a suburban office park in the middle of this old village which is what this is basically I do think it's incumbent on everybody to really, really examine it, to study it to look at every aspect of it. One last_thing, it might be old woods old sort of woods on that property but on First St. we have flooding and I'm just wondering what the root systems in that cause I know nothing of what we're speaking of but I just wonder what those roots systems might do to help stop that flooding as more and"more (inaudible). Again these are the questions I think an in depth study environmental study especially a traffic study cause the traffic is already crazy and you don't want this to become the Hamptons just one massive 791 September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting traffic jam and it's in danger of_doing that and I think a thousand car trips a day and hundred and twenty parking spaces this and that, giant parking lot where there used to be a lot of trees I don't know if that's quite in the character of the town of the village and I hope that it can be a good clear look can be taken at it. Thank you so much. ANN MURRAY : I'm Ann Murray and I'm here speaking for the Northfork Environmental Counsel we submitted a letter and I just wanted to reiterate that we insist that you issue a positive declaration or that the Planning Board does it have a full SEAR review of this project. I especially want to highlight if I can ,for a minute the traffic study that is necessary for this project. The DOT is already done I understand for the roundabout, it's previous to this development so I think probably the DOT needs to do another one and especially, especially this town needs to do its own independent traffic study of this location while considering this project and make sure it's a confident traffic study and make sure that consultant has no conflicts of interest in doing that.Thank you very much. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Is there anybody on Zoom? Okay is there anybody else? LUCY EUSTICE : Hi my name is Lucy, Eustice, I have a couple of questions. There is a lot of vacant office space and if you can't rent out the offices I'd like to know what the plan is, what's allowed because this is being sold as a medical office space but if there's no takers what's going to happen to those spaces? Also presumably since its privately funded you're in this to make money so if this property is sold and it was touched on previously I think it needs to be considering that the public is being sold on this affordable housing, how is that ensure that it carries forward if the property is sold by the investors? As it was mentioned it has already happened but it got sold and the apartments are not what they're supposed to be. So I think since those are the main selling points of this property we need more information about what is going to happen moving forward and looking ahead. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I can answer one of those questions and Paul can answer the others. I don't know what his plans are but I can tell you this, approvals by both Planning and Zoning can be conditioned upon certain terms and it is possible should this go forward and this is just the very first step, we want to get your comments early and upfront so that they're considered from the very beginning not down the line. We can place Covenants and Restrictions on an approval that would require you know below market rate rental units in perpetuity. So it would have to be a Covenant and Restriction and that's the way we would ensure that no matter who owned it;that's what they're buying into. LUCY EUSTICE : Please tell me what the rent is for one bedroom. September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting PAUL PAWLOWSKI : So to touch on those immediate questions, as far as the eight year cycle whatever we have to do Covenant and Restrictions for (inaudible) and in perpetuity we will do what the various Boards there's no (inaudible) never the attempt. As far as the RO zoning the RO code defines what can be in there. We would be happy to take it a step forward to make sure that it stays medical office in perpetuity as well. One of the goals here is not to take (inaudible) from the downtown with retail restaurants and such. At the same time whenever myself there's no investors it's myself and my partner, when we go into a project we understand property rights and we understand what neighbors should expect when they bought their property. What we get approved for across the board we're willing to get Covenants and Restrictions. What we're asking for is in the code and so whatever we have to do to help mitigate.those long term concerns. As far as the average rent of roughly around $1,400 that's very close to.what a one bedroom ,and studio right around there is what the numbers will come out to be. I respect that people not earning.enough to meet the mean income that we're showing but it's for a household so there's we're proposing forty units and we're trying to make a dent in a problem that is at a crisis level. So we can't help everyone but we're doing our best to start here at certain income levels. That's the best I can say about it and if the Board's (inaudible) a lower income level we're all ears. We're not just coming up with that. There's reasons for income levels and we can