Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
ZBA-06/01/2017 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 Southold, New York June 1, 2017 9:41 A.M. Board Members Present: LESLIE KANES WEISMAN - Chairperson/Member (Absent) PATRICIA ACAMPORA – Member ERIC DANTES – Member (Acting Chairperson) GERARD GOEHRINGER – Member NICHOLAS PLANAMENTO – Member KIM FUENTES – Board Assistant WILLIAM DUFFY – Town Attorney ? June 1, 2017 Regular Meeting INDEX OF HEARINGS Hearings Page Croteaux Vineyards #7013 3 - 6 Carl Stepnowsky #7029 6 - 13 Carl Stepnowsky #7030SE 6 - 13 Amy E. Reichard #7054 13 - 21 Roger and Eileen Panetta #7055 21 - 25 Leslie Black: FM and JM Peyser Living Trust #7056 26 - 29 Dan and Carla Messina #7061 29 - 33 ? June 1, 2017 Regular Meeting MEMBER DANTES : I make a motion to open the meeting for Thursday June 1, 2017. MEMBER GOEHRINGER : Second. MEMBER DANTES : All in favor? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye. MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye. MEMBER GOEHRINGER : Aye. MEMBER DANTES : Aye. Please stand for the pledge of allegiance. First thing of the agenda is the State Environmental Quality Reviews. New applications, resolution declaring applications that are setback/dimensional/lot waiver/accessory apartment/bed and breakfast requests at Type II Actions and not subject to environmental review pursuant to State Environmental Quality Review (SEQR) 6 NYCRR, Part 617.5 © (3) including the following, Carl Stepnowsky file # 7029, Carl Stepnowsky again file #7030 a Special Exception, Amy E. Reichard file #7054, Roger and Eileen Panetta #7055, Leslie Black: FM and JM Peyser Living Trust file #7056, Dan and Carla Messina file #7061. Is there a second? MEMBER GOEHRINGER : Second. MEMBER DANTES : All in favor? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye. MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye. MEMBER GOEHRINGER : Aye. MEMBER DANTES : Aye. Next we have a resolution to close the following hearing, Croteaux Vineyards #7013. We’ve taken testimony on this application as well exchanged written correspondence from MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Excuse me it might be premature but if there’s any dialect do I need to leave at this point? MEMBER DANTES : Is there anyone here from Croteaux Vineyards? SOMEONE FROM THE AUDIENCE SPEAKING (UNAMED) MEMBER DANTES : Do you intend to speak today? We’re not actually MATILDE BUSANA : Well it depends if (inaudible) ? June 1, 2017 Regular Meeting MEMBER DANTES : The resolution is to close the application. MATILDE BUSANA : I don’t know what that means. MEMBER DANTES : It means that there won’t be any testimony deliberations today. It means that the application will be closed and then we’ll start working on a decision. MATILDE BUSANA : (inaudible) that’s fine. T.A. DUFFY : I think you’ve been heard previously at previous meetings have you not? MATILDE BUSANA : Yes. MEMBER DANTES : As well as by letter I believe. MATILDE BUSANA : Yes, several. Can I just (inaudible) I was going to say the parking this past weekend it’s just you know there were more than (inaudible) people there. There were probably a hundred cars parked and the noise and the (inaudible) so disturbing it was just T.A. DUFFY : Can you just step up to the mic and give your name. MATILED BUSANA : My name is Matilde Busana with my wife (inaudible) we are the owners of the property at 1360 South Harbor Rd. which is next door to Croteaux. I mean I don’t want if I got the opportunity to just say that we’ve written letters and I think everything is on file but it’s just this past weekend was just I’m still disturbed by it. Even inside the house we couldn’t hear each other speak from the commotion and people coming in and out. The cars slamming and everybody was happy and so they were standing in the car park which is just on our boundary and talking and laughing and couple of whistles were going, across the field and all sorts of stuff so it was just and friends were coming to see us and I got a text from them saying we’ve been standing in a slow lane to get into South Harbor Rd. for the twenty minutes. It’s that slow we can’t get in to South Harbor Rd. It’s become an issue that’s really way over the bounds of acceptance shall I say. MEMBER GOEHRINGER : Can I ask a question? I just want to find out where she lives in reference to Croteaux. MATILDE BUSANA : Just next door. MEMBER GOEHRINGER : Just next door MATILDE BUSANA : Before you get to Croteaux’s on the same side of the street. Our properties were if there wasn’t a deer fence you could just walk across both properties. ? June 1, 2017 Regular Meeting MEMBER GOEHRINGER : So, just let me ask this one question then continue the dialogue. It’s where the parking area is, just before so you’re just before the parking area? MATILDE BUSANA : Yes at the parking area yes, yep yep absolutely. The parking area and really the only buffer is the deer fence which of course is no buffer to noise it’s stopping the deer from jumping in and out but it’s no buffer to noise and Mr. Croteaux had promised from the very beginning that he was going to do a mass planting that would actually buffer the noise but that hasn’t happened and at one stage he also had left a large buffer which I think the Town had told him and he did a planting by the fence and left a twenty foot or thirty foot buffer of something so that the cars parked backward and that’s now that’s disappeared now for the last four or five years so there’s no buffer so the cars park right up against the deer fence. We just got a new pool installed and at one stage I was out there because I was doing bits of landscaping and stuff and I actually noticed people that were at the deer fence peering into the pool so you sort of also have no privacy. You feel like if you’re going to be there having to swim people are going to peer. It’s a very attractive pool thank you for the compliment that you want to stare at because it’s a lovely pool but respect the privacy and also because of the noise I don’t think any plantings now are going to buffer it. This last weekend just proved that it was just too much. MEMBER GOEHRINGER : Can I ask just one more question, have you ever counted the amount of cars on a weekend