The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutZBA-09/07/2023 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 7, 2023 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 JULIE MCGIVNEY—Town Attorney ELIZABETH SAKARELLOS—Senior Office Assistant (Zoom) DONNA WESTERMANN —Office Assistant 1 September 7, 2023 Reguiar Meeting INDEX OF HEARINGS Hearing Page Burke,Thomas#7811SE (Decision) 3 46770 Route 48, LLC/Peconic Watersports#7700SE (Decision) 4-5 46770 Route 48, LLC/Peconic Watersports#7701 (Decision) 4-5 Rakhmanine, Mikhail and Jennifer V., as Trustees#7814 6- 7 Lazos, Chris and Marisa #7809 7 - 26 Schwartzman, Allan #7816 27- 34 Murtha, Gerald and Robin #7817 34-36 Berry P. 2021 APRT#7818 36-37 Wine Country Promotions, LLC#7819 37 -56 Couch, Gregory and Kristina #7820 56 - 58 BJB Ventures, LLC#7821 58- 63 Oliver, Katherine#7822 63 - 65 Van Adelsberg,Janet#7825 65 - 67 Trustees of the Morgan Croke Irrevocable Trust/Jesse Croke et. al #7823 67- 72 Reetz, Sarah #7824 72 -75 September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Good morning everyone and welcome to the meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals. Will you all please rise and join me in the Pledge of Allegiance. I'm going to begin with the Resolution declaring applications that are setback/dimensional/lot waiver/accessory apartment/bed and breakfast requests as Type II Actions and not subject to environmental review pursuant to'State Environmental Quality Review (SEAR) 6 NYCRR Part 617.5 c including the following: Rakhmanine as Trustees #7814, Lazos #7809, Schwartzman #7816, Murtha #7817, Berry #7814, Wine Country Promotions #7819, Couch #7820, BJB Ventures#7821, Oliver#7822, Van Adelsburg#7825, Croke Irrevocable Trust#7823 and Reetz #7824 so moved. Is there a second? MEMBER LEHNERT : Second CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER DANTES :Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye. We have two decisions before us actually three cause the last two are related, let's have a look at those. One is for Thomas and Kathleen Burke # 7811SE. This is an application for a Special Exception Permit for an accessory apartment in an accessory structure. Basically the applicants comply with most of the required standards however the law requires them to adhere to all of these standards and they do not comply with the fact that the "as built" structure is required to have a Certificate of Occupancy dated for at least three (3) years prior to applying for an accessory apartment. The applicant was issued the C.O. as applied for dated 3/4/2023 as an accessory garage. So the Board finds the applicants don't meet the minimum standards for approval as a consequence. Is there any discussion? I'm going to make a motion to deny as applied for, is there a second on that or discussion? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Second CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor?, MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER DANTES : Aye i September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye the motion carries. Peconic Water Sports we have one Special Exception for the Use and another for variance relief. Nick do you want to just do a quick summary of these two? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I'll start with the Special Exception, #7700 SE is for the Special Exception for the retail sales of marina related boats not to exceed 26 feet in length. The Special Exception would include ancillary storage etc. on a plot of land which is on the North Rd. I'm not seeing the size but I offer a decision that we grant the relief as requested. Then #7701 which of course all of this is subject to CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Let's 'do them one at a time cause we have to vote on each separately. So is there any discussion on the Special Exception application? MEMBER LEHNERT : Leslie I'm recused from this one. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :Thank you for reminding me Rob. MEMBER DANTES : I'm recused as well. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay well we have a quorum. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : The one thing I think we should mention that's dealt with in the Special Exception, aside from site plan approval there are a whole series of special conditions that the applicant needs to meet. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Absolutely a lot of them. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : So I don't know if you want to kind of (inaudible) but just as a reminder the applicant shall approval for the variance under file #7701 that has to do with the area variance relief that the applicant should have site plan approval from the Town of Southold Planning Board. There's ingress and egress requirements, boats and trailers shall not be stored in areas other than those that were previously discussed, signage needs approval, lighting must meet approval most of it again goes back to the site plan approval. It's only for this particular applicant's use so in other words if and when they choose to sell the property or the use changes they may need to review site plan again with the Town of Southold Planning Board. So I make a motion September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : With the changes from the original decision the Planning Board supports the application by the way and it is very appropriate for the location. It's surrounded by many similar kinds of commercial uses. So you have the motion? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Yes CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It's to approve with the standards and the conditions that we have to consider in making this determination. So this is a motion to grant, I'll second it. All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye. Please note Kim that Eric and Rob are recused but the motion carries. MEMBER PLANAMENTO Then relative to application #7700 for the same applicant Peconic Water Sports this has to do with the area variance requested they originally Town Code limits a commercial structure to have no greater than 60 linear feet on the roadway, their original design included 95 linear feet along North Rd. which was excessive. The applicant then reduced it to 78.1 feet in a redesign effort to meet the Planning Board comments. As such we're offering we should grant the application as amended and what we're denying the original application but grant the relief as amended subject to the following conditions. There was a de minimus request within the actual application but not as part of the original application that the driveway access to be reduced to 10 feet and we feel that that's negligible from what the requirements were for the code so it's a de minimus it includes the de minimus relief but that the applicant is also to receive site plan approval. They should have the Special Exception approval which we just granted. Basically, most of the conditions are the same as were placed in the Special Exception. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Right and they were imposed primarily by the Planning Board. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Exactly they were Planning Board requests. So I make a motion that we deny as applied for but grant the relief as amended including the de minimus relief. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I'll second it. All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye Rob and Eric are both recused.The motion carries. HEARING#7814—MIKHAIL and JENNIFER V. RAKHMANINE,AS TRUSTEES CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The first application before the Board is for Mikhail and Jennifer V. Rakhmanine as Trustees #7814. This is a request for variances from Article XXIII Section 280- 124 and the Building Inspector's April 11, 2023 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for a permit to demolish (by Southold Town definition) an existing single family dwelling and construct a new two story single family dwelling at 1) less than the code required minimum side yard setback of 15 feet, 2) less than, the code required minimum combined side yard setback of 35 feet located at 685 Bungalow Lane (adj. to Deep Hole Creek) in Mattituck. MARTIN FINNEGAN : Good morning everybody, Martin Finnegan 13250 Main Rd. in Mattituck here on behalf of the Rakhmanines. As Leslie mentioned this is essentially a deemed demo application, the applicants are seeking to reconstruct on the existing footprint. The existing house an add an addition the existing footprint lays 4.6 feet from the western property line. The addition however will be over 20 feet from this is about a 30,000 sq. ft. parcel in the R40 zoning district because of the existing lot width which is consistent with the neighborhood there you know most of the houses are built with non-conforming side yard setbacks. Part of the application includes the applicant's intent to upgrade the sanitary system and move it to the front yard and obviously install an IA system. So as to the criteria we did submit six letters in support from neighbors so I would submit to you that there will not be an undesirable impact on the neighborhood if variance relief is granted to allow the construction to move forward on the existing footprint. As to the need for variance relief obviously we can't do this if we don't this is as I said as a deemed demo by definition and that's what brings us here today. As to substantiality there is no increase in the non-conformity proposed here, we're staying on the footprint so even though it's 69% 1 would submit that it's not practically under the circumstances and as to environmental adverse impacts there's no perceivable impacts. As mentioned we're going to be upgrading IA which will be a net positive environmentally for the property and to the adjacent waterbody. So if there's any question I'm happy to address. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I just want to enter into the record that the single side yard setback is 4.6 feet, the code requires a minimum of 15 and a combined side yard setback is 24.80 feet where the code requires a minimum of 35 feet. However it is LWRP exempt, it has a Trustees permit dated 11/16/22. 1 should also point out it's pretty obvious if you pay attention, the house is not parallel to the side yards and as a consequence the smallest point September 7,2023 Regular Meeting on the right there in the image on the screen, that thing winds up at the very opposite end expanding to 32.6 feet which is very close to conforming, so there's an anomalous situation here. The other thing too is that the adjacent house is set much closer to the road than this house so a second story will have no impact on anything other than the shed. Anything else from the Board, any comments or questions? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I don't have any questions. MEMBER LEHNERT : I have no questions. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Eric MEMBER DANTES : No MEMBER ACAMPORA : No questions. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Is there anybody on Zoom? Anyone in the audience wishing to address the application? Alright 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 HEARING#7809—CHRIS and MARISA LAZOS CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next application before the Board is for Chris and Marisa Lazos #7809. This is a request for variances from Article IV Section 280-18, Article XXIII Section 280- 124, Article XXXVI Section 280-207A(1)(b) and the Building Inspector's March 10, 2023 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for a permit to construct additions and alterations to an existing single family dwelling at 1) exceeding the maximum permitted two and one half(2 7 September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting %) stories, 2) gross floor area exceeding permitted maximum square footage for lot containing up to 20,000 sq. ft. (buildable) in area, 3) more than the code permitted maximum lot coverage of 20% located at 1200 Leeton Drive in Southold. Hi Anthony, let me just indicate here that the gross floor area as proposed.is 3,066 sq. ft. where the code permitted maximum is 2,100 sq. ft., the proposed third story based upon the habitability of the two existing stories exceeds a maximum of 2 % stories and the lot coverage is proposed at 37.3% where the code permits a maximum of 20%. The LWRP inconsistency is based upon the fact that the expansion of the proposed dwelling is located in the coastal erosion hazard area which runs through the existing home. It's in a FEMA flood zone VE where there are frequent storms and so on.The existing house is already at 35.5% lot coverage, is that correct? ANTHONY PORTILLO : That is correct. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : So you're looking at a 1.9% increase. ANTHONY PORTILLO : That is correct and I can explain that further. I have some documents if I can pass the up? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I do also want to say I don't know if everybody has gotten copies of we have two letters of support that were submitted by neighbors and we have three letters of objection submitted by neighbors as applied for. I have three of them now let's see if we have BOARD ASSISTANT : (inaudible) you know like this morning which we didn't CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It's possible one came in early, it's part of the record anyway. Go ahead Anthony. ANTHONY PORTILLO : Let me just start with the project what we're looking to achieve, so currently the ground floor which is currently partially parking and then there is habitable space really like a rec room type of space. There is no basement to this house which is pretty common on Leeton,Drive and common in any coastal area is not going to have a basement. So that's really what that space is and I'd like the Board to kind of think about that because if it was considered a basement it wouldn't be counted towards the habitable space calculation or the GFA calculation. So in a way this house doesn't have that ability to have a rec space on that level as to say another house would. The addition which I call the second floor addition which I know by code is a third story is to put bedrooms for the family to allow for sleeping areas for the children. The house is currently very small on the living space floor which is why we're calling the second floor which I'm calling the first floor because again the lower floor really is just for recreational use so again if it was a basement it wouldn't be calculated toward GFA calculation. September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : You don't actually put a car in there though. Is that correct? ANTHONY PORTILLO : No but it's really a storage area that garage space and like I said it's recreational use mostly it's not like a sleeping area. If you look at the floor plans of the existing first floor which we're not touching it, it isn't being deemed as a reconstruction by the Building Department due to us putting a partial second floor addition. The current first floor which why I call the really just the living floor in a sense is really only two bedrooms. The clients have three children plus themselves plus any guests they may want to have over, it is really just not a great space for their use and that's the reason for the second story and adding bedrooms. The GFA being over is something that I just want to point out in the code that honestly the Board has the right to grant the variance, it's a little vague. I don't know if the Board can (inaudible) a little bit it doesn't really say where to take that average from is it from your neighboring house, is it five houses down on each side? So I sort of took my own liberty and I provided you guys and that's what I have there. What I could find in the microfiche floor plans to basically come up with some average calculation and this is in every neighboring home which if we do have to go to each neighboring home to try to get what we want to call the average that might be what we need to do. I don't know maybe the Board can speak to that a little bit. I do believe it's a little vague in the code (inaudible) you guys are looking for for an average. I know an average front yard setback we're going 300 feet on the same side in each direction. So with what I put together here is basically looking at four properties that are within five hundred feet I was kind of using that five hundred feet was based on looking at a the great plane which I believe CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Sky plane? ANTHONY PORTILLO : Sky plane MEMBER DANTES : (inaudible)for a front yard averaging? ANTHONY PORTILLO : 300 feet is front yard, sky plane is 500 feet. MEMBER DANTES : (inaudible) ANTHONY PORTILLO : I went to 500 feet for based on the sky plane. Again I feel like it's not very clear for the GFA in the code. So you got a very large house which I got a picture of for the third story area basically next door to the subject property they're at almost 4,000 sq. ft. (inaudible). Then you have 1200 Leeton 3,066, 1580 Leeton is 2,086 and then you have a smaller house which is even further away that one is at 400 feet east and that property 3,810. Anyway these properties amounted to an average GFA of 2,916 which is very close to what our ask is and again I'd like the Board to consider the fact that we don't have a basement and September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting if we were to remove that ground floor which in my mind is a basement,or a rec room we would be way under what the average is what we're requesting in the GFA. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Is that recreational space conditioned space is there heat? ANTHONY PORTILLO : It is conditioned space it is C.O'd, it is a C.O'd habitable space but again very much treated like a basement. I think the reason for that is there's a possibility for flooding and I don't think we're going to put a bedroom down there and sleep down there it's just really not a safe place for that but to use it as a rec space I think it's a nice space to have for the owners of the building. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Is the house as it exists now FEMA compliant? ANTHONLY PORTILLO : Well it's not because the rec space is considered habitable or finished and FEMA compliance would not allow that. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : That's what I'm getting at. Are you going to have to be FEMA compliant? ANTHONY PORTILLO : No ma'am because we're not being considered a reconstruction, this is considered an addition. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I just want that in the record. ANTHONY PORTILLO : Again looking at Leeton Drive being coastal and I think you know the area which I'm sure you guys all do you're seeing a lot of what you would see code three story homes right being whether there's parking or rec space underneath the home and then having sort of a second floor and a third floor living space because of the location of the home. Another one I put on I couldn't get a picture of I just know it personally I figured 600 Leeton which was built about two years ago it's right next to Kenney's Beach and that was a three story home as well by definition. MEMBER DANTES : Right but a lot of these homes that were built (inaudible) three stories but generally that first story is a garage and not a conditioned space. I think that's kind of why they gave you the Notice of Disapproval was cause it's different than the other ones that were built. ANTHONLY PORTILLO : But they're still considered three stories. (inaudible) receive on the three story if we had to become FEMA compliant because then we could use the GFA and that would be our ground level our grade plane. September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting MEMBER DANTES : Had you not had that rec space on the first floor I don't even think you'd have to come here. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well yes for other reasons a lot of other issues. ANTHONY PORTILLO : Lot coverage and CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : And building in the CEHA expansion in the CEHA. ANTHONY PORTILLO : So by definition we are within right of expansion in the CEHA we have to be under twenty five percent or (inaudible) footprint so we're not increasing our footprint even close to twenty five percent. Lot coverage which is pretty incidental because the house is really and we can talk more about that obviously CEHA is creating our lot coverage issue. If the CEHA wasn't involved we'd be at 13.5 on our lot coverage. Again our request for the addition is very minimal at 1.9%total lot coverage cause we are building on top of the existing house the request for the addition is for a stair hall cause we don't want to touch the existing first floor, we don't want to touch what's you know it's already been basically rehabbed and it's in good condition and the owners don't see the reason to have to go and tear that apart. It's really just to get that living space. i CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : So the addition in addition to the habitable bedrooms and so on the expansion is based on access the stair. ANTHONY PORTILLO : Just the first stair would be the entryway into the home with a stair going to the second story. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Obviously you have to have Trustees. ANTHONY PORTILLO : Yes ma'am. