HomeMy WebLinkAboutFriendman, Barbara 5.2025
Palmeri, Allison
From:Barbara Friedman <barbara@weilfriedmanarchitects.com>
Sent:Tuesday, May 13, 2025 8:12 AM
To:Lanza, Heather
Subject:Zoning Update-re lot coverage
Attachments:GFA AND SKY PLANE VARIANCES 2024.pdf
Hi Heather,
You did a great job last night and deserve a medal for tolerating some of the “questions”. It was great to see so
many engaged and informed citizens.
As I mentioned to you before, the lot coverage change is a big one and I think it really needs more study. I don’t
think you should abandon the idea of including impervious surfaces, but it definitely needs to be refined.
In general, a lot of attention is being paid to big picture standardized zoning, but as indicated last night, there are
many non-conforming residential lots. I DON’T think there should be quarter acre zoning, but I DO think there
could be overlays for places like Orient Village to allow for smaller setbacks, parking pads, exemption from tree
requirement in front yards, and higher lot coverage.
Lots under 25,000 square feet seem to have di?iculty meeting existing 20% lot coverage requirements. I am
attaching a spreadsheet I did for house size/pyramid variances in 2024. As you can see, there were also variances
for lot coverage on most of the smaller lots. I wasn’t looking for lot coverage variances, so there could be
additional applications for lot coverage in 2024.
I think it would be helpful to get a better understanding of how many properties are non-conforming, how big are
they, and are they grouped together in a way that overlays might make sense?
In consideration of more conforming lots, I modeled our favorite property on 2375 Laurel Avenue for lot coverage.
The property is 35,414 sf. and they could probably meet the 20% under the new definition as long as there isn’t a
large pool deck and a pool house (pool not included in building permit application). I did NOT include roof
overhangs- which would be included based on draft code section 280-9 E (which does not correlate with the
definitions section).
I also calculated the coverage for a property that I am doing work on in Bridgehampton. It is a flag lot with 81,420 sf
buildable, 87,640 sf total including the flagpole. I am embarrassed to tell you that with the swimming pool and
tennis court, the lot coverage is 32% if the flagpole area is included, 29% if the flagpole area (which is almost all
driveway) is excluded. Again, this does not include roof overhangs (which are not typically shown on surveys!)
Another issue in the draft code, is the definition for “Patios” says that building permits are not required. But if lot
coverage includes patios, a building permit and a survey would be required. Even if I put 24” x 24” stepstones
separated by grass between my house and shed, I would need a survey and building permit?
To summarize- please don’t give up on limiting impervious surfaces, and perhaps irrigated areas too, but the
regulations and percentages need to be more detailed and realistic.
Looking forward to the next meeting!
Best,
Barbara
1
Barbara Friedman
Weil Friedman Architects
cell: 917.846.0226
ATTENTION: This email came from an external source. Do not open attachments or click on links from
unknown senders or unexpected emails.
2