that are MATILED BUSANA : On a quiet weekend there’s about between fifty to sixty minimum. This weekend I was out there because I was doing some landscaping as I said and at one stage they were even cars that were parked in the street. They couldn’t get in the carpark so I counted upwards of eighty, eighty five cars. I can’t stop and count them all because Mr. Croteaux then says that I am harassing his clients if I also want to take a photo of something because he seems to see it or maybe he has people that are observing to make sure that I don’t do it I don’t know but he’s threatened and said don’t you do that because you’re harassing my clients and you are compromising my business and I feel that they are compromising my privacy. That’s all thank you very much. MEMBER DANTES : If there’s nothing else then I’d like to make a motion to close, reserve decision for another a later date for Croteaux Vineyards #7013. Is there a second? MEMBER GOEHRINGER : Second. MEMBER DANTES : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye. ? June 1, 2017 Regular Meeting MEMBER GOEHRINGER : Aye. MEMBER DANTES : Aye. Croteaux Vineyards is closed decision reserved for a later date. Just so you know ma’am there will be another meeting in two weeks which is the earliest time we’ll be able to vote this decision. If we do not have a decision ready in two weeks we have 62 days to make a decision from today’s date. Within 62 days there will be a decision. HEARING # 7029 & # 7030– CARL STEPNOWSKY MEMBER DANTES : The first public hearing at 9:30 A.M. is Carl Stepnowsky #7029. Request for a variance under Article III Section 280-15 and the Building Inspector’s October 5, 2016 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for permit to legalize an “as built” deck addition to an existing accessory garage converted in to an “as built” accessory apartment at 1) less than the code required minimum side yard setback of 10 feet at 500 Tucker Lane, Southold NY tax map number 1000-63-5-3 this application is concurrent with the other Carl Stepnowsky application I guess we’ll do them both, hear them both at the same time so also Carl Stepnowsky #7030 Special Exception. Applicant requests a Special Exception under Article III Section 280-13B (13). The applicant is owner of subject property requesting authorization to legalize an “as built” accessory apartment in an accessory structure at 500 Tucker Lane Southold NY tax map number 1000-63-5-3. Is there anyone here to represent the applicant? Could you please go to the podium and state your name. CARL STEPNOWSKY : Carl Stepnowsky. MEMBER DANTES : Would you like to make maybe a brief presentation about what you’re applying for and we’ll see if there’s any questions. CARL STEPNOWSKY : Actually, I did prepare one but I just made my garage an accessory cause the house was too big. I didn’t want to leave. I’ve been here since ’76 in Southold and I figured I’d down size. The house got too big for me and I figured I throw up an accessory and go from there. This has been a long term project for me. I’ve been kind of doing it myself and it’s probably seven years now and I just didn’t think about doing it right. I just figured I’d just do it so that was my bad on my half no doubt. MEMBER DANTES : Alright, Nick do you have any questions? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Yes, a couple of different talking points based upon my site inspection and you were kind enough to have been present to show me around. A couple of ? June 1, 2017 Regular Meeting different comments and it puts me in and I think the rest of the Board in a difficult position because it’s already built so it’s not as if our commentary might have different impact or different result had it been an application versus an as built and there’s two applications as I understand so it’s also a little bit more involved for me but the question that really stands to my mind’s eye and I don’t remember from the site inspection but I do remember our conversation that when I was leaving the back porch I stepped out and went down the back stairs and you can see it in one of your application photos, there’s actually a hot water heater vent. Is there any you know I don’t know the manufacturer’s specifications or anything relative to that but it’s kind of in a tight spot that normally when I see those vents there’s some sort of requirement so people don’t get hurt they often times say hot and again I don’t remember what the specifics are to this unit but can you tell me more about that exhaust and how it may or may not impact somebody’s safety cause it’s right at the top of the stairs. CARL STEPNOWSKY : Yea there’s probably a good from the stairs to the building there’s like four, four and a half feet and that does stick out about eighteen inches and it is hot water on demand so the only time it’s warm is when or I’m not even sure if it gets warm I never really checked it but when you turn the hot water on that’s when it turns on otherwise it’s cool so as far as it being warm and I’m not really sure if it does get warm out there. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I don’t know either. When I see fireplaces they often have embossed in the aluminum hood or whatever the metal is something that says hot or caution. It’s just vicariously close in my opinion to the location. I don’t know if this is something that’s more relative to the Building Department but what I would think as part of the application if you’re willing if it is something that the Building Department requires maybe it could be vented on the side as opposed to that landing area which is relatively tight in my opinion. I don’t know the specific size. I just looked on the survey, it doesn’t illustrate the dimensions. Having said that that’s really the only commentary that I have outside of I just thought that the run of the stairs also could be very dangerous during winter ice, snow etc. You do have the interior access but you know it would seem to me that if there had been a landing with a turn or something it would be safer especially as we all get older just the use of that location it is a little tight but it’s already built so I don’t know what further I could add. MEMBER GOEHRINGER : Well he could carpet it, you know you could have carpeting on the steps. It wouldn’t affect the steepness of it but MEMBER PLANAMENTO : And that’s something that would help with winter ice? MEMBER GOEHRINGER : Sure your feet wouldn’t be wet. I mean it would be damp because you’re carrying something up on your feet but I mean you know all steps made out of oak or ? June 1, 2017 Regular Meeting whatever that wood is that are painted with a sheen type of situation what you want to do because it deteriorates and I mean you could put carpeting. CARL STEPNOWSKY : Yea that’s CCA and there’s nothing on it. That’s just wood. MEMBER GOEHRINGER : Oh these are the outside steps he’s talking about? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I was talking about the outside steps these right here. MEMBER GOEHRINGER : I apologize. I thought you were talking about the inside steps. Do you use those steps only periodically in the winter? CARL STEPNOWSKY : In the winter periodically yeah and usually I’m not here during the winter so but I don’t have to use them you know if it is winter and it’s snow I can always MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Use the interior stairs. CARL STEPNOWSKY : I have the interior stairs so it’s not a big deal. I put that out there just so that I would have another escape in case there was a fire. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : So I guess the bigger question or concern I have which again I think it’s better to defer to the Building Department but if the exhaust the penetration for that hot water heater requires a certain distance the landing is I would say like three maybe three and a half feet square I don’t know maybe it’s four feet. It’s not represented on the survey but it is awfully tight cause it does stick out of the back wall of the house. CARL STEPNOWSKY : If need be I can have that to the outside. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : So you’ll do that if it’s required? CARL STEPNOWSKY : If it’s required, no problem. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Good and I think putting on what would appear to be maybe the north side of the house, just aesthetically it would be nicer as you go up and down the stairs anyway. You see this you did a beautiful job on the apartment and I wish we had apartments like that in the town of Southold so it’s nice to know that you’re living in a what appears to be a safe quality residence. Eric I think beyond that (inaudible) I don’t really have any other comments. MEMBER DANTES : Gerry do you have any further questions? ? June 1, 2017 Regular Meeting MEMBER GOEHRINGER : No I don’t think so. We’ve all inspected the apartment. I don’t think any one of us and I’m not speaking for the Board I could say that it’s probably one of the most beautiful ones that I’ve ever seen but that’s my opinion. MEMBER DANTES : Pat do you have any questions? MEMBER ACAMPORA : No questions. I’ll just so Gerry doesn’t speak for me I’ll also say I thought the apartment was very well (inaudible). MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Eric just one other thing just for the record, I did find and I was looking in the wrong spot on the survey the landing is three feet six inches so I think that’s awfully tight with that penetration that if it’s required by the Building Department, Mr. Stepnowsky has offered that he’d relocate the exhaust. MEMBER DANTES : Okay that will be between you and the Building Department we don’t do that here. I want to go to some technical things; it says on the survey by Frank Barylski if I’m reading it right that the garage is 7.5 feet west of the property line? CARL STEPNOWSKY : Yes. MEMBER DANTES : The Notice of Disapproval from the Building Department is siting it as +/- 5 feet from the property line. Do you know why? CARL STEPNOWSKY : No I’m sorry I don’t I thought it was eight foot. MEMBER DANTES : With the deck maybe but the garage basically the deck how many feet is the deck from the garage? CARL STEPNOWSKY : Maybe two inches. MEMBER DANTES : The surveyor, it looks like he put more than that but that’s alright. So the garage which is pre-existing is closer to the property line than the deck which you built? CARL STEPNOWSKY : By a couple of inches. MEMBER DANTES : Okay so and then the deck is more than the five feet from the property line as stated in the CARL STEPNOWSKY : I would say it’s a little less than eight foot because I was always under the assumption that the garage was eight foot from the property line. That was my I didn’t measure you know I ? June 1, 2017 Regular Meeting MEMBER DANTES : Six inches isn’t bad but for the paperwork it helps your application to be further from the property line than the five feet that it says and then you just built a new deck more conforming than what the pre-existing garage is already built at? CARL STEPNOWSKY : I’m sorry what? MEMBER DANTES : The deck the as built deck which you built you have more conforming than the pre-existing garage that’s been already there. CARL STEPNOWSKY : Yeah I guess you can say that cause it is a little bit more. MEMBER DANTES : So any deck you build behind the house would be behind the garage would require an area variance then because the garage is not CARL STEPNOWSKY : Yes. MEMBER DANTES : Have you explored any alternatives that would be conforming to code? CARL STEPNOWSKY : At this point no. MEMBER DANTES : My other questions were as far as you’re a full time resident of Southold then? CARL STEPNOWSKY : Yes since ’76. MEMBER DANTES : And then who do you rent the house to? CARL STEPNOWSKY : Brenda and Brian and I’m sorry I can’t say their last name cause they don’t it’s a funny name and I don’t think I’d be saying it right. MEMBER DANTES : Okay, are they relatives? CARL STEPNOWSKY : No. MEMBER DANTES : Are they on the town’s affordable housing registry? CARL STEPNOWSKY : No. MEMBER DANTES : Would they qualify for the town’s affordable housing registry do you know? CARL STEPNOWSKY : I don’t know. They’re both from East Hampton originally. MEMBER DANTES : So they live in the town, do they work in the town? CARL STEPNOWSKY : No, one works on Shelter Island, one works on East Hampton. ?? June 1, 2017 Regular Meeting MEMBER DANTES : Basically the way the accessory apartment works is you can either rent it to A. a family member or B. someone who qualifies for the town’s affordable housing registry. CARL STEPNOWSKY : I’m living in the accessory. MEMBER DANTES : Right that’s fine. I think they would need to apply and qualify for the town’s affordable housing. T.A. DUFFY : Do you receive a special exception do you have if you do receive a special exception from this Board to have the accessory apartment you then have to apply for a permit from the Building Department and one of the requirements is that your tenants have to qualify either have to be related or have to qualify for affordable housing registry. CARL STEPNOWSKY : Oh, okay. Does that mean Section 8? T.A. DUFFY : No. MEMBER DANTES : No. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Eric is that regarding the accessory or the primary house? T.A. DUFFY : I don’t think you can get around the affordable housing requirement by living in the apartment yourself and renting out your house. I think either way you have to rent to somebody that’s on the list. MEMBER DANTES : That would be a code interpretation it would mean T.A. DUFFY : I’d have to go back and look at the code again. I was looking at it the other day but I’m pretty sure no matter what the person has the renter has to qualify. CARL STEPNOWSKY : So they have to live in town then too in Southold town? MEMBER DANTES : Well they already live in Southold Town. CARL STEPNOWSKY : Well now they are yeah. MEMBER DANTES : We need to find out it’s a fairly liberal income requirement. Do you want to adjourn and find out if they qualify for the affordable housing registry before you move forward? CARL STEPNOWSKY : I would think they would qualify so I think we should go on. MEMBER DANTES : Or do you want to make a decision subject to in the decision? CARL STEPNOWSKY : Yes. ?? June 1, 2017 Regular Meeting MEMBER DANTES : We can make the decision and then he can go through the process. I believe there’s an inspection that’s required after our decision. T.A. DUFFY : They have to apply for the rental permit. MEMBER DANTES : Stop by who is Dennis Noncarrow and find out what the requirements are for the affordable MEMBER GOEHRINGER : In the Supervisor’s office. CARL STEPNOWSKY : Okay. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Eric is the inspection of the primary house or of the accessory? MEMBER DANTES : It’s going to be the rental. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Which ever one is going to be rented. MEMBER DANTES : So you have two tenants that are then residents of Southold Town and you’re going to verify CARL STEPNOWSKY : Do they have to live in the town first for a year to be residents or they’ve been here for six months now. They moved from East Hampton so just to give you a heads up on that. I think it’s a year right before you’re considered a resident? MEMBER DANTES : They have I mean they changed their residency registered to vote here take steps to make them residents. The big one I know is the income requirement which like I said is fairly substantially higher than Section 8 but it goes by how many kids you have, how many people in your household. CARL STEPNOWSKY : It’s just the two of them. MEMBER DANTES : There’s a bunch of criteria. If they make a lot of money they might not qualify. CARL STEPNOWSKY : I don’t think that’s the case. They’re having trouble with rent. MEMBER DANTES : Are there any other questions from the Board? MEMBER GOEHRINGER : No I think that we probably could do this subject to you know and you make the application based upon their particular situation. MEMBER DANTES : Hearing no further questions I make decision to ah does anyone else like to in the audience like to address this application? No, so hearing no further questions and no one ?? June 1, 2017 Regular Meeting else to address the application I like to make a decision to close this hearing reserve decision for a later date. MEMBER GOEHRINGER : Second. MEMBER DANTES : Seconded by Gerry all in favor? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye. MEMBER GOEHRINGER : Aye. MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye. MEMER DANTES : Aye. (See Minutes for Resolution) HEARING # 7054 – AMY E. REICHARD MEMBER DANTES : File #7054 Amy E. Reichard request for variance under Article XXIII Section 280-124 and the Building Inspector’s January 13, 2017 Amended February 23, 2017 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for a permit to construct additions and alterations to an existing single family dwelling at 1) less than the code required minimum front yard setback of 35 feet at 23650 NYS Route 25 in Orient, New York SCTM #1000-18-5-16.1. Is there anyone here to represent the applicant? AMY REICHARD : Me I’m Amy I’m the applicant. MEMBER DANTES : You’re Amy Reichard. AMY REICHARD : I’m Amy Reichard yes and this is Mark Strazza and Chris Mauceri who are working on the project with me. MEMBER DANTES : Which one is Mark Strazza? AMY REICHARD : Mark Strazza who is the architect. MEMBER DANTES : Your name and address. MARK STRAZZA : Mark Strazza and it’s 3 (inaudible) Riverside, Connecticut. AMY REICHARD : We grew up together my high school friend. ?? June 1, 2017 Regular Meeting MEMBER DANTES : The other gentleman? CHRIS MAUCERI : Chris Mauceri. MEMBER DANTES : And you are? CHRIS MAUCERI : Contractor. MEMBER DANTES : And your address? CHRIS MAUCERI : (inaudible) Cutchogue. MEMBER DANTES : Would you like to make a brief presentation and then we’ll see if the Board has any questions. AMY REICHARD : Should I just go I just want to thank you for the time. Mark is going to speak on my behalf to the specific details but I bought the house in March of last year and I really love Orient and we just want to make it a little nicer. So thank you. MARK STRAZZA : Is it okay if I talk from up there cause I’d rather address the pictures and MEMBER DANTES : Sure. MARK STRAZZA : I’ll try to make my voice carry. So this is the front elevation here. The house was built early 1900 we’re thinking 1910, 1920 and this is the section which we think is the original portion of the house. The engineer that we have hired believes that other structure here was secondary to this just based on the framing and the foundation and what not. So where the addition will be that