get into that. So permitted uses is a big thing and we're willing to covenant so what's potentially approved is in perpetuity, affordability is in perpetuity not an eight year cycle.So the number one question is on medical use and so my background is I am a developer but really I'm a landlord and some of my tenants consist of Stony Brook Medical, Winthrop, NYU these will be full within the first month of being done if approved. They are my tenants, we have over five hundred thousand square foot of medical space and we know the demand and the proximity to the current hospital is very close. They don't really have medical space within that proximity anymore so I think we'll fill you know the market of medical just to throw it out there we're not just hoping we understand that market, we have those tenants already and we look forward to servicing that professional need. Density what we're proposing is we didn't come to the table trying to max out this property. It would (inaudible) square foot medical and if you did the math on fifty percent for the with the sewer connection you get close to sixty units but we're not coming here saying please give us everything we need and want. Noise, no noise from this project will exceed the decibel levels of that North Rd. currently. Yes during construction all's I can say about that,is we'll be as efficient as possible with the nail guns get in get out, nothing we do takes we don't abuse the calendar on that. The noise level, this project because of the nature of it and the (inaudible) it's private medical space on the first floor and residential office on the second. We're not proposing outdoor seating or any of that sort of stuff. That's not the nature of it similar to other apartment buildings and that's the luxury of people living there, they don't need to sit in the parking lot. They get to walk downtown and utilize what's there. September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting So I�wanted to touch on traffic, noise the process I agree, there should be a very defined process and between my background, my partners background, Fairfield's property background the help of the Affordable Housing Committee I'm sure we can nail that down not just here say. We know the process and there's guidelines to that. This wouldn't be the first development so we look forward to defining that process. Scenic by views, there's roughly a thousand linear feet or nine hundred to a thousand linear feet on this corner. By the time we're done with this the only visual aspect into this would be the two entry ways, other than that we will heavily screen this. My partner on this owns 1,11 Sterling St. so we look forward to revegetating and also preserving any mature trees that we can on that buffer. On the site plan and we'll update it accordingly when we get down there, this potential utility area in the one area to the south of the property it won't be grass it will not be a pathway we will update that to show vegetation so it's as it is today. One thing I'd like to touch on because somebody brought it up, the other project. The other project and the merits of that affordable housing were dictated in 2007 by the previous owners of the neighborhood association in that neighborhood, the Village Board.and the owners. We abided by that, we improved on that with the sign off of the neighborhood association and not only did we view that, we finished the project to CO based on the guidelines that had nothing to do with what we proposed. We tried for two years to change it to affordable building in perpetuity and that was not approved. So that's an important subject for me cause I spent a lot of time and energy trying to improve on that. That's a project that we sold as approved.The current owners if they ever try and change things have to go through a process but that subject is not what we're proposing today and we abide by everything that was proposed and granted approval and threw in a few little improvements to that affordable housing criteria. I didn't believe in that affordable housing criteria, it was a complete disaster but that was approved by the Supreme Court, the neighborhood association, the Town Board in 2007 and yes five people hit the lottery. MEMBER DANTES :The Village Board. PAUL PAWLOWSKI : Yes the Village Board, sorry. So we not only took it to the finish line we got the CO and we sold it based on what every one of those signatures wanted at the time of the approval. We're at a new project where all the various boards have their input on what's going to happen potentially or what's not going to happen and we would have to again abide by that. Those are just a few of the things I wanted to touch on based on some of the comments. Last one, water and flooding, we'll capture more water runoff once done compared to today. So our storm water program will be better than the root systems (inaudible) scientifically. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Anyone else want to,address the Board? September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting DONALD WILCENSKI : Hi my name is Donald Wilcenski of Southold Town Planning Chairman and I just wanted to make and thank the Board (inaudible) this can help us through our process and I just wanted to go on the record that I'm here in attendance and our Planning Director Heather Lanza is here as well. Thank you. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I will say one thing, I think any of us in government are aware of the challenges that are before us. I've been doing this a long time, twenty five years or so and we've all seen an incredible change in our town and change is inevitable. Our obligation as residents of this town and participants in government to manage change responsibly so that whatever is proposed does not weigh negatively on those of us who live here. So Planning and Zoning are working very carefully together, we're constantly trying to up our game as it were in order to meet the challenges that are before us that are increasing the complex. I just want to reassure all of you that we're very, very glad that you all showed up this is what participatory democracy is supposed to be. That's what's great about living in a small town, you have an accessible government and you're opinion counts. So they will not you know we're trying to work with the developer, his attorney, it's just the beginning and there will be changes I'm sure along the way and all your comments will be carefully considered. CHARLES SANDERS : I'm Charles Sanders. I'm glad you actually said that because I'm really struggling with this. I was talking to Paul, I was talking to my neighbors I'm still kind of on the fence with a couple of things but what I want to say I'm a Town Assessor so I'm speaking as a homeowner right now not as a Town Assessor. I really have struggled with this, I believe you own property you have a right to actually do (inaudible). I knew when I bought my house that something would actually go there, we all knew that when we bought our properties. I want to make sure that's clear, you own property you should be able to build on that property. The question is what's appropriate? When I look at this proposal I have no issue in terms of what Paul is trying to propose in terms of providing affordable housing. I just think it's too dense, that's my only concern. I'm being selfish here. I would love for it to stay as a woodland for the rest of my life, it doesn't hurt or impact me in a negative way if it just'stays woodland. We're living in a town that does need affordable housing and that is a struggle and for me to say no you shouldn't have affordable housing just cause it's next to my back yard I don't think that's fair and I don't think that's really appropriate. I wrote out a whole thing but it sounded too legal as I was thinking about it. It's a struggle it really is a struggle to what is appropriate. Every single one of us that lives on Knapp St. we don't want it to be built there for the wildlife to be obstructed. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Charles with all due respect you need to address the Board. September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting CHARLES SANDERS : Oh I'm sorry. So when I think of this project that's really what I think of, I think there's a balance between my own selfish wants and the need for the community. So doing the affordable housing, one hundred,percent we need affordable housing, do we need more office space, probably not. I would like to see this redesigned and maybe just look at it from the perspective of providing affordable housing or providing other residential, reducing the density, making sure that the lot next to my house is again I'm speaking selfishly I don't want that to bea road obviously] don't want that to be a road because it's going to impact my home. When I look at the project more deeply you have forty apartments that's just imagine how many cars that is, how many people it is going to have a pretty big impact on our community. So (inaudible) revisit, reevaluate it, bring down the density I think it would make all of my neighbors happy and I think it would make me happy. I also want Paul to he invested in the property and has every right to make money off of it there's nothing wrong with an individual who is investing to make money. We wouldn't live in our homes if somebody didn't build and money off of it right? Every single one of them when we have every opportunity (inaudible) to go in together and spend our own money, divide up that land and or have it zoned for us or just leave it as wooded. We chose not to do that, we should have thought about that (inaudible). So he has every opportunity to build I would just like to see him,reduce the impact and reduce the amount of density.That's my personal opinion. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Anybody else want to address the Board? JERRY O'NEIL : First of.all I agree with I'm sorry Jerry O'Neil I live on Bailey Ave. my home is up against the east side of the (inaudible) directly on a property behind building four and the parking lot. I do agree with ninety percent of what everybody said. I also agree I don't think there's anyone in this room that has said that they don't acknowledge the problem of affordable housing, it's a big problem. This is not about wanting affordable housing. I was happy to hear that something could be done. What this is about is where this is located and the density. I get a little concerned when I hear and I certainly expected something to be built (inaudible) on the property behind me of course no one should (inaudible). Did I expect this, no but the issue is it's on a corner that we do have the