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : They actually are the we don't have the same kind of authority over the coastal erosion hazard area as they do, they are the by code administrative they have administrative jurisdiction and then if they disapprove the expansion of anything in the CEHA whether it's a footprint or not they have to approve it then you have the right to appeal that to the Town Board which can grant,an approval for construction in a coastal erosion hazard zone. I just want to make sure that it's all clear about how this has to work. ANTHONY PORTILLO : (inaudible) having to go to Trustees we already actually`applied for you know we sort I think we were kind of shuffled around a little bit and ended up here. I just want to be clear with the Board on one thing, I think it's important for us to remember this isn't considered a reconstruction so I don't think we I think the granted habitable space is already existing it shouldn't be something we're taking away from the homeowners. It's C.O'd September 7,2023 Regular Meeting it's done properly to begin with and I don't think that and I think we should also consider here is that you know if we are looking at where we need, we need sleeping space we're not going to look at the situation as though well why can't we use the bottom floor for sleeping space we really need to add a floor to get sleeping space. That bottom floor again it might not be FEMA compliant, it doesn't need to be FEMA compliant by code by state code, by town code because we aren't looking at a substantial improvement here. The amount of work that we're doing to the home is just adding a floor and I do think that the Board can look at Leeton Drive pretty clearly and see that this isn't out of the ordinary for that area to have a house of that stature of that height. Also the size, it's actually going to be small compared to the other homes. The neighboring home right to the west is humongous. I do believe that you really take this into consideration and please don't look at it as a reconstruction cause we shouldn't so whether the homeowner decides hey I want to comply with FEMA or not they don't have to by code. So I don't think that we have to regulate that, I think it's just more about understanding the need for the bedrooms space there's no need to destroy what's already done and done well and this is really the way to do in my opinion. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Anthony, question relative to what you were saying about this is just an addition and not a demolition, what happens as part of the build out cause you're altering this taking the roof off, adding that second floor and it's discovered it is in fact a demolition that there's rot that the foundation or the underpinnings of the house can't support that second floor? How do you plan or what is your proposition as far as how you move forward? ANTHONY PORTILLO : Well if it is deemed a reconstruction Nick we will have to comply with FEMA. So the GFA actually will get reduced because we will no longer have that space that's in the ground floor which again I'm calling the basement in my eyes. So if that happens then we will actually be reducing the GFA and we wouldn't even be deemed a third story because we will be using the DFE as our grade plane. So if that happens during construction the we actually go and reverse in a sense I mean we wouldn't even need approval from the Board. I think the clients are aware that that's a possibility. I looked at the foundation and it's in good condition,the house was built well to begin with so we will be preserving what's there and we will be building on top. I mean this is not a again touching that floor is not in the cards it's in very good shape. , MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Did Mike or the Plans Examiner ask for a statement I think that you would prepare about the value of the existing structure versus the cost of the improvements? September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting ANTHONY PORTILLO : No but these plans were submitted and they deemed it to be a non- substantial improvement and it's considered an addition because they wrote the denial letter. So I did provide demo plans, they have received the proposed plans and they deemed it not a reconstruction. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Anthony on the I'm looking at this Sheet No. SD-3 this is the proposed ground floor plan, to what extent is that different from the existing ground floor plan? ANTHONY PORTILLO : I'm sorry there's no difference, the proposed ground floor and the proposed second floor there's no change. I'm sorry what's that showing is just the foundation work that's going to be you see the piers there? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yes I do. ANTHONY PORTILLO : That's all. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : So it does have an existing garage a one car garage? ANTHONY PORTILLO : That's correct, it's more like storage they don't park their car in there but CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Is there a garage door on it? ANTHONY PORTILLO : Yes the front door. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : What about the existing bathroom, is there a full bathroom down there now? ANTHONY PORTILLO : Yes what you see in the plans is what's existing. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay so this is proposed and "as built" right? ANTHONY PORTILLO : That's correct. The only thing we're adding is the structure for the (inaudible) proposed part of this. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : So that's just structural columns. ANTHONY PORTILLO : That's correct for the addition. MEMBER DANTES : What do you plan on doing for the septic? ANTHONY PORTILLO : Currently we don't have to upgrade it but if again we're going through the Boards September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Can you elaborate on that cause currently it's a two bedroom house and you're proposing it as a four bedroom house. ANTHONY PORTILLO : Currently two bedroom, now that I'm thinking about it maybe I am upgrading I apologize maybe we have to CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yea I think the Health Department is going to get you on that. ANTHONY PORTILLO : The Trustees are going to require it anyway. I just haven't laid out CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :That's going to have to be in the front yard you know? ANTHONY PORTILLO : Yea it's not a problem and it will be an IA system which is better. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : So just as a point of reference, on your first floor plan SD-2 it shows the demolition plan and you're labeling the second bedroom as an existing bedroom but then on the proposed second floor it's labeled as existing den. ANTHONY PORTILLO : It should be proposed. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I guess as a den then you have to get rid of the doorway and open up the closet. I think Mike likes to see openings of at least four feet. ANTHONY PORTILLO : Really the den situation is allowed, you're allowed that extra space that doesn't get calculated in your bedroom count for septic. MEMBER LEHNERT : If he's putting in a new septic system it won't matter either way. ANTHONY PORTILLO : Again I wasn't asked that from the original submission to the Building Department apparently. You know part of this whole thing was the owners don't want it to be a reconstruction I mean they want to keep that direct space, they don't they're not concerned about the flood again that's in my opinion up the homeowners that's their insurance. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : That's what I was going to mention, the house from the site inspections can see that there are flood vents on the lower first floor, in your plan I don't see those so I'm assuming they remain. ANTHONY PORTILLO : Everything remains, we're not doing any work down there. Nick you can see on both floors the only work being done is on the ground floor and the first floor and the second floor the only work being done is that stair tower and then obviously the addition above. September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Here comes the whammy, this is deemed to be LWRP inconsistent as you know and this Board cannot approve anything that we cannot find mitigation for therefore to overrule that determination and say that it is LWRP compliant based upon mitigation. How do you propose we mitigate that prior to Trustees approval? ,ANTHONY PORTILLO : I believe that LWRP is because of Jhe I don't believe I think that the definition is pretty clear and we're not over that definition of the footprint. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : No I mean you know you can read the details as to why, it's basically because you are expanding in a high velocity flood zone and that is inconsistent with the policies in the LWRP. Unless as you know from experience unless we can find a way to get around that and make it consistent we don't have the authority to grant an approval. So this is what we have to grapple with, any ideas? ANTHONY PORTILLO : I mean again we can you know we have flood vents I mean its' really just that it's in it's considered a finished space I mean that's still (inaudible). You're indicating the building cause in it's a CEHA area CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : That's what Mark is basically referring to. ANTHONY PORTILLO Yea I mean we are building on top of what's there that's already (inaudible) so I think it just comes down to making that the structure has to be you know it's a VE zone which does have requirements for overturning and things that can crash into the structure which you know we would have to make sure (inaudible). I mean I would imagine that that would be our going to Trustees to CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Is there any way to that you can amend this application in order to expand primarily in the non CEHA area and enlarge the house side of the CEHA? I mean I know logically and functionally you're just putting a second story on top of what's there makes sense but I have to ask that question. ANTHONY PORTILLO : You think the proposed footprint (inaudible) unless we were to do something with like cantilevering towards the front of the home possibly,? I haven't really you know thought about that so much, maybe that's something we can consider. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : It would seem you could also expand to the east, looking on the survey you have a building envelope. ANTHONY PORTILLO : Yea so we are restricted by how much we can add to the building. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : In what way, lot coverage? I September 7,2023 Regular Meeting ANTHONY PORTILLO : No being in the CEHA zone the amount of the expansion is 20 or 25% of the existing structure. MEMBER DANTES : That's true the lot coverage would go up. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It would certainly go up. ANTHONY PORTILLO : I mean that's the other thing is (inaudible) in the CEHA area that we can't expand more than that existing structure, the existing habitable square footage we can't increase the square footage. That was one thing taken into consideration. I think obviously it just made more sense to just build on top of what was there. I mean pushing the building out of the CEHA I mean it looks like we end up losing like almost eight to nine feet of what we're proposing which I don't think that works to get to achieve you know the three bedrooms and the two bathrooms upstairs. I mean if you really look at my plans CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : If you expand toward the street you can do that I mean you're not going to be able to cantilever that far but you can put a couple of piers underneath and therefore not increase the lot coverage. ANTHONY PORTILLO : It sounds like a possibility. MEMBER DANTES : What's your front yard setback requirement?You have 39 now. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It's probably 35, they probably would need a variance. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : 35 on the survey. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : But it's a lesser variance to have a front yard variance than a variance in the CEHA. Well look what we're just trying to do is get into the record all the options and to explore the possibilities and to look at the pros and cons. ANTHONY PORTILLO : I see coming into this it was a difficult project to start with and we had a lot to consider and we also started prior to the house rule just so you guys are aware of that but the design obviously they started (inaudible) years ago when me and clients started sort of figuring out what we wanted to do so that did affect us kind of mid game at the fifty yard line unfortunately. So we kept kind of driving forward to achieve the (inaudible) so I think if the CEHA is one of the sticking points maybe we should consider something in the front yard or try to adjust the footprint towards the front yard on the second floor and maybe that will help with making a decision on the other variances. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yea well I just wanted to bring that to your attention as a possibility. September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting ANTHONY PORTILLO : I appreciate that. I don't know what the (inaudible) CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Let me see if the Board has any other questions, anything from anybody at this point? MEMBER DANTES : The thing is if they expand in the CEHA they'll still going to have the basement and the first floor in the CEHA. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :That's right. MEMBER DANTES : I mean I don't know what the actual scientific effect would be in just having another going the second floor maybe it'll solve some paperwork requirements but I don't think construction wise or scientifically it really helps protect the environment more than what they're proposing now. ANTHONY PORTILLO : That's kind of what I was getting at, the fact is we're building on top of what's already existing and what's existing is even more seaward into the CEHA than what we're proposing. MEMBER DANTES : I think we just need to make a decision on what you proposed cause I don't know what revisions really that you have available to help the science. ANTHONY PORTILLO : Well to me I just want to throw this out there, even if maybe I was to move the second floor a couple of feet where I actually could cantilever (inaudible) structure maybe then I'm a little bit out of the CEHA or a little bit more landward of the CEHA maybe not completely passed the line maybe that helps the decision of the Board..1 think the number one goal for my clients is not to deem this a reconstruction because it's a lot of work to� CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well also it's very clear that the family needs more space and I don't believe the Board objects to expanding the size of their home based on their family that's not you know that's not we don't personalize things we're not legally allowed to but nevertheless that's certainly a reasonable request. The question before the Board and for you is what's the best way to do it with the least impacts and the less non-conformity possible. With regard to averaging, I was involved in writing that code and it was the intent to use 500 feet on either side on the same side of the street. However understanding that every neighborhood varies and sometimes there are little lots you get a lot of houses and if they're great big lots you're going to get maybe one or two so it's kind of that's why it was written that way cause the Board has to look at character of the neighborhood and that's how we're going to proceed so you're submissions are helpful. ANTHONY PORTILLO : Okay thank you. September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting A.T.A. MCGIVNEY : Can you just go over again the purpose for keeping that rec room in the basement? All those things seem to go away if you didn't do that, I'm unclear as to why you're keeping it. ANTHONY PORTILLO : The purpose is that it's C.O'd habitable space that they use as a rec room for their children you know it's just a valuable space to them. They want to preserve it and it meets the (inaudible) being built already. It would be costly to you know having to remove all that stuff and get involved in making the house FEMA compliant. The idea is to not touch it and not spend any money and a valuable space to the MEMBER DANTES ': Well basically you'd have to be FEMA compliant you would have to basically pin the house up (inaudible) steel not only the whole rec room but probably the whole existing foundation and then (inaudible) ANTHONY PORTILLO : It's in a V zone so you would have to have it open fifty open fifty percent CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Break away walls yea. ANTHONY PORTILLO : It's a significant amount of work. MEMBER DANTES : You wouldn't be able to keep anything that's there now. ANTHONY PORTILLO : But you can park down there and storage. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yea that's it. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : But then if it's storage why have it as habitable space just give up the well can you give the C of 0 on it? MEMBER DANTES : Yea he can make it FEMA compliant. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Of course. MEMBER DANTES : He's right it is ANTHONY PORTILLO : It's going to cost a hundred and fifty to two hundred thousand dollars plus the proposed amount of work. You know it's lifting the home, the foundation piles CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It's a lot of work. ANTHONY PORTILLO : Then if you want to do a nice lattice system around the home. September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting MEMBER PLANAMENTO : This is where I still have a hard time though where you say it's just an addition versus a demolition, just from personal knowledge and two of the Board Members live not very far away. I can't speak to you know the Chairperson's opinion about flooding but I know that Leeton during the storm surge after and I think it was an unnamed storm after Super Storm Sandy left like three feet of water, one of the houses that were shown in the photograph I mean had you know water standing there that occurred back in February until June if not early July and this is from just my own personal experience of walking the area and frequenting the neighborhood. So I kind of just try and understand what the benefits are versus the detriments. It's one of the oldest homes, I mean this is an original house that probably predated the second World War. ANTHONY PORTILLO : Maybe this question is best for the homeowner to speak to, to tell you why they want to keep this space. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I think we all understand that you want to keep the space but it creates maybe a hurdle that may be unnecessary. CHRIS LAZOS : I'm Chris Lazos and I think the whole if it's not a reconstruction then we don't need to be FEMA compliant. I don't 'see a point to do extra work just to do extra work and you know we want to do the limited amount that we need. We do have three kids and an expanding family and I have a daughter that is you know turning ten years old that's sharing you know a bunk bed well it's a three bunk beds in one room with two brothers. I mean you know it's not going to be you know as they get older they're not going to want to live together or sleep together in the same room. If there's no reason to disrupt this space we're just building on top I don't see a reason you know if it's not building code to change it then there's no reason to change it. So I feel like why do more work if we don't have to and you know really have a limited disruption in the space in the area. We wouldn't like to touch the ground of the dunes or anything else over there. I hope I answered your question. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Julie can you maybe clarify something for me cause there are other homes in the neighborhood that I'm aware of that have just storage'underneath their homes. CHRIS LAZOS : Oh just one question, talking about the home this home was moved in 1979 so it wasn't predated WWII or anything this was moved fifty feet closer to the street so these are all newer pilings not the original pilings. The home was moved it's 15.3 feet above sea level you know the main floor and we did have them checked out before I purchased the home in 2018 that the pilings were in good shape and they are solid. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well look, I've lived in this neighborhood since 1985 and I'm very familiar with both Leeton and North Sea and the VE zone line runs right through the middle of September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting both of those streets. The whole neighborhood originally was small cottages you know mostly summer cottages and it didn't matter, you were boarded up and if there was storm damage it got fixed up and that was that. Now over time expansion of lots of dwellings have happened in lots of neighborhoods including this one and that's one of the reasons you see so much height and bulk. A lot of the larger homes that are there now were dealing with flood conditions including your own. So we're seeing rather visual transformation of a lot of neighborhoods including both of those streets as a result. CHRIS LAZOS : We're willing to take that risk (inaudible) if something happens and from what I understand it hasn't been flooded. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay, you know what, I think I'd like to see if there's anyone in the audience who wants to address the application. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Leslie if I could just I was asking Julie, I'm a little unclear within do you have to make it FEMA compliant if you're just abandoning the C of 0 and what is in theory a basement? Could you lose the finished materials which would then allow the second story well what they're proposing is a third story. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : If it was considered non-habitable, unfinished then it would be you know then it would not be three stories. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : It would then be a garage? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Storage and garage. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Storage area. .CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : That's true that would get rid of one variance and you could build right on top and you wouldn't but you'd have to give up your recreation space. What it is is a tradeoff you know between what's the better way to go. I can understand why you wouldn't want your kids to not have that's directly accessible to the beach and all of that, it's easy. ANTHONY PORTILLO : The main difference is it's either what it is now or it's just you know gutted I mean it's still there. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Right but it solves a problem and I don't want to say it's a design problem and what might have to happen, I've seen other homes where a basement needs to be at least I don't know three or four feet into the earth. It's interesting on how the dune has been sort of excavated out from under your deck area or around the house, it might be explained in the fact that you mentioned in 1979 the house was moved. I was unaware that the house was ever relocated. I've seen old aerials from prior to the second World War and September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting the house was there. So it just seems to me that it's a solution to solve the problem that yes you have storage in the garage but not in theory conditioned space. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well you know what, let's do this let's hear from there may be people on Zoom, there may be people in the audience and I want to hear from them so that we can then you can have an opportunity what they have to say and you can respond of course, is there someone who would like to come to the mic and speak? ANDREW STANTON : Good morning, my name is Andrew Stanton and I live at 1480 Leeton Drive two houses down. The bottom line is that this is a common sense approach to what anyone would do in this particular situation. I've been there for fifty years since 1973 so it makes sense to me I understand there may have to be some compromises but I'm not against it at all and I think it would be perfectly fitting with the neighborhood. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Thank you for your testimony, anybody else? LYNN NORMANDIA : Hi Lynn Normandia 2100 Leeton. Everything this gentleman has said very reasonable, owner is very reasonable I applaud you for your compassion 'and doing your homework and knowing so much about our neighborhood I thank you. I'm just concerned that if they go for the third floor idea then the rest of our neighbors who have built up will go and live on their half floor and there will be more houses with third floors. Your idea gut the bottom I was going to say why don't you do that. I know it's going to be a mess you have a bathroom down there too so it really is habitable. I wasn't allowed to put a bathroom, I'm one of the little houses on Leeton and there's still quite a few of them but they're disappearing as we die. So I'm not opposed to going up, five, six of our twelve houses have gotten up but that means we're still quite a few of the original structures of those little cottages that we know may blow away. I live in one full time so if it goes, goodbye. In any case you've all given wonderful thoughts for them to think about, I just say as a third floor we're creating a precedent that the rest of the world will go for then and we don't want that to happen. So I thank you for your compassion and l just wanted to warn you I just seen one of the IA systems put in in the neigh borhood'and they dig out like a trench that must be like twenty feet deep and all your beautiful Montauk Daisies gone and what you get then well if you've done any research it's miserable so watch out for that one.Anyway thank you so much for what you do. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Thank you for your testimony. Is there anyone else? PAT UOORE : No interest as far as financial I don't know them but I wish them well. As I was listening a couple of things that you asked and it seemed to me first as far as LWRP the fact that the sanitary system is going to be upgraded would be a positive with respect-to the LWRP because while that again the house but they've described is C.O'd space, first floor is September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting habitable with a full bathroom so all of that adds up to the addressing the 25% that you're permitted so by removing it aren't you undermining the coastal erosion law which says, you're you know it's not a major addition and if your floor area is based on less than 25% the space as they pointed out numerous times has a C of 0 yes it would solve the third floor issue but that's why they are here because you do see a practical using the old term practical difficulty in moving bedrooms into what would be compliant FEMA space. It seems like all the suggestions of alternatives there really aren't any feasible alternatives because expanding towards the road or footprint you're impacting the coastal erosion law and you're impacting the lot coverage. So it seemed to me that the application that's being proposed is very reasonable the gross floor area when the law came in it was a great deal of concern that was raised to the Board with respect to the waterside properties like Leeton Drive and like North Sea Drive that it was creating a non-conformity that was going to create problems for homeowners. The assurance that everybody seemed to get was, yes we know that but that's what the Zoning Board is for. So I would remind the Board that that is you know you're being asked for relief given the circumstances of this property that for all appearances seems to be a very reasonable application. Nobody is trying to come in with a grand house that is completely inconsistent either with the size of the homes in the neighborhood or the environmental issues that are affected. So I would hope I certainly think that he did a fantastic job so. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I should enter into the record that that was Pat Moore speaking, you forgot to say who you are. MEMBER DANTES : So my understanding in Pat's argument is that she's saying removing the existing foundation and making the house FEMA compliant would be a greater environmental evil than leaving it alone, so can you go to a narrative why? ANTHONY PORTILLO : Yes I would agree because we would have to lift the home, we would have to put in helical piles, put in a foundation system for that MEMBER DANTES : So you would have to dig out the existing block or destroy the existing vegetation. ANTHONY PORTILLO : It would be removing what's there so there would be removing flooring, removing the slab opening it up creating you know to make it just sand down there or whatever leaving it natural. So it would definitely cause some environmental impact on demoing that area on the ground floor. MEMBER DANTES : So you would have to remove fill from the property? 12.Z J September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting ANTHONY PORTILLO : A hundred percent. We would have to put in a tie beam, the tie beam would be two feet deep, twenty four inches wide so that fill would definitely be removed. There would be excavation, it definitely is a bigger project than what we are requesting. I just also I think my first statement was consider this a basement right, I don't think I'm not telling the Board what they should be looking at but I don't think the Board should be looking at if the building is FEMA compliant or not. It doesn't have to be per code. The owners have the right to have a livable space there that's C.O'd regardless of if they left it that way the way it is now it would be a habitable space C.O'd that would be in the flood zone. So they're not required to be out of the flood zone. I understand that it would make the situation easier to digest in regards to us putting an addition on that floor but I think it's just important to understand that it's not a code requirement. We don't have to do that. Again if we were coming in as a reconstruction or as a new building, we'd have to comply with all those requirements. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Understood, is there anybody on Zoom that wants to address this application? OFFICE ASSISTANT WESTERMANN : We have several people on Zoom however there are no hands at this time. ANTHONY PORTILLO : If I can also just for the record just one last thing, there was an approval in November of 2020 for a third story, the address is 8100 Hortons Lane ZBA file No. 7433. Some of the conditions were putting in an IA system, how to do some revisions to the plan, sprinkler system was required, some screening was something you guys suggested as well or required in this CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Which one is this you're talking about? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : This is the one at the end of Hortons Lane. ANTHONY PORTILLO : Looking at this proposed design compared to that I think we fit right off the bat the neighbor this home and the neighboring home we would be pretty much looking the same. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : One of the differences though is that that home was actually moved closer to the street and out of the CERA. ANTHONY PORTILLO : Because it was reconstruction. CHAIRPERSON, WEISMAN : The original architect had a beautiful design, very light very porous visually as architects say we architects say. September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting I ANTHONY PORTILLO : Isn't my design beautiful? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I can't comment on an application, this one is closed so I get to talk about it I can't talk about alright they fired the original architect and hired a different one and the result was an incredibly clunky very over scaled but more compliant environmentally and the bottom is all open for nothing but cars and storage so it's not considered another story. ANTHONY PORTILLO : But it is'like a by definition MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Anthony the entry hall there's a stairwell with an entry hall so like where you mentioned one to the west of Kenney's Beach which visually clearly looks like a third floor and I don't remember that application it might have been before my time ANTHONY PORTILLO : It wasn't required to have CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : They didn't require variances. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Exactly but the strange thing is the bulkheads don't qualify as floors or as in 8100 is was more than just a stairwell. MEMBER DANTES : No that was a code interpretation. ANTHONY PORTILLO : If;you are a reconstruction or a new building you have to be FEMA compliant you're grade plane becomes the FE. So now you're not considered a thirds story you're still required I know that home because I worked on it you were still required to put an automatic sprinkler system on the third story. They still call it a third story. You don't need a variance because your grade plane is no longer at grade, it's at the FE. That's why you probably didn't hear anything about that in regards to zoning. My point is that yes that's the condition you have on Leeton, all we're indicating is there's no reason for us to get rid of this C.O'd rec space that's the decision of the owner in regards to his own insurance and if he's gotta fix it later on or whatever. In reality you guys are all right, if it was a reconstruction and it had to be FEMA compliant that third story wouldn't be a third story. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Anthony for me that's one of the sticking points, I'm not an architect I know the building costs but just visually and we've seen this many times before that what is proposed are alterations and additions when in fact it's really a demolition and new build. Here I find it amazing that the plans examiner didn't request some form of a statement just because it really visually looks like you know a demolition. ANTHONY PORTILLO : No windows being touched on those floors, we're not doing any work on those floors. September 7,2023 Regular Meeting MEMBER PLANAMENTO : You're taking the roof off. ANTHONY PORTILLO : Yea floor joists, new roof the third story is smaller than the second story so we didn't match the footprint and again that determination was made. I brought to them, I talked to them about it and they said yea I believe what I believe and again they're calculations are probably based on the fact that you have habitable space on the ground floor that's considered habitable so there's a cost associated with that but there's value to that space. So if you take the value of that space, the value of the first floor and then you take what is the construction cost to do the second story that's where the calculation (inaudible) in my opinion. I agree with that because if you look at the and if you were to take just the square footage costs and then what the square footage that we're adding square footage costs of the existing square footage we're adding it's not even close to half so how would the numbers be over half? I think that's how the evaluations happen. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Look in the interest of time we've spent an awful lot of time on this application, we're way behind schedule at this point and I'd like to move this on. I want to ask the Board what do yo,u want to do and what do you want to do? Do you want us to close or do i you want to we can close it in two weeks, you can talk to your clients discuss it further and see if you have any other thoughts based on what we heard. I'm going to leave that up to you, I think the Board is willing to do either. ANTHONY PORTILLO : I'd request the adjournment, I just want to make sure we go back and talk about all the points you made and make sure that and if there's any adjustments that I can come up with. I think you know the CEHA is something to think about, I almost do agree with Pat and when we were talking about we're staying in that footprint I don't know if bringing it forward makes a lot of sense. I don't think that we should be going for a front yard variance so I'll probably try to avoid that. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : You may come to the same conclusion that this is the best answer. I'm just asking you whether you want the opportunity. ANTHONY PORTILLO : I think so cause it's a little bit sensitive and I know that it's a lot of information so I think we should talk about it a little more and we'll come back. Are you guys okay with that? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Also maybe check in on the septic system while it's a good idea to put the IA system in which ANTHONY PORTILLO : Nick I misspoke we're going to have to put one in. I'm sorry. September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : We would probably not permit an expansion ourselves we've conditioned hundreds of things that we approve with a required IA system there's room. ANTHONY PORTILLO : I think if you look at the one you did approve also screening is something you guys want to mandate I don't think MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I think the neighbors might be more upset if there's more screening. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :There's not a lot of evergreens on that street let's face it. MEMBER DANTES : How do you even maintain the screening? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yea really. Well if you look at Bombara's property they have replaced their evergreens about ANTHONY PORTILLO : (inaudible) or even architectural screening is that something that you guys would consider? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Is there anything else from anybody? I'm going to make a motion to adjourn this hearing to the Special Meeting on September 21St MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Or do you want to wait till the next Public Hearing. MEMBER LEHNERT : Let's do the next Public Hearing. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I'm going to make a motion to adjourn this to the October Regular Meeting which is October 5th. 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 2,.i September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting HEARING#7816—ALLAN SCHWARTZMAN I CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next application before the Board is for Allan Schwartzman #7816. This is a request for a variance from Article XXIII Section 280-123 and the Building Inspector's April 10, 2023 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for a permit to legalize "as built" alterations to a pre-existing accessory garage containing a sleeping room, bathroom and two (2) conditioned spaces at 1) a non-conforming building containing a non- conforming use shall not be enlarged, reconstructed, structurally altered or moved unless such building is changed to a conforming use located at 1165 West Rd. (adj. to Cutchogue Harbor) in Cutchogue. Pat do you want to just begin, we have let's see we've all done an interior inspection on this because this is an application for a an accessory garage that contains an apartment. I'm going to actually begin with a question, you indicated and I guess that I know there was a Stop Work Order on this, things were done without proper permits at the time and it's a beautiful apartment there's no question.about it. PAT MOORE : I wish to clarify, it's not really an apartment there's no kitchen there's cooking. It's like a cabinet with a little half refrigerator and a sink but I just want to clarify for the record there's no cooking. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well then how do caretakers live in it? PAT MOORE : Well prior to the renovation the first floor did have a kitchenette. There was a record that people had been living there, it had either been way back as part of the affidavits for the Pre CO the prior family the Nagle family they were doing renovations for the house in the eighties that was when the larger renovations the primary house and they were living in this living space and at that time it was pre renovation. There might have been a small stove there at the time so that they could cook but it was not something that my client had ever intended to keep. He wants it purely as we'll call it staff guest quarters so it allows for safe private sleeping area with a full bathroom and bedrooms just as you saw but not for preparation of meals. In fact what you saw there was the living space on the first floor is finished space but it has a garage door on it. So if you're sitting in there you can look through and it has a garage door, the two garage doors the original garage doors were replaced with carriage doors. So it's quasi it's habitable space but I don't think you can call it like a very sealed up heating space on the first floor. The second floor is more protected and warmer to live on but that CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :That's certainly it is conditioned space there. PAT MOORE : It's conditioned space but it's funny because the first floor conditioned space has a garage door. September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : But that's irrelevant it's not being used as a garage, that's an aesthetic decision because almost all of the accessory structures and there are tons of them on that street are garages. PAT MOORE : They were originally garages. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : They were very close to the road so that's common in the neighborhood and I think part of the aesthetic consideration was to retain the original appearance for both the house and that structure. So I don't think it has anything to do with its use, it has to do with its appearance externally. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Just one thing I would correct, the garage door that you mentioned with the carriage doors that open from the living space that wasn't there the garage door was actually the front door the owner reversed the floor plan. PAT MOORE : So I pulled up the listing from when the house was original and all it had a description of a loft a garage loft and it had a picture of the front of the garage. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : So that's what I'm referring to,the doors were reversed yea. PAT MOORE : Well what actually this actually the pictures I have a picture I can put it on the record but it has the garage doors on the west side two garage doors on the west side and all the habitable space was like on the right hand side. So you came in and that's where it had a little kitchenette, a living area and the staircase must have been over there on that side to get to the second floor sleeping quarters. When it was renovated that east side of the building the garage door was taken down MEMBER PLANAMENTO : That's what I wanted to point out. PAT MOORE : Yea, yea it was altered and the fagade was changed but all the living space pre- renovation was on the east side and the kitchen used to be on the east side so interior it was retained in its function architecturally and renovated. So it's electrical, plumbing everything was upgraded for safety. As far as what was there prior to there was definitely it had been used according to the affidavits I provided to the Building Department for the Pre CO and just historic conversations with people that in trying to get Pre CO's I spoke to a lot of people but you know fifty years is now people are going away. Unfortunately I have the grandson who from the Nagle family so I had that affidavit and he can tell me exactly how it was prior to that's what it is now. z September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : That's what I wanted to ask because I know that the Building Department based upon these affidavits issued a Pre CO for what they called an accessory garage containing an apartment. PAT MOORE : No it says sleeping area. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I'll read it exactly, this No. 73237 dated 7/9/2022 for wood frame accessory garage with sleeping room, bathroom and two conditioned spaces with a violation for "as built" alterations including HVAC, one bedroom, one lav and two common spaces one of the first and one on the second floor. A Stop Work Order was issued which will be lifted if ZBA grants approval for doing all these alterations without permits. PAT MOORE : Yes CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : We also have in our record just so I have it in this record, your submission essentially arguing that the LWRP was not correct in issuing an inconsistency. So we do have that in our record. PAT MOORE : Yes CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : So the reason the Pre CO was issued was because of these affidavits, can you tell us a little bit more about how many and from whom cause we don't have copies of those. PAT MOORE : Oh, I can provide those cause I thought that you had the full records from the Pre CO application so CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I don't think we have the affidavits. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : No and I had asked Kim for the Pre C of 0. PAT MOORE : So there was an affidavit prepared by not prepared but you know as far as described actually he typed it he did prepare it, Donald Van,Jr. who is the grandson of one of the original owners original being 1930's. I want to correct the record, I said that this was built in the 1930's it actually was built earlier in the 1900's. I just didn't know that at the time I did further investigation I think that the historian was able to give me some background. Unfortunately she didn't have any further records. Anyway, the family had the Nagle family had purchased it right after the 1938 hurricane and they lived there in the thirties till 1954 when Mr. Nagle died and then in '59 when Mrs. Nagle that was the grandparents died. They would bring out their chauffeur, their cook it was you brought your staff from the city out and this is where they stayed. Thereafter once the grandparents passed away then the family continued to use this space for their own use, for guests and so on. So it was not it was kept 2,9 . September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting pretty much in its original condition probably at the same maybe upgraded a little bit but I didn't really ask as far as what it was like. I want to say it was probably pretty consistent with its original maybe some linoleum tile instead of the wood. He did describe that it had it was a one large bedroom and the upstairs right now has two smaller bedrooms and a sitting area. Originally it was one large bedroom and there were multiple beds in that space, I don't know if you saw that. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I think you submitted that information to us. We didn't get the affidavit we got your description. PAT MOORE : Oh okay my description came from the affidavit. So thereafter the Nagle family continued to live, own it, use it and they described that in the eighties it was being used to live in while it was being renovated. My client also used it while he was renovating the house so it continued to be used. When he was done renovating the house he was ready to renovate the garage, he hired professionals and they just didn't get permits which he was quite surprised and very upset about it obviously. The reason for the Stop Work Order is that there were other reasons for the Building Department to be on the premises and they saw what appeared to be the changes to the garage. So that's when I got involved, clearly I had to go back to the documentation and the Pre CO that was originally issued, it said garage. My opinion is that Gary Fish I think issued the permit never went inside because it would have been very clear from visual inspection what was there. I had to go back and ask the Building Department to update the Pre CO and reflect the existing use with the completion of the permits for the renovation once we got the use legalized. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : So let me ask you this, how would you characterize or relate the Pre CO then to the Notice of Disapproval that refers to an enlargement or alteration to a pre- existing building with a non-conforming use if the Pre CO says it was conforming? In other words a Pre CO legitimates the use right? PAT MOORE : Correct CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : So how does that then relate to the Notice of Disapproval? PAT MOORE : I think the Building Department takes the position that any renovation of a pre- existing use be it a non-conforming pre-existing use requires a variance. So in this case because again there is no inspections by the Building Department at any point and time they could have said hold on you need a variance or okay you're okay just don't do this or don't do that.. The way I understood from the Building Department and John Jarski when we were doing the process I went with him for the inspections and everything, because of HVAC, September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting electric, plumbing all the systems had been upgraded. Clearly the bathroom had been completely renovated it's obvious CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Two of them. PAT MOORE : Well the house bathroom on the first floor is a permitted use so a garage and a half bath is not a problem, it needs a permit. But if that was CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : What we just heard is it's not a garage but neither is it an apartment because then they would have to qualify on the affordable housing registry. PAT MOORE : Let me clarify, there is a garage on the left side that's a one bay garage. It's for a very small for a sports car most likely storage cause its' narrow but there is a garage there. The garage use continues, there's a half bathroom on the first floor. The non-conformity would be the full bathroom and the-living space the sleeping quarters. So the fact that all of this has to be legalized they said well you're going to have to go the Zoning Board to get the okay and get a building permit to renovate the space and make it you know as is. So that's the reason we're here. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I mean the thing that's clear about this is that this is a very unique situation, it doesn't fall into any of the currently existing categories per say. PAT MOORE : He does not want an accessory apartment. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It's kind of like Sage Blvd. I mean you know they're all pre-existing non-conforming cause there's multiple residences on one piece of property. PAT MOORE : As you said on West•Drive just next door is a garage with a lovely apartment, I don't even know if you can call it an apartment maybe that one is more substantial cause it has a full kitchen but it is very common in this area and many of the homes that were built in the thirties the more substantial homes that the guest quarters living space was provided outside of the primary residence. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay anything else from the Board? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Pat if I can just ask a question, you mentioned a half bath is a legal use within an accessory garage. PAT MOORE : Yes MEMBER PLANAMENTO : The half bath is not accessed via the garage, it's accessed via the living space I don't know if that creates a problem. •1 September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting PAT MOORE : I think just functionally that's the way it was done. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Which one was the original, was it the half bath that was there originally or the full bath upstairs? PAT MOORE : I think the half bath was I honestly don't know because there was a full bath, whether it was relocated to the second floor may have been the you know I'm going based on the history. MEMBER DANTES : Honestly in that space you wouldn't be able to put a full bath in there. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Oh it's too small. PAT MOORE : No, no yea MEMBER DANTES : We know there was a bathroom somewhere. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Most likely it was on that floor on the first floor. PAT MOORE : It's in the physical space, whether it was moved or not I don't know. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : The only other question I have was relative to the sanitary system, the septic, does this have its own septic system? Does the house have a new IA system? Tell us about the property. PAT MOORE : I honestly we don't have a lot of information on the sanitary. The existing.house because of the work that was done in the eighties we suspect that it was upgraded cause otherwise it went from the thirties but it was done in the eighties without Health Department approval. There was no documentation so I couldn't get confirmation of where the sanitary systems are nothing so CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : That's one of the comments Mark made in the LWRP it wasn't clear, you're going to need Health Department approval. PAT MOORE : I mean honestly we need Health Department. I'm hoping that the Health Department will allow us to put a smaller system for just the garage since the house has never been an issue but that'll be MEMBER PLANAMENTO : (inaudible) theoretically by the Board of Health to have two systems on one lot? MEMBER LEHNERT : Yes September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting PAT MOORE : Because of distances and everything else sometimes that's recommended and in this case that might be the case because the house is so far from this building. That's my hope because we most likely have to put it in the driveway area so as to not disturb the house and the landscaping. It's a very significant landscaping that's there. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay so that's an issue you'll have to deal with the Health Department. PAT MOORE : We already acknowledge,it and I've explained to the client that the Building Department will require it no matter what since we have a pre-existing (inaudible). CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay anything else from anyone in the audience? Anything else from the Board? PAT MOORE : Did you want a copy of the Pre CO record? I have it all actually clipped together CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well we have the Pre CO you mean the affidavits, sure. BOARD ASSISTANT : I will take it and give it to the Board. PAT MOORE : I have it clipped because when I went through my file I had again for the record I have two affidavits, number one from Marylou Folts. So Marylou Folts actually married her husband who has since passed I believe grew up in that area and was friends with the Nagle family so she was able to provide some additional information. It really collaborates with what I already had learned from the grandson. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :Alright hearing no further questions or comments I'm going to make a motion to close the hearing reserve decision to a later date. I'm not going.to do it subject to receipt because we're getting them right now. PAT MOORE : That actually came from the town records,the Pre CO record. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay great that's helpful, is there a second o� that motion? MEMBER LEHNERT : Second CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA :Aye MEMBER DANTES : Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye HEARING#7817—GERALD and ROBIN MURTHA CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next application before the Board is for Gerald and Robin Murtha #7817. This is a request for a variance from Article III Section 280-15 and the Building Inspector's April 14, 2023 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for a permit to construct an accessory in-ground swimming pool at 1) located in other than the code permitted rear yard located at 2662 Long Creek Drive in Southold. State your name for the record please. HEATHER SANDERSON : Heather Sanderson CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I'm going to say very quickly that the County has responded and we received an email from them, there was some consideration that perhaps because there's so much undeveloped land around it that is PDR land, preserved development rights for the county that the swimming pool might have been partially on that reserved land and that has been resolved. It is based on a new survey determined that it is not on PDR land so we can just simply go ahead and review the swimming pool located in a side yard instead of the code required rear yard. Is there something you'd like to tell the Board? HEATHER SANDERSON : The property is located on 45.6 acres proposing an in-ground pool and because of the way the house is situated is being considered the side yard. They're going to be MEMBER DANTES : In all honesty if the pool was in the code conforming rear yard then he'd be on top of the septic system it looks like so HEATHER ANDERSON : It will be more than a hundred feet away from the wetlands and it's not going to be seen from the road, it's not really going to be seen from the neighboring properties. MEMBER LEHNERT : It looks like it's at the rear of the house, the architectural rear of the house. HEATHER SANDERSON : Correct which is why it was put that way. September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well with that shaped property once again first of all there's no impact on anything or anyone, no one is going to ever see it. It's at the end of a very, very, very unique driveway and I don't see any adverse impact whatsoever it's an enormous property and the way it's cited is logical relative to the house layout and we now know that it's perfectly permitted. Does the Board have any questions or comments? We've all been out to the site. MEMBER LEHNERT : It's a pretty benign application. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : This is a very benign application, anything from anybody? Anyone in the audience, anybody on Zoom? Please come to the podium and state your name. ANGELINA NORTON : Angelina Norton, I reside at 610 Pond Ave. in Southold, New York. My concerns are the development rights have been sold on that entire property that the Murtha's own. They have a 1.2 acre building envelope and if they have intended in putting a pool in why didn't they locate it on that 1.2 acre building envelope? MEMBER DANTES : The latest survey shows it clearly located in the envelope. That's the one they had up there. ANGELINA NORTON : I have to look at it again. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : This is a new it's an updated survey that we requested. We talked to the county we just got it. You can look at it there. What they've done is we wanted to make sure that it wasn't on development rights sold land. We checked with the county, the county looked at the new survey which is more accurate than the old one that they had you got the old one cause we did so we doubled checked. We sent it in and they have no confirmed that the proposed pool is indeed on their buildable area and it is not within the development rights sold area. ANGELINA NORTON : That's perfect. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay thank you for your concern and your patience. HEATHER SANDERSON : Anything else? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I don't think so. Is there anything else from anybody? MEMBER ACAMPORA : No CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Motion to close the hearing reserve decision to a later date. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Second September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER DANTES : Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye we'll have a decision in two weeks. HEARING#7818—BERRY P. 2021 QPRT CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next application before the Board is for Berry P. 2021 QPRT #7818. This is a request for a variance from Article XXII Section 280-116A(1) and the Building Inspector's April 27, 2623 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for a permit to construct a pergola addition to a single family dwelling at 1) located less than the code required 100 feet from the top of the bluff located at 2840 Stars Rd. in East Marion. MEMBER PLANAMENT6: Leslie I just want to let you know that I'm recusing myself. MIKE KIMACK : Good morning everyone, Michael Kimack on behalf of the applicant. The pergola is tucked into a corner of the existing home and it will be no further seaward than the house itself. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : 80 foot bluff setback. MIKE KIMACK : Yea that's the reason we're here exactly because we're within your jurisdiction. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : And it's an open structure over an existing patio basically for sun protection. MEMBER LEHNERT : And it's maintaining the existing setback. MIKE KIMACK : Exactly CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : And it is LWRP consistent. There's a huge long driveway as well. MIKE KIMACK : It's an interesting piece of property. September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting MEMBER ACAMPORA : A beautiful piece of property. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yes it is.There's certainly no visual impact on anything or anyone. MEMBER ACAMPORA : No CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Anything from the Board? MEMBER DANTES : I have no questions. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Anyone in the audience? Is there anyone on Zoom? Motion to close the hearing reserve decision to a later date. MEMBER ACAMPORA : Second CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER DANTES : Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye HEARING#7819—WINE COUNTRY PROMOTIONS, LLC CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next application before the Board is for Wine County Promotions, LLC #7819. This is a request for an Interpretation pursuant to Article III Section 280-13A(1) and the Building Inspector's May 1, 2023 Notice of Disapproval based on an. application for a permit to construct additions and alterations to an existing single family dwelling 1) to determine whether the proposed construction is permitted and whether the proposed intent as'designed and functionality of the site constitutes a single family dwelling located at 63615 CR 48 (adj. to Long Island Sound) in Greenport. So this one is a code interpretation cause the Building Department isn't certain if this constitutes a single dwelling or two separate structures. I have an actual I just want to confirm something, this is a complicated proposal and it's an important proposal because it might set a precedent one way or the other. MIKE KIMACK : We don't think so but I think I can go through that with you. September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay, let's do this, why don't we let you go ahead and present what you want to and the we'll have some questions. MIKE KIMACK :The owner is here, she traveled from Switzerland in order to attend that's how important it is to her and the family. Let me start by saying what this is not, then I'll get back to the interpretation why their asking for the interpretation. This is not a second dwelling of the house primarily. The reason being is that a second dwelling has to be detached by definition. This is has bene attached under the definition of breezeway more than 80 sq. ft. has to be conditioned space and by the understanding that once you attach something more than 80 sq. ft. and make it conditions it becomes an addition to the house. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : That's correct but let me ask you a question because I don't want to lose this. I have the codes right here and you also make reference to the definition of a breezeway and so on, we know it's not because it is enclosed and conditioned space a breezeway is open. So it says that you know other types of attachments shall not attach a main building a separate building unless the attachment meets the requirements of livable floor area. Now you go to the definition of livable floor area and it says, all spaces within the exterior walls of a dwelling unit inclusive of several exclusive of several things. The fact is this heated corridor which is according to my one sixteenth inch scale approximately 86 feet in length MIKE KIMACK : There are two of them. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay, but it's a continuous the point is none of them whether there is one or two are within the exterior walls of the single family dwelling. They are an entity onto themselves. MIKE KIMACK : The Building Department basically addressed that. We had a long conversation it took about seven months to go through this. One of the discussions that I had with the Building Department how they would consider that space and the answer that I got from , Mike Verity was that we considered it to be conditioned space. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well it is conditioned space. MIKE KIMACK : And they would also be considered habitable because while we were talking about it at that time was this was when the GFA came out and one question that I had we're not we're exempt from the GFA because the application went in prior to January 1St of 2023. However since it has been a long when it came up I wasn't quite sure at the time the Building Department wasn't exactly sure what would be exempt or what would not be exempt. One of the discussions that I had with the Building Department was whether that this would be considered habitable space and the answer was yes. It would be considered all of it habitable September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting space and it counted towards the GFA. It's a good question but I wanted to make sure that I wanted to start with that first in terms of in essence MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Leslie maybe we can (inaudible) while it's considered habitable space it doesn't fall within the confines of CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Of livable floor area. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Of livable floor area. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The Building Department may have interpreted\that differently based on what you just told us. However based upon direct reading of the code it is not within the exterior walls of a dwelling, the dwelling exists already and the additional structure MIKE KIMACK : It becomes an addition, it is an addition to the existing dwelling as a result of CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It is an addition to the existing dwelling and it's attached by this you know MIKE KIMACK : Which has several components within it. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well that's what I was going to also say, it's also attaching a series of accessory uses.There's an artist studio, there is a greenhouse that starts at the house and MIKE KIMACK : A greenhouse the corners themselves become a showing places for the owner's art primarily. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well look, one thing that we understand you know my background is architecture and one thing we understand is that architects design things and are paid specifically to customize things for their clients and that is precisely what's happened here. However whether or not the world at large is prepared to see them the same way an architect sees their'client's needs is something this Board has to grapple with. MIKE KIMACK : This is well put by you because this is going to go to the core of the design itself and I'll get into that. In essence the corridor becomes the corridors themselves even though they're 86 feet becomes part of the working,environment for the art studio because that's where the client proposes to show all of their art work basically becoming a functional part of the overall space that's between the main house and what will be the you know the place with the pool. So it isn't just a pass through it isn't just a breezeway from getting one point to another but it's part of the living habitable area because it's functional to the purpose by which this whole thing has been designed. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : So you're saying the artist studio is for gallery space? September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting MIKE KIMACK : Yes and we'll get to that by specifically, I wanted to first start off by saying that by definition and you brought up the one point that this particular space is not a detached second dwelling. The question of whether or not the corridor in and of itself maybe declared habitable space which we believe it is because it's usable space function able space within the uses that are designed for that particular space and we will get into each one of those going forward. Having said that basically and in a sense that and the Building Department did not bring that up, they simply brought it up under the whether or not it was a one family or not. MEMBER DANTES : The uses aren't the issue right, it's just the fact that it's designed like a two family. MIKE KIMACK : It's an interesting way they worded it. They worded it the functionality of design the intent of the design now the intent of the design is my client's intent. They're questioning whether the intent of that design is for more than a one family. Now if it's not a two family which it's not they're saying it's not a one family. The question is we have to prove to you that the function of design actually will meet the fact that it's one family. Now there are two components to that function of design, the design basically which is the exterior design basically. Now the exterior design as it sits on the site is something that I would like the owner to talk to in terms of why it was done in that particular way. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Right in the middle of this we have an arraignment which we knew was coming. MIKE KIMACK : You want to take that and make a break and come back later? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yea absolutely, why don't you are you ready? I think what we'll have to do is apologies to everybody including us, so we're just going to have to make motion to recess for lunch. I'm going to make a motion to recess and we can stop the recording the Zoom and all that. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Second CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER DANTES : Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Motion to reconvene. MEMBER ACAMPORA : Second CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER DANTES : Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye. Okay where did we leave off. So you were starting to explain MIKE KIMACK : To bring you back we were basically talking about the definition of a breezeway in essence that if it extended more than 80 sq. ft. it had to be conditioned and then you raised a question about the second part of that where other types of attachments which extend more than 10 feet or exceed 80 sq. ft. shall not attach the main building to a separate building unless such attachment meets the requirements of livable floor area. You go to the definition of livable floor area basically it's all spaces within the exterior walls of a dwelling unit exclusive of garages, breezeways, unheated porches, cellars, heater rooms and approved basements having a window area less than 10 sq. ft. of the room. Useable floor area shall include all spaces not otherwise excluded above such as principle rooms, utility rooms, bathrooms, all closets and hallways open directly into any rooms within the dwelling unit. I'll leave it at that for the present time and my next presentation will be talking about the functional uses within the building itself primarily. Donna do you have the thumb drive that I had with all the pictures? Oh I'm sorry Kim I apologize.The pictures would be a little bit more. OFFICE ASSISTANT WESTERMANN : Hold on let me look for them. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Mike while she's looking (inaudible) when you're discussing the livable floor area and space but it's not calculated as far as within garages even, doesn't this corridor extend through a garage? MIKE KIMACK : No it becomes a carport primarily, it allows it's a carport extension to it. It's not an enclosed garage, it's a garage area at the outside that ties into the corridor space. BOARD ASSISTANT : Mike she has the photos up, are there any ones you want to start with? MIKE KIMACK : I'm not quite sure where we're at that's probably at the beginning. September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting OFFICE ASSISTANT WESTERMANN :Just tell me when to stop Mike. MIKE KIMACK : Hold it right�there primarily. The main principle dwelling you can see on the upper right hand corner, the proposal is to attach to that primarily and as you come out of that the first attachment is a greenhouse primarily and then there is attached to that is a gallery basically that walks from there to the art studio. Now the gallery itself is part of the function of the art studio I'll let the owner speak more to that and the reason it was done this way. It goes to the art studio and then after that from the art studio there's more gallery space basically that goes passed the carport that's open to that area. Then after that it attaches to the addition which is constructed and that addition which you can bring up which is on the left hand side of it the basement section of the addition I'll do,this schedule cause I know you have a big schedule going but the basement section has a craft room, a cellar foyer, a playroom, projection room, boiler room, storage, bathroom, pool/beach changing room etc. like that that's on the lower area and there's a pool technical area in that area. That's what's the function of the basement area of the part of the addition attachment between (inaudible). MEMBER DANTES : So you're saying this whole breezeway has a full basement under? MIKE KIMACK : No, no, no the breezeway doesn't but it leads into a basement. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :The other building that they're putting on at the end on the water MIKE KIMACK : On the left hand side. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : closer to the bluff that has a basement, it has a swimming pool. MIKE KIMACK : Donna if you could put up the drawings we can look at the architectural renderings I think may be helpful. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It passes under those canopies MIKE KIMACK : Right to the other building. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : with a series of functions along the way. MIKE KIMACK : Correct, that was the basement function. The first floor function is simply a living room/dining room, there's no kitchen that would CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : What's the wet bar, it says wet bar. MIKE KIMACK : The wet bar is simply a sink like that I'm not quite sure. 4 September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting HELEN CALLE-LIN : I'm Helen Calle-In, so I can maybe explain the project a bit like in detail why certain things are. The whole idea of this is that we wanted to create a usable space throughout the whole house and to kind of have so the pool house actually is more of a space where there's going to be a basic one open room on the floor where there's the pool and that space has it's going to be used mainly for basically meditation, yoga and you know things around the pool with the family. Our family we're getting into our fifties you know we're a family of all women who are divorced basically and we would like to stay together because my father died a few years ago and this was his dream. We are all artists so this is kind of problematic in the whole house because we all need a lot of space to create. So that's why the middle space there is actually an artist studio and that is actually for my sister who is an active artist and at the moment she is trying to do larger pieces and she has no more room. My father was a he collected antique pieces and my mother is also an artist and we have over a hundred paintings in the basement of hers that we can't even show. So this is the whole idea of the house was to kind of create this kind of in between and also my mother is Buddhist so she really doesn't want us to cut down any trees on the land but this is not possible. So we have the acreage to just make a huge you know gallery large wide invasive but that's not part of our philosophy. We can't do that because then we would be killing a whole bunch of trees in order to do that. So that's why we have this little walkway to try to get around the spaces because it's a highly it's very dense in greenery this property and this is what we fell in love with. It's a beautiful property for that. The idea is to create this gallery space so we have interior living and exterior living. So all this walkway that you see that you think is only a walkway it's actually a gallery where there's going to be this all glass so it's completely see through and then there's the bits of this glass that actually opens so it creates like an inside outdoor living space and it's actually we're trying to make a space that's harmonious enough where the gallery itself yes we have the art, we have the pieces that are antiques but we also have the sculptures that are outside. We also have the beautiful trees that are you know that are there and the landscape and the moss that's on the floor. I mean we actually have moss all over the where there's the walkways and that's to show one point that we don't use any chemical pesticides that's why the moss is there and we'd like to preserve this. This is the part of the nature with the art is something that we want to preserve and that's why we have this really have this kind of wonky passage but this wonky passage is part of the whole I think the beauty of the place because that area is the area that we think is the most is the heart of the family it's the creation. So we have basically the house that's existing right now is quite small it only has three bedrooms and it has a gigantic kitchen so we're very happy with that that's why we don't really need another kitchen. The wet bar is mainly just for when we're you know when we're around the pool to have a place to have drinks and that's about it you know. Then afterwards it's quite empty there's no bathroom even on that floor because we don't really intended it to be like a place that is there's a September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting bathroom in the basement it's more than enough for if you're in the pool and you change and you need to go,to the restroom and that's more than enough. Two extra bedrooms on top because we are a family of so there is my sister so all'three of us and we're you know my two sisters are divorced and the other one is always single she's an artist and we have our two kids and we would just like to live together that's all. The whole idea is to create something of course it's very contemporary in design so the idea was not to kind of create a fake colonial look or something like that but to use local materials still and to try to get a uniformized the existing house with the new with the extension, through shingle roofs, through the whole idea of having as much aesthetic natural sidings because the old house has wood sidings that kind of needs a little bit of renovation that's for sure and the whole this whole concept was to actually avoid a gigantic wide house with hall and rooms and you know it could have been a different type of project where we just went okay fine we have the square footage let's just make a very heavy structure and that's not part of the philosophy and I think it would kill the whole charm of this whole property. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : How does the existing dwelling relate architecturally in your mind to what is being proposed for the rest of the project? HELEN CALLE-LIN : The existing dwelling looks very different. It was built in a very classical architecture and so in this contemporary extension we didn't want to make fake (inaudible) and we felt that it was very important to mark the fact that okay this is a new intervention and this new intervention onto this property we're trying to do it intelligently so that we can preserve the maximum amount of the living you know material that's there and at the same time would like to be able to work in all this space because we none of us have we all work at home and we all create so between the I actually do industrial design and furniture design and so I also need a lot of space so we're all kind of in this together and we thought oh yea this is the best way to do it would be to say okay the new construction would add on with the similar materials which is the shingle roofs and keep the maximum amount of wooden structure that we have so that's what we were looking at wooden framing and all that. To create a transparency with the new build where basically we have we just see roofs and the rest is kind of open and it's glass and between the areas there are certain glass bids which are immobile and then there's certain glass bids that actually open. So that just creates such a beautiful transparent feel to the whole property and also I'd like to respect the properties of my neighbors. I love my neighbors and I think that their properties area amazingly beautiful as well and we have tons of animals that go through this whole area and we just kind of want to preserve that. Even though it's a contemporary build we're just you know there is quite a lot of inspiration from Andrew Geller who built these beautiful roofs that come down and shingled but with a slight contemporary interpretation. So of course we were very inspired by that and we thought that was extremely beautiful. So the pool house itself only has it has the September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting sloping roof and then the whole side is all transparent it's all glass. So the only side that has you know also another side of board and batten is actually the side that we want to my neighbor that's here and so the idea is to also give him enough privacy on the sides where we have to give onto him and then the other side is my neighbor Donna and we try to give them privacy as well so this the only closed sides are just the sides and the rest are all transparent. MEMBER DANTES : This is for Mike, what are the Building Department want changed in order \ to not send you here? I MIKE KIMACK : I wish I could tell you that.] spent seven months trying to get that out of the Building Department. I asked specifically what they thought did not make this a one family and I never got the answer. What I did get was the language that you see in the Notice of Disapproval so since that's the language that I have to deal with that's the language that I'm dealing before you. I think that Helen's approach and I want to emphasize this that everything within everything all the function within the inside of the design is for one family home, there's nothing in this that basically talks to a second dwelling. It couldn't be a second dwelling simply because if it's an addition to an existing house it's by definition not a second dwelling to begin with. The question that the Building Department raised is, is it a one family? Well if it's not a two family it's not a one family what is it kind of thing and that's what I've been running around in my head. The important thing to look at here is and as Leslie how you pointed out primarily is the definition under livable floor area, basically they use the term hallways basically as being part of the livable floor area. These are more than a hallway and as Helen tried to explain they're part of the art studio, they're part of the presentation of their own art. They become functional to that, that space is used for that. Even though their hallways or corridors whatever they get from point A to point B they're going from the greenhouse to the art studio to the carport area into the main primary home that's allowed. So they are functional habitable spaces because they're functional components. The functional purpose of these with a family to enjoy and display their art privately. They become habitable space as a result of that. MEMBER DANTES : Next question is it shows on the plans that you have two separate I mean this could be what they're thinking, you have two separate septic systems, separate HVAC systems, separate MIKE KIMACK : I knew that was coming up, they brought that up to me they said gee Mike the septic systems I said yes, I can make it one. Now I can certainly make it one that's not a problem. I can put a couple of distribution pools and make it one I offered that. That in and of itself was not a deterrent to write the Notice of Disapproval. I can understand looking at it that you got two the perception would be in and of itself having two septic systems and the 451 September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting design wasn't necessarily something that I thought would have triggered looking at it other than a one family dwelling. However, if they wanted to I can easily design it and we can take out the existing system for the house it can be one big IA system for the one dwelling, that's not a problem. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yea you would need to do an IA system it's five bedrooms. MIKE KIMACK : No we were doing it anyway, we were offering two IA systems, we were upgrading the existing home and we're adding one an additional IA system to the addition. They raised the issue well maybe they didn't say it did they just said maybe having two might but they never CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well because if you have you know if you have a cabana let's say a pool house cabana which is in large part what this recreational addition with bedrooms represents then you can have a separate system or you can link it to the one existing one but if you're saying this is one linear kind of dwelling with a series of activities MIKE KIMACK : I can easily design a new one I mean if that's what the Building Department told me was the hang up issue that was easily overcome. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Is there a fireplace in the building that's closer to the HELEN CALLE-LIN : Excuse me, there's a fireplace in the existing house right now. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : No not the existing house the proposed addition. HELEN CALLE-LIN : The proposed addition there is a fireplace. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I thought so, it's not labeled as such but it looked architecturally like it was. HELEN CALLE-LIN : I don't know if it's allowed or not but we the architect CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It's not that it's not allowed. HELEN CALLE-LIN : I was just like okay why not. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It's allowed that's not what I was HELEN CALLE-LIN : The idea is that we do also like to try to use maximum amount of non- electrical and heating and also you know air conditioning so we that's what the design is also a lot of transparent and opening that's cross opening because I'm personally extremely allergic to (inaudible) I'm coughing like crazy and so the whole family we kind of like it when ,, September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting it's natural and that was why we proposed to have you know we try to heat with you know when it's really, really cold I mean of course we have to put the heating on but most of the time if it's in between maybe we light a fireplace for just to you know the evening time when we're together and then you know it's over. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I just was asking cause I want to make sure that I'm reading the plans correctly it wasn't drawn specifically as most fireplaces are. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : So I think in my mind's eye and I can't speak to what the Building Department has to say but we're here with the request for a Code Interpretation whether this is or isn't a single family home. What it might be I don't know, it's unusual. So what I'm asking you is are there examples of homes, I tried Googling the architect other designs that might have this connectivity of multiple buildings and I couldn't come up with anything that had such great distances. Are you aware of any buildings any single family residences in the Town of Southold I'm not saying in the immediate area that fit this sort of plan that are connected by these extremely long corridors. MIKE KIMACK : Nick I think the answer would be that I didn't pursue the fact of looking at others, I looked at the fact that we have buildable area primarily and buildable envelope and as of right we can build in the buildable envelope. Your question to me is, is this something showing up in other places but we're looking at what they're trying to achieve on this particular property with this particular building envelope. We're not before you for front yard setbacks or side yard setbacks. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : It's about an interpretation and I mean as I read it when you see two living rooms, two dining rooms, two septic systems there's something more than one. A typical house I'm not saying architectural I don't want to impose my design tastes on the applicant but when you look at a house typically on any level or somebody ask a child to draw what a house looks like they're not going to necessarily have this sort of you know design element. I'm just confused because if a corridor was to be contained within the four walls or whatever walls of the residential unit, if we're looking at just here this town hall which could be a similar floor plan for a house there's a central corridor that connects all the different rooms. Here the corridor is outside of the actual rooms so it's very hard for me as a Board Member to interpret this as something that is I don't want to say traditional but as just a single family home. MIKE KIMACK : Then I take you back to the definition of a floor area livable. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It requires that these corridors be MIKE KIMACK : They basically said livable is a hallway too it's included to livable. 471 September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yes but it's supposed to be within the exterior walls. MIKE KIMACK : And it is within the exterior walls and it's functional to MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Within exterior walls but not interior walls of the actual residence. If it was in the floor plan of the existing house then yes I would agree. MIKE KIMACK : You're separating this whole are between-as simply a bypass point between the primary home and the pool house area which it is not. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well one thing is labeled garage, now you just testified that it's not a garage it's a carport it's open but your plan labels it as garage. Secondly, I just want to make sure that we're reflecting what is being proposed accurately that's all. The artist studio you'd had previously described prior to Helen's testimony as a gallery for the display of art which led me to wonder who are they displaying it for? Is this going to be open for public view as an art collection. MIKE KIMACK : No for family only. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well she just clarified that. Moreover you just said it's not just for that it is for a practicing artist to use to produce art work. Now we have this unusual precedent that we had to make an interpretation and I'm sure you're aware of what constitutes an artist studio and there are about twenty four criteria that have to be determined to allow that use to exist. MEMBER DANTES : That's in an accessory structure. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I know that's in an accessory structure. The question is are these accessory since they're under separate roofs and they're attached by a linear corridor or is this one unit, one continuous linear dwelling? MIKE KIMACK : We propose that it's one continuous linear (inaudible) by definition. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : We know that. MIKE KIMACK : I'm not sure how under the definition you can look at it any other way than that.'lt's an area where the art gallery or studio if you want to call it is for private use it's for performing putting art together creating more art and the corridors or the hallways that we want to do is for the presentation of the family's art which they have a voluminous amount. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The art that is proposed to be produced there by Helen and your sisters where are they sold, are they in collection, are they September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting HELEN CALLE-LIN : They're not sold, so my mother paints and she's been a classical artist for a very long time and she does it for her own pleasure and we kept everything so it's all in the current basement right now which we can no longer enter` cause there's so much stuff. Then my dad also collected antique small antique pieces for a very long time now and we have like almost eight hundred pieces and it's all in cardboard boxes in the basement. It's all for ourselves and of course my sisters CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : So you don't display art anywhere else, you don't sell industrial design? HELEN CALLE-LIN : No we don't, my industrial design is different. So I work actually for other people and I work in Switzerland and I produce industrial design for a lot of companies. I work from my computer and when I am at home I like to create things like that are not necessarily sold for anybody but it just gives me a lot of inspiration cause I do pottery, I make giant wood pieces I love doing that because I love wood work. It's part of creation that's ongoing creation in this whole family and my sister she is an artist but she is actually when she works she works for virtual design for people on-line as well more than anything else but for her own personal work she does large paintings and large sizes but she doesn't sell them and it's for herself. For her it's also very important because it's part of what she does in order for her to develop and also be able to do her work differently. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : What about the proposed photography studio and craft studio and HELEN CALLE-LIN :That's for the younger generation. So what's happened is that my daughter who is now twenty years old, she has decided when she finishes her school in two more years her college she is going to move back here and she will stay here full time and she does photography and she does a lot of sculptures and she really wants to work also with plants that's why we have the greenhouse. She's studying biology and chemistry in Amsterdam right now and she is fascinated by the world of forest farming and she loves nature and that is why we CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : So that's the greenhouse. HELEN CALLE-LIN : The greenhouse and that's what we have to preserve as many trees as,we can and that's why we have so much moss on the property. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : You know this is an interesting thing, I mean I know enough people in the audience here to know that this is pretty an interesting challenge right. Talk about being stuck between an attempt to railroad somebody's aesthetic sensibility and what the code requires or doesn't. The good news is it's an interpretation because if it weren't we could not take into consideration any of the things you've told us about your family because September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting we cannot personalize variance relief, we have statutes that we have to follow and that's not based on the person and I've actually had to turn down problems with wheelchair ramps when I've worked for twenty years with disabled people. It's weird but that's the way it works so I appreciate all of your explanation because I understand the sensitivity that an architect would bring to customizing a kind of a special place for a client. HELEN CALLE-LIN : This is a very difficult project even for me because I have to respond I mean I come from a very traditional family so when my dad died I am responsible for the whole family so I'm trying to take care of everybody the best I can and knowing that one of my sister is divorced and she kind of depends on me and my little sister who is an artist depends also on me so I'm trying to take care of everybody properly so we're all in our fifties I mean face it we're going to grow old there together. My mom she's 82 she's not going to be moving from that place, it's her forever home she just wants to be able to see the ocean. She's a bit fragile so you know and I understand and she wants to continue with what she's been producing all these years which is a lot of calligraphy and a lot of traditional art and she loves it. It's kind of very difficult.to please a whole family that keeps producing a lot of creative stuff. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Leslie can I ask Donna to pull something up that CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Walk us through the massing model cause that's for the benefit of the public we're all, that's the (inaudible) down on the bluff. HELEN CALLE-LIN : Exactly so you can see these MEMBER PLANAMENTO : There was another image like this I didn't have this in my packet but I did see oh Donna the first one. What I'm trying to understand is this I'm calling it a corridor for lack of a better work I don't know if you're calling it officially a hallway that extends from the house and I'm not quite sure where the front door is cause the front door as it exists now it seems like it's a secondary door but you have this long corridor but then you've got these awning roofs that don't appear attached to the residence. HELEN CALLE-LIN : Yea the whole idea is to have it all kind of feel like it's floating because it's so pretty. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : But if they're not part of the house HELEN CALLE-LIN : No they're all part of the house it's just that now it's more of an architectural feat, I don't know how they're going to be able to build this. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : But it's not attached. September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting HELEN CALLE-LIN :This is still on a concept, this is just a print out CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It's going to be a lot-of steel. HELEN CALLE-LIN : No I don't think so cause I told them CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : You want to do it with wood? HELEN CALLE-LIN : We want to use I would really, really like for them to try to figure out how to do this with wood framing and I had talked to some builders and they said yes this is possible. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It's possible. HELEN CALLE-LIN : Yea it is possible but the whole idea is I'm very, very inspired to try and create something where we feel like everything is floating and there's a lot of transparency. I know it's contemporary architecture, it has nothing to do with the traditional architecture. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Leslie my point though is it's like awnings for lack of a better word that are not attached to the house does this then require variance relief because they're accessory structures which are not in compliant locations. MEMBER DANTES : He's got (inaudible) various parts of the HELEN CALLE-LIN : Lean kit MEMBER DANTES : Whatever you want to call it. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Yea I don't see that and that's why I'm asking this question. MEMBER DANTES : It's a rendering it's not clear. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : It's not clear in the plans either. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :The drawings that we have are not for construction either, they're not they're conceptual drawings they're not (inaudible) developed design but they're not construction. MIKE KIMACK : So basically the main building is all wood could you to that Donna. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Go to the next one Donna, what's the roofing? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I'm familiar with Andrew Geller as an architect. (inaudible) costal house swimming pool last year (inaudible) house in Mattituck. September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yea we did the tea pot house. MIKE KIMACK : I don't want to mislead but most of it is (inaudible) but it's not primarily but MEMBER PLANAMENTO : No I understood that but MIKE KIMACK : It's an overall concept. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay let's keep going, let's go through this stuff. HELEN CALLE-LIN : Of course this is you know this is the drawings don't show exactly how it's going to be built but so this is the whole idea is it's going to be so the sides when you look at the sides, the sides are going to be the board an batten construction and when you're going through the house like this it's all transparent cause it's going to be glass and then the whole idea is that this part of the house is something that I want to say that because it's also (inaudible) meditation space for my mom because we do have the thousand year old Buddha at home at the moment and it has been there with us all through all our generations that is not considered housed again because there's nowhere to put the Buddha and so this is kind of this is going to be kind of like a space where it has to feel quite empty so that's why that floor where there is a pool that floor the first floor it's completely empty for just that little where the bar so we can have drinks and stuff but it won't stay completely empty and we try to move any type of element that goes in there (inaudible). The architect wanted to propose a bathroom in there but we said no because it's supposed to be a meditation space you can't have the bathroom there. So it's you know like you said it's not a classical thing where okay the architect was kind of confused too, he's like (inaudible) put a table there but I mean we're not necessarily going to have a dinner table necessarily there. So it's all much more fluid in a way it's going to be used and I'm very sorry but it's not going to be a classical interpretation of a home where you have the living room, the dining room. This space is basically a pool house with a lot of element of spirituality and there is two extra rooms because I have nowhere to stay when I come. I would like to be able to still also grow old in this home and that's kind of part of the whole thing. Then afterwards so there is the existing house is built in a very classical fashion, there's a gigantic kitchen, a gigantic dining room that's enough for us we're happy (inaudible) and if we need to go a year or two well we'll just bring whatever we need to put it on the wet bar and (inaudible). The whole idea is to have this transparency is very important and yes I am extremely in love with all the (inaudible) and that's why we have (inaudible) but it's all floating visually, it's not really floating because it has to be connected it's all one (inaudible) otherwise we're going to have (inaudible) going through certain areas. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I was going to ask you about drainage. September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting HELEN CALLE-LIN : This is not my I'm not my specialty is (inaudible) so I don't know so of course we're going to hire a proper company that has to know how to link all this together. physically,so that we could be (inaudible). CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Understood. HELEN CALLE-LIN : Right now I need to redo the roof of the existing house it needs to be done so that we can actually age (inaudible) and even I'm supposed to be redoing the porch but I've been waiting too because if I need to do wood bids on the other bits of the house I want it to all age the same. So if I do wood now and then I have to do another one it's not going to age the same way. MIKE KIMACK : Do we have some more photos or is that .CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Let's just go through these. HELEN CALLE-LIN : We can go keep on going forward (inaudible) there's ton of land you know an example of course I can't find exactly the images but this is kind of how we feel about this living space that is gallery and also things that open up into outdoor/indoor spaces. This shows this illustrates this quite well so there is like this artist space in the middle or art studio and that's the whole idea and in the greenhouse you know there is also a little area where we want to put a Japanese hot tub for my mom, she really wanted one and so I don't know where else to put it so I was like okay well at least the greenhouse is (inaudible). My daughter wanted the plants so (inaudible). So this is the whole feel of how I see our property like a space that can be somewhere we can enjoy the outside as much as the inside because CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN,: These are not examples of the actual design, these are examples of the feel. HELEN CALLE-LIN : The feel exactly cause of course we can't build yet so I can't find I did my best to illustrate. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : How do we interpret something that these aren't the actual plans? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The plans that we have are proposed, these are examples of the type. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I'm not talking about that I'm talking about this cause she said that the plans that we're looking at here she said are conceptual. September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : No that just simply means that they are not developed to the stage of construction. They are a design proposal, they're design development they're not just conceptual MEMBER PLANAMENTO : (inaudible) interpretation for the house this is the home that would be built. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : This is the home that would be built they have to do construction drawings or amend these or whatever but this is a specific develop design. MIKE KIMACK : This is designed Nick for the Building Department to make that Notice of Disapproval interpretation but they're not final designs but we have to hand them CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Construction drawings, there's different phases in design and different types of drawings along the way and this is a purposeful design that has been developed and revamped several times no doubt. So the next phase would be should they be approved they would go into construction drawings which is what you need for a building permit. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Two other comments that I have in response to the testimony that you've offered Miss Calle-Lin, so you gave a lot of testimony about multi-generational living about aging in place yet there's no bedroom and there's a lot of transitions let alone distances that there's no primary floor bedroom. HELEN CALLE-LIN : Well there's three bedrooms in the existing house MEMBER PLANAMENTO : On the second floor HELEN CALLE-LIN : on the second floor and two on this side. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : On the second floor? HELEN CALLE-LIN : Yes MEMBER PLANAMENTO : But what I'm saying is you gave testimony about aging in place and closets CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : They're all upstairs HELEN CALLE-LIN : You see how there's a round stair in the middle there? J CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yes it's a circular stair. September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting HELEN CALLE-LIN : Yes we did that on purpose figuring that if we don't have hover boards by the time I'm old I mean I can just take that out and put like a round elevator. I'm kind of hoping for you know I'm hoping that maybe by then they'll develop something new to get us upstairs you know. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay you know what, we have a lot of other applications before us we're going to have to wrap this up. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I have another comment, when you're talking about animals, wildlife nature again this sort of limits the mobility of other natural elements of other creatures just because it's not necessarily,concentrated in one location so it straddles the length of the property just a statement. MIKE KIMCAK : Nick the deer will find a way. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : That I don't doubt although the birds and maybe the deer will be walking into the glass. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Some of them will be flying into the glass. MIKE KIMACK : I think we presented sufficient information. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I want to hear if there's anyone in the audience who wants to address the application. Is there anyone on Zoom Donna. Board I think we have enough. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Ken did you want to speak? KEN ZAHLER : My name is Ken Zahler, I live next door to Helen 63735 Rt. 48. So my wife and I have built and lived in four houses each very distinctive not just a house. A historic copy of a salt box from the 1700's. The house we're in now is designed to look like a barn converted in to a house. I'm very, very particular in terms of the world of aesthetics and I just I cringe when I see something that's not nice, not attractive, not balanced. I've had many conversations with my next door neighbor and I think she is of like mind and I've seen her drawings and the design and of what you have had up on the screen there and what I would propose to the Board, we're all probably pretty well aware of what New York State requires in law of construction and it if complies with all of those things why have an objection to anything? It's not in a subdivision of 100 x 100 foot lots where a next door neighbor may object to an unusual appearance, nobody can see it but me and I don't think anybody is going to object to it and it's about a thousand feet from the road with an awful lot of trees in between. So people passing by aren't going to see it and it's I think I'm looking forward to seeing how it looks when it's finished. September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Thank you for your testimony. Is there anybody else? 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 the motion carries. Mike I don't think we're going to have this in two weeks we have sixty two days but I suspect this one is going to take longer. The earliest we would have a decision would be at the next Regular Meeting on October Stn HEARING#7820—GREGORY and KRISTINA COUCH CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next application before the Board is for Gregory and Kristina Couch #7820. This is a request for a variance from Article XXIII Section 280-124 and,the Building Inspector's May 19, 2023 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for a permit to construct an accessory structure at 1) less than the code required minimum side yard setback of 20 feet located at 345 Reeve Ave. (adj. to Marratooka Lake) in Mattituck. ROB BROWN : Robert Brown architect for Mr. and Mrs. Couch. We are simply asking for a sige yard variance relief from the side yard setbacks for a garage and storage structure to replace an existing very bulky and large structure. We are intending to accomplish a few things, moving any structure farther from the wetlands than the 'existing structure reducing significantly the amount of paving on the property and creating a situation where the garage structure is more readily accessible from the street than having to go essentially.around the existing house to get to the garage. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Just let me enter into the record, the side yard setback that's being proposed is 10 feet where the code requires a minimum of 20 feet. ROB BROWN : Yes September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I had a question, the garage has two rooms and a full stairs to the second floor, spaces are not labeled. ROB BROWN : It's all storage, it's one (inaudible) on the ground floor which is garage. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Are you proposing to finish any of it with other than open rafters? ROB BROWN : No CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Open rafters and studs right? ROB BROWN : Exactly CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Any plumbing? ROB BROWN : No CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : No plumbing, and any heat? —ROB BROWN : No CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : No plumbing no heat. So the proposed use is strictly as a garage with storage? ROB BROWN : Correct CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : You have a pretty narrow lot for sure and it's very long, 436 feet long by 88 feet wide. There is an existing hedge row this is all based on inspecting the property it's also on the plan but there's a hedge row that's quite large there very densely landscaped along that side yard. I don't think anybody is going to see anything from any you just see it from the road because of the driveway. Across the street is the church. I don't have any questions, Pat? MEMBER ACAMPORA : No questions. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Eric MEMBER DANTES : No I mean it's 88 feet wide and (inaudible) CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Nick anything from you? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : No questions. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Rob September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting MEMBER LEHNERT : I have no questions. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Is there anyone in the audience who wants to address the application. GREG COUCH : I'm Greg Couch, my neighbors were here earlier but they're in their late eighties so they weren't able to make it back to support us and to let you know that they are in support of the structure cause it kinds of fits in with the neighborhood that's all. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Thank you for letting me know that and I apologize to everybody for running so late. GREG COUCH : That's okay I just don't think they could hang out. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It was at least entertaining. Alright, I don't have any further questions. Is there anybody on Zoom. Motion to close the hearing reserve`decision to a later date. MEMBER ACAMPORA : Second CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER DANTES : Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Aye the motion carries. HEARING#7821—BJB VENTURES, LLC CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next application before the Board is for BJB Ventures, LLC #7821. This is a'request for variances from Article III Section 280-15, Article XXIII Section 280- 124 and the Building Inspector's May 22, 2023 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for a permit to legalize "as built" additions and alterations to an existing accessory garage at 1) less than the code required minimum rear yard setback of 5 feet, 2) more than the code September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting permitted maximum 1,000 sq. ft. in size, 3) more than the code permitted maximum lot coverage of 20% located at 1235 Factory Ave. in Mattituck. BILL GOGGINS : Good afternoon my name is William C. Goggins, I'm located at 13235 Main Rd. Mattituck, New York I'm an attorney and I represent BJB Ventures, LLC. As a preliminary statement the owners of the LLC are Bobby and Jeni Schultz and they love trees, they love the environment, they love animals so I just wanted to make that statement. So the first issue is rear yard setback which should be 5 feet, there's a pre-existing 3 foot setback and I can probably lay it out for the Board. In 1979 December 1, 1979 the Building Department issued a Certificate of Occupancy which should be in the packet and if not I can give a copy where they issued a Certificate of Occupancy for a private one family dwelling with accessory structure that was in 1978. Then in 1987 April 30, 1987 there was a C.O. issued for an accessory structure to the accessory building and I'm not sure if it's in the packets but I made copies for CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yea we have them, we have the C.O.'s BILL GOGGINS : You have the building permit application for the half bath? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : No I don't have the building permit, we have the C.O's with those dates that you just I MEMBER DANTES : So why are you here if this has an existing C.O. on it? BILL GOGGINS : I'll get to that in a moment. So this was the building permit application for the accessory structure to the accessory building. So if you go to page three I highlighted (inaudible) application for the building permit at that time that they have the width of the garage is 26 feet and they also they're putting in a screen porch a 12 foot by 20 foot and if you go to the last page of the packet I gave you there's a drawing of the existing the garage it's kind of a not much of a drawing but the garage shows that the existing the garage in 1987 is 3 feet from the rear property line. So I'm not sure back in 1978 when they built this accessory structure whether or not there was even a rear yard setback at that time, it appears that there wasn't. So that's pre-existing and I'm guessing that in April 30, 1987 when they put the extension they made the extension 6 feet from the property line which can be gleaned from that same drawing. So now fast forward to today and we talk about the history we have those two C.O.'s issued in April of 2005 someone named Pedro Lopez purchased the property, five years later he went into foreclosure and the foreclosure took over ten years to finish and for ten years there were tenants in this building, there were rats, there were broken down cars it was a mess there. The Schultz's purchased this property at foreclosure which was about three weeks after the bank got title to it themselves so they didn't we didn't really have I represented them we really didn't have a full opportunity to get inside it was as in close in September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting two weeks or else. So they took a risk and they bought it and they went forward they got a building permit for it to do renovations. They cleaned up the property and then when the Building Inspector came to inspect they came up with these violations so they had to put in an application for a building permit for an "as built" accessory garage. As you can see it was already built but what they did what I think this Mr. Lopez did was he expanded the 1987 expansion by it was to be 3 feet on each side so if you look on the north side of the property where that X is which is a roof I think that was the 1987 extension. The extension there on the survey shows 28 feet by 12 but the application as you can see from the package I gave you was less, it was 20 by 12. So they must have been expanded at that time and I think there were mistakes in calculations over the years because the original structure appears to be 26 by 24 yet the current survey shows 26 by 24 the original building. So I just think there was that they weren't as accurate as they needed to be at the time when they did the work in 1978 and then again in '87 when they mapped it out. Clearly somebody expanded that 20 by 12 area which is on the north side. So I think that they're looking for a variance because they expanded the north side toward the rear to be consistent with the primary structure the original structure. MEMBER DANTES : Cause on your permanent it shows it not being (inaudible) but then CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : And now it is. BILL GOGGINS : Now it is, so I kind of highlighted it for the Board to show what was permitted and what appeared to be different. r MEMBER DANTES : Okay so it's 4 feet (inaudible) BILL GOGGINS : So it's not that they went further to the rear the whole building was already there. MEMBER DANTES : A non-conforming rear yard setback was existing. BILL GOGGINS : Most of the building except for 12 feet of it. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : And then of course the code changed and now it only permits a maximum of 1,000 sq. ft. in size and this is 1.029.6 sq. ft. is that correct? BILL GOGGINS : Exactly correct. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : So that's pretty de minimus: BILL GOGGINS : Then the lot coverage CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Is 21.3% September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting BILL GOGGINS : Yes ma'am so that's kind of de minimus as well. MEMBER DANTES : The majority of that was existing. BILL GOGGINS : Oh yea the additional space I calculated at 175.2 sq. ft. but again if that's accurate. We're not sure what it looked like whether they built it 12 by 20 or they made it wider whether or not. The 28 feet here on the survey include the eaves and maybe when they did the original structure they just counted the footprint. It's just a little bit off by like 2.6 feet, the current survey and what's actually there (inaudible) variance for the 3 foot setback like 12 feet distance (inaudible) on the west side of the property then towards the variance for the reduction of the increase in size sorry and lot coverage. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I got a question Bill, the you know when we did site inspections we sort of really thoroughly look around as well as we can and it appears the garage may be used for residential purposes or was cause there's very nice finished flooring on the inside of part of it. There's a residential door in that building, there's also sheetrock it's all sheet rocked so is it heated or air conditioned do you know? BILL GOGGINS : I don't know but it was clearly used as an apartment before my clients purchased it and I think when they purchased it they thought they weren't sure but they assumed it was a legal apartment back there. When we go into it and had time to research the property we realized it was not a you know a use to have occupancy so when one did the renovations we knew it would come up (inaudible) but yea it probably was. , CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : And what about now, are they proposing to use it as a residential purpose. BILL GOGGINS : No not now (inaudible) it is an accessory structure built prior to the time they changed the,-law so CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : They have the right to come an apply for an accessory apartment if that's what they want to do. MEMER LEHNERT : Are they going to bring it back to a garage? BILL GOGGINS : It's still the one part CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Part of it is, it's mostly storage right nowAhere's no cars but I saw a hot water heater in there and a mattress but I mean it wasn't a bed. BILL GOGGINS : I had to evict them, there had to be sixteen people living in the house (inaudible) I didn't see what was in the garage but I had to go to the eviction. September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Poor people. I BILL GOGGINS : Poor people right living in substandard conditions. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well that's what happens when you have a lot of population out here that needs to live here and we need them to work here and they don't have anywhere to live. BILL GOGGINS : Yea that's part of it but part of it is Mr. Lopez not paying his mortgage, not paying his taxes, not paying insurance and making money. MEMBER LEHNERT : He was collecting rent. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : He was a slum landlord. BILL GOGGINS : (inaudible) but he cleaned it up (inaudible) a year ago to what it is now. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Alright I just want to make sure that the use is conforming as a storage building at this point. BILL GOGGINS : Yea garage an storage. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well there's nothing that says you can't sheetrock a garage and a storage building it just can't be conditioned space that's all. Anything from the Board? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I have no questions. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I mean the variances are straightforward. MEMBER ACAMPORA : No questions. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I think you certainly presented ample evidence you know at their pre-existing conditions. Anybody in the audience? Is there anybody on Zoom? 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 September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye, the motion carries. HEARING#7822,—KATHERINE OLIVER CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next application before the Board is for Katherine Oliver #7822. This is a request for a variance from Article XXIII Section 280-124 and the Building Inspector's June 1, 2023 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for a permit to construct additions and alterations to an existing single family dwelling and to construct an accessory swimming pool at 1) less than the code required minimum side yard setback of 15 feet and 2) swimming pool located in other than the code permitted rear yard location at 1255 Bay Shore Rd. (adj. to Shelter Island Sound) in Greenport. FRANK UELLENDAHL : Frank Uellendahl architect for the Katherine Oliver. She would like to improve certain parts of the house. The property and the house has been in the families possession since the fifties, there were some interior changes made over time but a couple of things that Katherine really would like to improve is the house doesn't really have an entry an entry foyer. The original primary entry was actually through the screened in porch from the waterside. You see those brick (inaudible) surrounding the structure and that's still the original wooden door. We decided to just extend and this is why we're needing variance to extend the one story structure where the kitchen is on the one side of the property to actually make it a proper better entry, right now you fall right into the kitchen island. The second variance request would be to widen the screened in porch by 3.5 feet. It's only 7 foot wide and they're having difficulty CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I don't know how they can get themselves and furniture in there. FRANK UELLENDAHL : I've had many cocktails there but we're all lining up but with a view of the water so they would like to improve this. The third addition does not require your input but it's important to note that the house is actually elevated by about three feet and it's a beautiful piece of property but they're not using it because they're way up so you have to take the seven, eight steps down to go to the beach so that's why I suggested to bring to extend the existing deck but lower it by two and half feet by three steps so there is a mediation between three foot high and ground and then up to the brick patio around with a pool. That way the property will be used much more properly and they will enjoy. So the sky 3 September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting plane is not an issue here because where it's standing the additions fall into the (inaudible) structure area. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : If you look back at the site plan, what's the setback the pool is 16 by 40 right? FRANK UELLENDAHL : 16 by 40 correct and I did the average I went to the top of the bank and it's about 16.67% so that's not a problem. The actual distance, closest distance from a structure which is the pool in this case to the top of bank is about 19 feet but it's about I didn't show that dimension but about 80 feet to the edge of the wetlands. The top of the bank this is relatively gentle slope down to the wetlands. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Do you need any Trustees on this then? FRANK UELLENDAHL : I have to go once I get your approval. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It's LWRP exempt and we do have a letter of support from a neighbor. FRANK UELLENDAHL : Yes I saw. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay, let's see if there's anything from the Board, Pat do you have any questions? MEMBER ACAMPORA : No questions. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Eric MEMBER DANTES : I do not. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Nick MEMBER PLANAMENTO : No questions. MEMBER LEHNERT : No questions. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : As usual a pretty understandable presentation. Is there anybody in the audience who wants to address the application? Please come forward and state your name for us. PAUL POMERANTZ : Paul Pomerantz at 1205 Bay Shore Rd. the immediate neighbor. I sent a CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : You're the one we got the letter from. September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting PAUL POMERANTZ : You said you got a letter of support from Jay the neighbor diagonally across. I also sent a letter of support. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :.Oh we do have it, we have two letters of support. PAUL POMERANTZ : Okay good that's it. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Sometimes you take all your notes you write everything down and the day before the hearing in comes three more things that you try and find where you put them in your notes. Nothing from the Board-, nothing from anybody else, anybody on Zoom? Motion to close the hearing reserve decision to a later date. MEMBER ACAMPORA : Second CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER DANTES : Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye HAERING#7825—JANET VAN ADELSBERG CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next application before the Board is for Janet Van Adelsberg #7825. This is a request for a variance from Article III Section 280-15 and the Building Inspector's June 13, 2023 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for a permit to construct an accessory structure at 1) located in other than the code permitted rear yard located at 4297 Wells Rd. (adj. to Richmond Creek) in Peconic. URAL TALGAT : Ural Talgat I'm the architect for the owner and I think it's pretty straightforward. We just want to (inaudible) kind of keep it away from wetlands so therefore it falls within the side yard of the house. I'm here to answer any questions that the Board may have. 4 September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : So the accessory structure is in the side yard, it's LWRP consistent we got that. The gazebo is open on three sides some storage, it's unenclosed for sitting and storing garden equipment 147.9 feet setback from the wetlands so you don't need Trustees. URAL TALGAT : We have a letter of non-jurisdiction. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : You want to submit that, that would be good. i URAL TALGAT :This is my original copy I can make copies. MEMBER DANTES :This is from the Trustees? URAL TALGAT : Yes MEMBER DANTES : (inaudible)the garage, the barn and the pool? URAL TALGAT : I believe so I'm not a hundred percent, I think there might be an outstanding issue and this is something that the building (inaudible). MEMBER DANTES : It has an open building permit then? URLA TALGAT : I don't know what part of it is open or closed. JANET VAN ADELSBERG : Hi Janet Van Adelsberg I'm the owner. We had done some renovations they haven't gotten a C.O., it's been inspected, there was one outstanding thing about let me think MEMBER DANTES : On which structure? I JANET VAN ADELSBERG : On the pergola next to the pool. It was something about the core of the walls supporting the pergola. It has probably been taken care of but I'll CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It also has prior ZBA approval from 2014 for the construction of an accessory in-ground pool and shed. JANET VAN ADELSBERG : Yes that's in the side yard (inaudible). CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Anything from the Board? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I have no questions. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : No questions. September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Anybody on Zoom? Is there anybody in the audience who wants to address the application? 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 the motion carries. HEARING # 7823 — TRUSTEES OF THE MORGAN CROKE IRREVOCABLE TRUST/JESSE CROKE, ET AL CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next application before the Board is Trustees of the Morgan Croke Irrevocable Trust/Jesse Croke, Et. Al. #7823. This is a request for a waiver of merger petition under Article II Section 280-10A to unmerge land identified as SCTM No. 1000-48-1- 31 which has merged with SCTM No. 1000-48-1-30 based on the Building Inspector's May 24, 2023 Notice of Disapproval which states that a non-conforming lot shall merge with an adjacent conforming on non-conforming lot held in common ownership with the first lot at any time after July 1, 1983 and that non-conforming lots shall merge until the total lot size conforms to the current bulk schedule requirements (minimum 40,000 sq. ft. in the R-40 Residential Zoning District located at 820 Wiggins St. in Greenport. KATERINA GRINKO : Good afternoon my name is Katerian Grinko I am the attorney for the applicant. We're here before you to present you with the facts as to'why'this property is eligible for the waiver of merger. The subject property at 820 Wiggins is vacant lot and it's adjacent to 740 Wiggins which is improved by a small single family dwelling. The applicants owned the home for many years, it has been in the family. In fact we were just able to pull the Surrogate's Court record to establish that predecessor in interest was also the family member and with your permission I would just like to distribute the copy of the Last Will and September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting Testament as well as an amendment to my statements of fact as we discovered this new evidence. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Sure thank you. KATERINA GRINKO : So the property was in the family since 1967, Marion Johnson and her husband purchased the vacant land in 1967 and the improved parcel was owned by the Johnson family since 1947. So both lots were transferred by two separate deeds and has been in actual single and separate ownership since 1986. There was a three year of merger between 1983 when the law was enacted and then in 1986 when the title to the property was transferred to the heirs of Ms. Johnson pursuant to her Last Will and Testament was transferred to Morgan Croke who is her nephew and I submitted the Last Will and Testament along with the probate petition for the record. So as such the applicant met the first code requirement which clearly states that the property could apply for a waiver of merger if there hasn't been transferred to an unrelated party which there hasn't been here. As to the second point of the code and the balancing test, we looked at the property and most of the lots in this subdivision and in this neighborhood of same size in fact four additional lots on Wiggins St. are of identical size and it's lot 31, lot 33, lot 34 and then if we look at Front St. which is a block over there are five lots of identical size so the unmerger will not impact the character of the neighborhood the lots will be consistent with the overall look of the neighborhood. In addition, historically the property owners maintained the vacant lot as its own property, it has never been improved with any accessory structures. There was always an understanding by the family that it's an investment and actually the family members were quite shocked that just this spring they learned that the lots merged because Mr. Croke, Morgan Croke who inherited the property was very careful about maintaining single and separate so for thirty seven years there has never 'been merger same owner and the historical date has been provided to the Board. Finally we believe that the proposed waiver will not create an adverse impact on the physical and environmental conditions in the neighborhood because like I mentioned most of the properties are in the same size and keeping the lot size small will also help the neighborhood to keep it's character by keeping the small structure on it. In addition I also reviewed quite a bit of decisions specifically in the Hamlet of Greenport and just for the record there are at least five (inaudible) recent decisions No. 6332, 6229, 6790, 7178, 7215 where the waiver of merger was approved and facts are quite similar through our case. That completes my statement and I appreciate your time. T. A. MCGIVNEY : Can you relist the priors? KATERINA GRINKO : So I had this is just some more recent ones so that's decisions No. 6332, 6229, 6790, 7178 and 7215 and one of them was very similar and I think I have extra copies September 7,2023 Regular Meeting and can distribute. The lots are very similar in size and I think it's 2021. It's from August 2021, 1 have extra copies. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I have a question, we did certainly observe that the lot is just grass it hasn't been developed, there's a huge Holly tree and so on on it but there's also a brick patio attached to this accessory garage on the developed lot which straddles the property line onto the undeveloped lot which you can easily see on the survey. Donna can you bring that up? KATERINA GRINKO : It's an old brick patio but I'm not sure if the Board-Members visited the property, I went to post the property and they actually just use it it's a shade spot so they use it for just chairs. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Leslie, in addition to the brick patio which clearly is developed as you know I think they treated the two lots as one just for their comfort and enjoyment but there's also substantial brick and stone curbing around various trees like edging and things and then what I had thought which I missed in one of the photos I thought there had been a swimming pool because there's a stair but it turns out that there's a trampoline which is visible within the photographs of your application packet so it's really used to service the residents of the house. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It's a recreational area it wasn't developed per say but it was used. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Treated as one lot I°would argue. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yea but we've had plenty of situations like that before too with waiver of mergers. The other question I had let me see, you know one of the things perhaps you can answer this I don't know but it would appear that there's no building permit of a C.O. for the garage or the pergola and we need to kind of look into that. It looks like the house needs a Pre CO,there's a CO Z4326 for a porch addition. KATERINA GRINKO : (inaudible) Certificate of Occupancy for single family dwelling from 1971. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Z4326 is fora porch addition. KATERINA GRINKO : It says private one family dwelling. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : What's the number on that C.O? KATERINA GRINKO : Z4326 September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting T. A. MCGIVNEY : But the building permit attached actually specifies what it's for which is the addition to the dwelling. They just wrote C.O.'s for one family dwelling and it wasn't always for that. MEMBER DANTES : Yea but back then (inaudible) I mean they did weird they might have been C.Oing the whole property (inaudible). We need the whole file where (inaudible) structures on. Maybe they made some notes. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well I think we couldn't find a building permit for or C.O. for the garage and the pergola. We have the C.O. for the porch addition that makes reference to the house but it wasn't for the house. This could be part of the problem with the Building Department records. I suspect that's what it really is. We just want to try and make sure everything is accurately legally as we move forward. I had a question that you may also know the answer to, is this connected to Greenport sewer or water or can it be if this lot is KATERINA GRINKO : I'm not sure if it's connected. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I'm not sure exactly where it runs you know it's Wiggins but it's weird in there about where the sewer district starts and stops. Maybe Frank do you know? FRANK UELLENDAHL : I don't think there is a sewer system on Eighth St. (inaudible) CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I don't think so either. Well it makes a difference only if the development of another sanitary system in the neighborhood. Now if anybody builds a house they have to put in an IA system anyway so it's certainly mitigated by current law that didn't exist previously. I think that's all I can think of really, does the Board have anything, Rob anything from you? MEMBER LEHNERT : I have nothing. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Nick MEMBER PLANAMENTO : No CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Eric MEMBER DANTES : Nah CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : We'll just have to wind our way through the legal paperwork. MEMBER DANTES : (inaudible)Johnson and Croke are related? September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting KATERINA GRINKO : Yes Ms. Johnson passed without kids and husband and she actually bequest to her nephew who was Morgan Croke who was the subsequent owner. MEMBER DANTES : Who did she bequest the other parcel to? KATERINA GRINKO : Both properties transferred at the same time, the both properties were transferred to him only and that's in her Last Will and Testament. MEMBER DANTES : So he still owns both properties? KATERINA GRINKO : Correct in single and separate ownerships since 1986. Mr. Croke passed away and I'm working with his children the three boys. Both Mr. Croke and Mrs. Croke now passed MEMBER DANTES : So both parcels are in this Trust? KATERINA GRINKO : They are in separate ownership they have been in separate ownerships since Mr. Croke took title in 1986 as a bequest to him. It was just merged during Ms. Johnson's ownership and at that time the law was enacted it was simply before passing did not change title but she acquired properties from two different individuals in different years but two separate deeds from two different grantors. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yea she didn't amend the title of the properties, she probably didn't even know to do that. KATERINA GRINKO : I don't know maybe she was sick because the law passed in '83 and she passed in '85 so I don't know it's hard to say. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well this seems pretty benign, is there anybody in the audience who wants to address the application? Is there anybody on Zoom? OFFICE ASSITANT WESTERMANN : There are no hands but we do have Mr. Croke on Zoom if he'd like to say something but other than that no hands. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : If there's nothing further, 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 September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye HEARING#7824—SARAH REETZ CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The last application before the Board is for Sarah Reetz#7824. This is a request for a waiver of merger petition under Article II Section 280-10A to unmerge land identified as SCTM No. 1000-49-1-16 which has merged=with SCTM No. 1000-49-1-17 based on the Building Inspector's June 16, 2023 Notice of Disapproval relief from ZBA determination #4546 of March 3, 1998 that requires lots to be merged and permission to construct a single family dwelling at 1) a non-conforming lot shall merge with an adjacent conforming or non- conforming lot held in common ownership with the first lot at any time after July 1, 1983 and that non-conforming lots shall merge until the total size conforms to the current bulk schedule requirements (minimum 40,000 sq. ft. in the R40 Residential Zoning District), 2) prior Zoning Board of Appeals determination #4546 states that subject lot is merged and acts as a single lot and lot area with the adjoining parcel located at 825 Cove Circle in Greenport. FRANK UELLENDAHL : (inaudible) lot 16 and what I submitted actually shows the smallest house that we could build there, 857 sq. ft. and with a new septic system. The Building Department (inaudible) through all of this to make sure that it's a buildable lot. My research actually shows that it's in separate ownership (inaudible) her husband (inaudible) and more importantly I'm being joined by the attorney Martin Finnegan because CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It's not for architects it's for lawyers to deal with. MARTIN FINNEGAN : Good afternoon Martin Finnegan first on and last on today so I'll try to get through this pretty quickly. I think this was presented as a waiver of merger application in response to the Notice of Disapproval or the Building Department's need of the 1998 ZBA determination but I really feel like what we need to ask you for is to overturn the Notice of Disapproval because there was not in fact a merger of these parcels. As Frank mentioned they have been in single and separate ownership since our clients and before our clients bought them. There's a single and separate search that�is part of the record. If you look through the decision, yes there is a reference to both lots, there is a reference to aggregate square footage of the lots but the relief that was granted in that determination was to the front yard Z September 7,2023 Regular Meeting setback because the existing foundation that they sought relief or the "as built" structure was there and they just thought to rebuild the house there. The relief was granted as to the lines of lot 16 not lot 17 which is the vacant lot we're speaking about today. I think what is more telling is that there is no reference in the decision to meger, there is no condition that these lots be merged when the relief was granted. There are other conditions that speak to the road and what not but there was never an affirmative merger of these lots by the owners. As we know if we came in today and said we wanted to merge these lots we'd have to go through a process with the Planning Board to make that happen and get Health Department approval. Frank has Health Department approval for the proposed structure and for the sanitary system for that house which he wouldn't have been able to get if this had been treated as one parcel cause it wouldn't have matched up with anything, in the Health Department records. So in the absence of any affirmative merger or a merger by operation of law which did not occur because of the single and separate status of the lots there's nothing for you to waive. There is no merger to waive here so I'm asking you to review this and overturn the Notice of Disapproval cause it's simply their read of the decision and it really not supported by the record of that decision or by a read of that. If you want to go down the waiver of merger route we clearly satisfy all the criteria under the code, it's never been transferred out of the family. This lot is 100 by 100 lot and is consistent with all the other lots in that subdivision in size and as Frank mentioned the proposed structure is completely conforming to the bulk schedule for that lot. So that's really it, I don't really believe that there's any evidence of a merger here and there's nothing in the determination or the record of this property that establishes these lots were ever merged. So if there's any questions I'd be happy to address them. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Actually no because that was my reading of the ZBA decision frankly. It's the language they used in that decision and it wasn't really about a merger at all. MARTIN FINNEGAN : You have granted relief to me on other applications that's conditioned on merger of lots and nothing happens and no building permit is usually (inaudible) we have a deed none of that every happened. There's no deed there's nothing that effectuated a merger it just doesn't MEMBER DANTES : The decision was for the lot next door not the subject lot so how did they make the connection between the lot next door and the subject lot? MARTIN FINNEGAN : Whatever reason when it was presented the agent for the applicant presented it as and talked about the square footage of the lot next door but the relief was really for lot 16 not lot 17 so I don't know I don't know how it got off the rails and how this I September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting interpretation was made but the bottom line is we would respectfully request that you overturn the Notice of Disapproval so that CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : That's a much easier route than the waiver which is much thornier, more complicated. MARTIN FINNEGAN : But Ithink that's all the Building Department was asking Frank for (inaudible) CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It's like they're requiring de minimus approvals all the time. I don't have any questions, anything from any of you? A.T.A. MCGIVNEY : You read that part of the file was the 4546 what was part of the hearing testimony, was that included within the packet that was submitted? Just to have that on the record as well although just to include that the transcript just any indication that they might have been trying to show that it should have been merged or would be merged. MARTIN FINNEGAN : There was it was not part of it cause Frank put in the application and there was a brief colloquy between a member and I think it was Bob Brown actually I don't want to make a mistake where he suggested that they weren't intending to use the other lot separately. My clients have no recollection of that, that it was not they went out of their way to keep these lots single and separate. I don't know where that came from, I suspect Bob was saying what we had said at the moment to get the variance and move on but it was not the facts at the time. It was not A.T.A. MCGIVNEY : (inaudible) separate lots but they (inaudible) acquired it. MARTIN FINNEGAN : Yes that's what happened. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Anything else from anybody? Nobody on Zoom right? 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 September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye. Resolution for next Regular Meeting with Public Hearings to be held Thursday, October 5, 2023 at 9:00 a.m. so moved. MEMBER ACAMPORA : Second CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER DANTES : Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye. Resolution to approve Minutes from Special Meeting held August 17, 2023 so moved. MEMBER DANTES : Second CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER DANTES : Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye. Resolution to approve a one year extension of Condition No. 6 for Appeal No. 7680 John Bernhard and Jennifer Maye so moved. MEMBER ACAMPORA : Second CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All'in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER DANTES : Aye) MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye September 7, 2023 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye you're going to add a resolution for the next meeting I think cause we don't have it now. 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 7, 2023 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 18, 2023