we’ll be encroaching into the setback will be above this (inaudible) the addition will be here and that is on the easterly side of the dwelling. Then this picture here I highlighted here to make it easier for everyone to understand. It’s just this section here this small dormer which will in keeping with the front dormer that is already there on the front elevation and then on the side will be just this little section here that will be an addition within that five foot (inaudible) encroachment. So the front yard is not being encroached any further than the existing structure is actually 14 feet here and 14 and change from the existing front porch. We’re not coming anywhere closer any closer than that and actually these other two houses here that are adjacent are just as close or if not closer to the road than the existing dwelling and that’s basically it. A second floor a bathroom that we’ll address will service the two existing bedrooms on that side of the house. MEMBER DANTES : Do I have a copy of that survey showing the other MARK STRAZZA : This survey yea it was part of the package and I did highlight this section and I actually put a note on each individual survey stating where it was. ?? June 1, 2017 Regular Meeting MEMBER DANTES : It’s probably in here somewhere I can’t keep them all in front of me at the same time. MARK STRAZZA : So that’s the (inaudible) that proposed addition is basically 12 foot 5, 5 foot 6 and I actually also highlighted the setback (inaudible) showing the 35 foot setback. Does anyone have any questions for the applicant, Gerry? MEMBER GOEHRINGER : Is the main house the historical house based upon it’s age requiring to go to any other agencies? MARK STRAZZA : I don’t believe so. MEMBER GOEHRINGER : It’s out of the village of Orient so that would be the historic area and it’s well out you know I mean it’s AMY REICHARD : I was told that that area was in Main Rd. area was not when I bought it but I only have that verbally. MARK STRAZZA : And the house is not plaqued already so. NICHOLAS PLANAMENTO : My understanding actually within Landmarks is sort of like an opt in opt out. Being familiar with the house a little bit and actually during the site inspection I was shocked to see actually how wide Main Rd. Kings Highway extends into your front lawn by the location of the markers really taken back by that but what my question would be and I was really happy Mark to hear you just comment that the east side of the house predates the west side. The concern that I would have and I don’t know quite how one would go about the process but I think it’s actually substantially older than what you or maybe the engineer thinks. I really think it might be a late 18 th century structure that had been like so commonly done on the North Fork you know skip generations due to whatever economic hardships, whatever the time allowed or disallowed the family might not have had money to really improve the house until the early twentieth century. I’m a big proponent of local architectural preservation especially residential. I’ve seen far too many houses in our community disappear. This is a really modest original structure. I’m not talking about the addition and the proposed alterations are really quite appealing but what I would like if it’s possible to have some sort of comment if there could be some further review either within historic rather Oyster Ponds Historical Society or SPLIA, I’m sorry SPLIA is the Society for the Preservation of Long Island Antiquities research and there are two different surveys made, one in the early 1930’s and anther in the 1980’s. The house may have been skipped just because of its modest scale but I think today and certainly one of the higher and better values especially in Orient where there is a strong I don’t want to say preservation movement but people really take a lot of concern and clearly you did a little ?? June 1, 2017 Regular Meeting research on the property I would just like to see if there could be further research preformed to find out the actual origins of the house before it’s altered. AMY RIECHARD : I spoke to the neighbors Kathy and Ed Loper who knew the original owners. They thought they had told me early 1900’s and they were still had been in touch with the original owners. That’s the only thing I know and I did go to the Town meeting to try and learn before we decided what to do I went to listen what the Town was looking for to make sure I was doing what was appropriate and to make sure the structure stays as is as best as possible. It’s just it needs some work. It hasn’t been worked on in a long time. MEMBER PLANAMETO : You can see the house it’s an older house. AMY REICHARD : Yea, it leaks and it needs to be cleaned up but I want to keep it as it is cause I think it’s just got such great curb appeal and it fits into the area so nicely. That’s what they told me knowing the original owners and they called people to tell them in the family that I had bought it and they were very happy that I was going to be taking (inaudible). That’s really all I know. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Sure and I don’t know if the suggestion could be followed somehow but I do think if MEMBER DANTES : What are you asking? Are you asking her to go to the Historical Society and take a photocopy of you said there’s two surveys that are available in Orient? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Well SPLIA has two inventories I don’t know if this is on the SPLIA list but I think it might be a little further and maybe a simple conversation with Ted Web. MEMBER DANTES : What’s SPLIA? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : SPLIA is the Society for the Preservation of Long Island Antiquities. Now I think what they’re proposing and even if the house is documented a historic home meaning the eastern edge the improvements that they’re suggesting you know don’t necessarily harm the façade so I don’t know if this ends up being a mood point but I do think maybe we can do a little bit more research or ask them just to find out more about the origin. MEMBER DANTES : Where to do you find SPLIA? MEMBER GOEHRINGER : New York State list isn’t it? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Well I would suggest first of all starting either Oyster Ponds which sounds like you had a conversation with someone but maybe a little further with Ted Web who ?? June 1, 2017 Regular Meeting is an Orient resident right around the corner is part of the Landmark Preservation and he’ll know right off the bat more about what I’m suggesting. MEMBER DANTES : Is he he’s part of MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Oyster Ponds absolutely. MEMBER DANTES : He’s part of the Oyster Ponds Historical Society? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Yes. MEMBER DANTES : So maybe ask the Oyster Ponds Historical Society if they know if this house is on the what is it SPLIA? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Well I’m thinking it might not even be on the SPLIA list just because of the build out very clearly looks more arts and crafts early twentieth century then what I suspect is an eighteen century structure. So I think if we just have clarification I don’t know if that would impact the design or not so as I said AMY REICHARD : May I ask a question please? Regardless of this does this affect how you would want us to do this bathroom? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : No I don’t think so cause I mean you’re really AMY REICHARD : So you just want to make sure we have it listed properly. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I think it’s important to save and I don’t know if they have a comment or if that changes the game in any way but my understanding and I don’t want to suggest it might be an extra step but Landmarks might want to take a look at this and suggest something to embellish what you’re already doing to help preserve the history. MEMBER DANTES : I don’t know if we can put things I think Landmarks is put there by town code. I don’t think it’s put there by us. I don’t think that we can MEMBER PLANAMENTO : So maybe just as a suggestion. MEMBER DANTES : Yeah we can like verify that it’s an older building, preexisting zoning or we use things as examples as to why you need the variance but we’re not going to landmark it. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : No I wasn’t suggesting that and I do believe it’s an opt in program anyway. MEMBER DANTES : Okay if you find out anything that goes along with what the standards of what the area variance are. ?? June 1, 2017 Regular Meeting AMY REICHARD : Oh I’m happy to do whatever you’d like me to do I’m just a little confused as to what I need to go do but hopefully Mark knows so MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I think the idea here is just to delve in a bit deeper into the research and while you spoke with a neighbor that knows the owner clearly the people that put the addition on are not alive and their parent or grandparents may not be familiar with the origins of the house. People didn’t necessarily pay attention. Here in our community even until fairly recently people didn’t pay attention to some you know significantly older homes that really should have been preserved and they’re altered beyond recognition or knocked down and I don’t think that’s what you’re planning on here but I would just be curious AMY REICHARD : I just want to clean it up a little bit cause things are leaking and falling down and I want to live in it and enjoy it so it just needs to cleaned up. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Absolutely. AMY REICHARD : The bathroom is just because there is no bathroom upstairs. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Right and I’m not making a comment on the interior and I think that even if you spoke to people at Landmarks there is really no comment on interior. It’s just about the exterior façade so I think and I don’t remember what the siding is but it seems like its asphalt shingle right now. So they might have a comment on MARK STRAZZA : Red cedar shingles, white (inaudible) MEMBER PLANAMENTO : That’s what I assumed. MARK STRAZZA : Typical (inaudible) MEMBER PLANAMENTO : So I mean you should really that should be smooth sailing but for example if it’s discovered to be an eighteen century farm house of some merit or history I don’t know they might have commentary as far as if you were using vinyl siding or other type of materials. I don’t know and I certainly don’t want to create a hardship for you I just think it’s important that as you’ve already pointed out and I was happy to see that you assumed or your research indicated what I instinctually already felt. So it’s good I just would like if could just clear it with MARK STRAZZA : So they could have some input as if whether it’s shingles or clapboard or MEMBER PLANAMENTO : You know I don’t know, I don’t know what their purview would be. I think the most important thing is just to document what it is and if it’s certainly the early twentieth structure I think they’re going to say fantastic this is a beautiful job. If it’s discovered ?? June 1, 2017 Regular Meeting as something significant I don’t know and I’m not trying to suggest (inaudible) project but I’m just curious to know what the origin of the house is. MARK STRAZZA : Okay we’ll see if they have anything. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Yeah and I think again you can find Ted Web very easily or I’ll give the information to Kim if you’d get it from her who is sort of our liaison in the office and you can give him a call. He’s very accessible and he’s well knowledged and quite honestly he’ll be a good neighbor. AMY REICHARD : I’d love to meet someone also in the neighborhood. I’ve only met people by kind of walking around knocking on doors with the dog and introducing myself so MEMBER PLANAMENTO : He’ll guide you and I think the important thing is which you have already exhibited is that you want to preserve the history. I think that you might be surprised I don’t know. MEMBER DANTES : Pat do you have any questions? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Well in looking at the property I noticed that in the back and you’re going to be putting on a deck? MARK STRAZZA : Actually I think that due to budget constraints I think the decks are going to get omitted. MEMBER ACAMPORA : Okay cause I was wondering there is a very large tree. AMY REICHARD : Oh it’s beautiful. MEMBER ACAMPORA : It is beautiful and I was wondering if any of that would encroach upon that tree? AMY REICHARD : No I actually hired a tree specialist when I first bought the house last year and I’ve been working with him to get it healthy and it’s just gorgeous. No I think that’s actually what made me buy the house at first cause I stood in the yard and it was so shady and pretty so we’re not going to hurt that tree at all. MEMBER ACAMPORA : Okay and are you planning any changes to the garage at all? AMY REICHARD : I can’t afford to do it right now so I wanted to just get the house in a place that I could just enjoy and then eventually I’d like to again clean it up. I did replace the roof when I bought the house for insurance purposes. They made me replace the garage roof but other than that it’s a sound structure so I will clean it up. ?? June 1, 2017 Regular Meeting MEMBER DANTES : I would like to point out that the house is the benefit of a preexisting certificate of occupancy #31095 dated August 8, 2005 for one family dwelling with accessory wood framed garage issued to Henry Warnicowski signed by Gary Fish and it does state that the house was built prior to April 9, 1957. AMY REICHARD : So the Warnicowski’s are the neighbors are the people the Loper’s told me about. The Loper’s live if you look at my house over here and they told me that they reached out to the Warnicowski’s to let them know I was buying the house but that’s all the history they knew. MEMBER DANTES : The other question I had are there or have you found any other area variances for front yard setbacks in the neighborhood? MARK STRAZZA : I did not research that. MEMBER DANTES : I can tell you I’m pretty sure there are cause we had other variances. If you could talk to the office work on getting a list it would something that we can site in our when we write the decision. I do know that in Orient there are a lot of older buildings and there are a lot of non-conforming buildings so I’m fairly certain that you’ll find some apples to apples to compare. We discussed the character of the neighborhood. We discussed the benefit sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by some method feasible for the applicant to pursue other than a variance because the existing home with a preexisting certificate of occupancy is already non-conforming. We discussed that the amount of relief is not substantial. Will the variance have any adverse impacts on the neighborhood? MARK STRAZZA : I don’t believe so. The addition is in keeping with the neighborhood. The other two adjacent houses are closer to the road than this addition. I think it’s a very small and very modest addition to the house. I don’t think it’s going to have any impact at all. MEMBER DANTES : Then it’s a second story addition over an existing first story? MARK STRAZZA : Yes. MEMBER DANTES : Is there anyone else in the audience who would like to speak? Are there any other questions or comments from the Board? Hearing no further questions or comments or additional testimony I’d like to make a motion to adjourn this decision to adjourn this to the Special Meeting to give the applicant a chance to just submit the requested area variances and to look up the information that Nick asked for and then we’ll hopefully be able to close this decision at the June Special Meeting. MEMBER ACAMPORA : Second. ?? June 1, 2017 Regular Meeting MEMBER DANTES : All in favor? MEMBER GOEHRINGER : Aye. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye. MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye. MEMBER DANTES : Aye. (See Minutes for Resolution) HEARING # 7055 – ROGER and EILEEN PANETTA MEMBER DANTES : File #7055 Roger and Eileen Panetta. Request for variance under Article XXIII Section 280-124 and the Building Inspector’s January 13, 2017 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for a permit to construct a deck addition to an existing single family dwelling and to legalize an “as built” accessory gazebo at 1) proposed deck addition is less than the code required minimum rear yard setback of 50, 2) “as built” gazebo is located in other than the code required rear yard at 550 Greenway West, Orient NY SCTM#1000-15-1-19. Is there anyone here to represent the applicant? ROGER PANETTA : We are. Roger and Eileen Panetta. MEMBER DANTES : What’s your address? ROGER PANETTA : 550 Greenway West. MEMBER DANTES : I understand there has been some discrepancy with the mailings? ROGER PANETTA : I think there’s been complication with the property owner immediately behind our home and the mailing was returned as undeliverable but I believe that property is now owned by Mr. Leducka who lives across the street from us because when he purchased it he came to the back yard. We know him, he knows about this hearing and he offered to come to speak and I did not want to impose on him. So I think he knows about this. I got no return from the people directly behind us. MEMBER DANTES : From (inaudible) ROGER PANETTA : I’m not sure what the name is. It’s I’ll give it to you in a minute. It was the original owner of that property who sold it to Mr. Leduka but he did not return respond to the certified mail. ?? June 1, 2017 Regular Meeting MEMBER DANTES : I was the attorney who represented Robert Leduka in that transaction. I can tell you Mr. (inaudible) was in poor health at the time and Mr. Leduka did indeed purchase it so we can confirm that the mailing was accurate. Would you like to make a brief presentation? See if there’s any questions from the Board. ROGER PANETTA : Sure. I think the house had an original variance because of setback issues when it was placed. We’re proposing to build a deck about 30 by 60 which 16 I’m sorry 30 by 16, 31 by 16 deep which will take the edge of the deck a platform deck not elevated with no railings it will take the edge of the deck within 28 feet of the property line of Mr. Leduka and there is presently a small concrete patio immediately behind the two doors the sliding doors which will lead to the eventual wood platform patio, deck. MEMBER DANTES : Are there any questions from the Board, Gerry? MEMBER GOEHRINGER : Yes, are you thinking about repositioning the gazebo in any way? Why don’t you tell us about that? ROGER PANETTA : Well we weren’t. We