traffic concerns.So I invite you as this young lady did to come there and stand on the point where you're going to have entrances and egress on the North Rd. and look directly across to the entrance to the Linn Restaurant parking lot and also the proximity where the traffic circle is going to be hundreds of feet away. Any traffic there is going to hold up there, the traffic circle is a single mini round about so when you stop traffic there or coming out on Main St. if people are trying to get in and out of this somebody is trying to get in, somebody is trying to get out based on the (inaudible) these are working people they're getting up every day they're going to work. They're getting up six, seven, eight o'clock, you're going to have traffic in and out of the Town of Greenport in and out of that development and you're going to have people going to work in the medical offices. September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting You're going to have people coming to see them. The people are waiting to do that, to get in and out of Main St. the traffic is going to be backed up on the Northfork because the traffic circle is one way and it's only a few hundred feet away so that's going to have (inaudible). Regarding the environmental impact there's noise from the traffic, it will be heard where my house is right now. Again I bought that and I know the proximity of the North Rd. and in the nice months I have the windows right open I hear the traffic, I'm going to hear more but that's part of the deal where I bought my home. We will also have soot that comes with that and dirt and the other thing is I'll wrap up I do have many things to say, one thing is it's great to hear and see the responses from the petitioner of how wonderful these things are but because he says it's wonderful and it looks good and it blends with the neighborhood that doesn't mean it's (inaudible). This is a residential neighborhood. On Bailey Ave. we do have traffic from the hospital coming up and down. I'd be more than happy to support it the hospital is one of the best things we have in the neighborhood but we also have people parking commercial vehicles along the street there. Now the floor plan that's been on the board and up there it shows now we have a buffer of trees and Paul I appreciate that they're there, they weren't there when this plan was developed and submitted just about a year ago in August of last year. Instead there were fifty more parking spots that lined all the area where those trees are. That's what's on file on the town when it was submitted. So I appreciate now (inaudible) there's going to be trees and maybe you can enhance that but explain to me how when this is proposed same forty units, same medical offices how we have fifty more thirty percent more parking that's now not necessary where did that go? Well I'll tell you where it will go, it'll.go on Knapp St., it'll go on Bailey Ave. okay and when the traffic starts to back up on the North Rd. and Main St. what I can't say that I do but] don't put it you have Waze and Google Maps that you can save a minute by going down Bailey Ave. or by going down Manhassett and across Champlain and just from a Planning Board perspective maybe moving further along to that gentleman thank you sir, the sewer system is going to support this.-As somebody said, my house has an old sewer if I have to replace that that's going to cost me tens of thousands of dollars. If the sewer'system can support Brecknock and plans on supporting the marina projects there's going to be a lot of construction up and down those streets in our neighborhood. If it can support that you want to know that give me a piece of that, let me come down and add me to (inaudible). So there is some (inaudible) what about fencing? If somebody is parking their car on Knapp St. and on Bailey Ave. they're not going to walk around the block to go get their car, they're going down through the (inaudible). Somebody pointed out in the beginning of this we were told nothing is being developed there that's pristine, everybody picked up that the area where the utilities are going to be coming in there's going to be a grass path (inaudible), people are going to walk down that grass pathway of course they are and that's where they're going to go to get their cars and when they park at night they're going to park Knapp St. and they're going to park on Sterling Place and they're SsT September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting going to park on Bailey and I don't have a fence in my back.yard and there's some surveying that's going on they cut through the yard they bend my stupid little fence so be it I understand that happens. There should be a fence in my opinion if this goes through all around that property that prohibits egress and entrance a pedestrian entrance on that property to the adjacent properties. So I'll finish with'that, thank you and I'm sorry for being loud. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Anyone else wanting to address the Board? Anybody on Zoom Liz? It doesn't look like it. SENIOR OFFICE ASSISTANT SAKARELLOS : Not anyone with a hand up. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay anybody, else in the audience? Martin do you want to make some closing comments? MARTIN FINNEGAN : I just want to say back to the very first comment about soil (inaudible) part of the Planning file it was submitted as part of that submission and I'd be happy to send a copy for your record as well. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Thank you Martin.-We will put that copy on our Laser Fiche file but Planning Board has all of their things scanned also,isn't that right? You can certainly access anything from their file relative to this project. Planning Board is the one that actually does lighting, they're the ones that does ingress and egress, they're the ones that calculate the required parking yield, they are the ones that require landscape buffers it's all in the code. A lot of the things you're talking about will certainly be appreciated by the Planning Board and considered carefully. The.ZBA's job as I said when we get to it and it's not going to happen that quick will be to look at the Special Exception standards and those standards counsel Finnegan addressed they're also on the website under the application General Special Exception Permit applications (inaudible) and applicant has to make their case or not make their case. The Board has to decide whether they have made the case. SEAR helps us determine whether or not adverse impacts being in harmony with-the neighborhood is accomplished or not.The Planning Board also has an Architectural Review Committee and any design proposal or commercial project goes to the ARC as I think I.said earlier for their review so they will chiming in on what it looks like. Does it comport with residential character of the area or not. So there's a lot of hoop's to jump through here, this is quite an involved process for good reason because we want to make sure that a project of this scale is well done and that it's a benefit and not a detriment. Anybody else want to say anything? Even from the Board. I'm going to adjourn it without a date because we don't really know how long it's going to take. Liz did you want to say something? 861 September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting SENIOR OFFICE ASSISTANT SAKARELLOS : I did move someone in, they have their hand up. Their initials are CH. Can you state your name please. CHERYL HORSFALL : Yes hi, my name is Cheryl Horsfall and reside at 614 Bailey Ave. which is obviously right next to the proposed project and as a member of the Greenport North Neighborhood Association I just wanted to say it-on the record that I support the comments that have been made by the association, by my neighbors and others who have asked for a positive declaration. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I do want to conclude by saying that every,application that comes before the Zoning ,Board no matter what it's for whether it's fora variances or Special Exception or waiver of merger we individually go out and inspect each one of us every single property before our public hearings. We not only look at subject' lot, we look at the surrounding area, we walk it, we drive around it, it is our professional obligation and our fiduciary responsibility to look at impacts to the neighborhood. We don't evaluate . neighborhoods based on a'piece of paper we walk it, we go and'look..We're all neighbors and we care very much about where we live and we care about our properties. So we give very careful consideration accessing what a neighborhood character is and this project is no different. We have been to the site more than once and certainly driven on Bailey Ave. and on Knapp and on Sterling and Manhassett we live here too we go to the same restaurant: So we've seen it and we do understand your concerns, we also understand what the neighborhood looks like. We also know what you're trying to preserve. So bear in mind that this is step one, we're very grateful for taking this time we know you all have,b'usy lives, your comments are very important and they will all be written up. This hearing will e transcribed, because it's recorded I can offer this much. We do have this on an MP or something file can we convert that to a DVD right? BOARD ASSISTANT : Yes CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay, it won't be visual but we can transcribe this recording onto a DVD so if anybody wants a copy we can loan you a copy to say if you weren't able to be here and you really wanted to hear word for word what was said we can give that to you. Again it's not the whole video it's just the audio and the written transcript as soon as it's written up and it will take a while we had a lot of hours here that will be available in our file also for you to view. UNNAMED SPEAKER : Can you still send in documents or. letters? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : You can because we will adjourn without a date. What that means is that this hearing is open so if somebody wasn't here and wants to send something in, if you September 1, 2022 Regular Meeting want to think about it further you're welcomed to submit anything you wish in writing. Just send it in to our office you can email it, bring it in however it's convenient for you. Anything else from the Board? Okay I'm going to make a motion to adjourn this hearing without a 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 all for attending. Motion to close the meeting, 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. September 1, 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 : September 14,2022