did not know it was non-conforming until we submitted the application for the deck. Evidently it goes back to two possibly three previous owners but I think if I’m not mistaken it’s 38 feet from the property line on the other side of the house not from the back. It’s much longer than that but I think the issue is 38 feet to the property line to the north. MEMBER GOEHRINGER : We’ve all been there so we’ve seen the property. Again I’m not speaking for the Board but the question is that this variance which created the further setback of the house I suspect when it was originally built you know placed this situation that you’re in with the deck. The deck is going to remain open to the sky? ROGER PANETTA : Yes no railings and it’s a platform deck just slightly elevated. MEMBER GOEHRINGER : But the gazebo has no electricity? ROGER PANETTA : No. MEMBER GOEHRINGER : It seemed to be in relatively good condition. ROGER PANETTA : Yes. MEMBER GOEHRINGER : I don’t know how the Board feels about the gazebo, we have granted them before in their present position. Some of the situations are the reason why I ask that question about its condition is because at some time in the past we have suggested that if it no ?? June 1, 2017 Regular Meeting longer became if the position was its overall stature it became dilapidated we would ask you not to fix it or just take it down. ROGER PANETTA : I can understand that. MEMBER GOEHRINGER : Would that be the same situation here in the future if for some strange reason a tree hit it or whatever the case might be god forbid that you would remove it and or replace it in the rear yard somewhere. ROGER PANETTA : You’re asking me to testify for my granddaughter so that’s a problem but yes I do understand and I certainly can accept that and live with it and I understand the reasoning there. MEMBER GOEHRINGER : I have no further questions. My main concern is that it’s open to the sky and we understand why people need decks because it’s (inaudible) way of being outside without being on the grass so I can understand that. That’s my testimony. MEMBER DANTES : Pat do you have any questions? MEMBER ACAMPORA : No. MEMBER DANTES : Nick do you have any questions? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : No questions. MEMBER DANTES : I have a question. How come (inaudible) an undesirable change will not be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties if granted. ROGER PANETTA : Well it’s in the back of the house not visible from the street. I think it will be 28 feet to the property line of Mr. Leduka and I think that fact that it’s a platform deck it doesn’t represent the visual intrusion the way a raised deck with railings would and I think that makes it less intrusive in the neighborhood and I know from speaking with Robert and also from speaking with Constantino our neighbor to the south who has a patio deck roughly the same size he also said he would come this morning to speak and again I didn’t want to impose on him but I don’t think he has a problem with it. MEMBER GOEHRINGER : What can I just ask a question? What’s the elevation of the concrete deck? ROGER PANETTA : I’m sorry I’m not exactly sure it’s the concrete deck is flat it’s about this much platform. MEMBER GOEHRINGER : Okay so it’s one it’s basically one step above. ?? June 1, 2017 Regular Meeting ROGER PANETTA : Exactly and that’s what it is one step out from the sliding doors onto the property (inaudible) it’s about MEMBER GOEHRINGER : One step. ROGER PANETTA : Exactly. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Actually Mr. Panetta to that point then why not a new concrete patio, why are you seeking a variance for a raised platform? ROGER PANETTA : We asked ourselves that question I think we just aesthetically in terms of comfort but particularly aesthetically thought the platform deck was more appropriate for the house rather than a patio which our neighbor put in a beautiful patio but I think Eileen and I made an aesthetic judgment about how we thought it was more congenial to the house to put in a wood deck. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : The transition as you can see in the picture submitted is not nine inches it’s probably barely six inches, it’s very low. ROGER PANETTA : Very low but I think enough to facilitate some breathing space and air and things like that and six inches must be roughly the size of the step down that you were talking about from the sliding doors. MEMBER GOEHRINGER : You know there’s great advantages to that because of course it eliminates some grass number one and number two it’s just it’s cleaner as opposed to and of course you would have to build out everything if you made it a higher situation. EILEEN PANETTA : If I could just add to that the lowest shorter step down was important to me but I’m sure I’ll be bringing casseroles or what have you out there and the fewer steps I have to take the better so it seemed that the deck would raise it up a little bit just make it a little easier getting in and out of the house onto the deck rather than a patio (inaudible) ROGER PANETTA : I think to answer your question since I think we made an aesthetic judgement and it certainly would have been simpler to do the patio but I think Eileen and I felt just not right. MEMBER DANTES : The only question I have is I’m looking at the picture here it looks like there is I know the land behind you is undeveloped it looks like the I guess it’s the wooded parcel starts on your property? ROGER PANETTA : Could you clarify that please? ?? June 1, 2017 Regular Meeting MEMBER DANTES : Basically I’m looking at the picture and it looks like what I’m getting at is evergreen screening. It looks like there’s the wooded section starts is still on ROGER PANETTA : (inaudible) MEMBER DANTES : Yea. ROGER PANETTA : The plantings here in the last month (inaudible) and there we planted about ten trees. MEMBER DANTES : What kind? ROGER PANETTA : Evergreens. MEMBER DANTES : How tall would they grow? ROGER PANETTA : They’ll grow fifteen feet and we placed them between the existing trees. Some of these are on our property line. These trees are very close to the property line. Some of these are (inaudible) so the property line is right there and we placed the (inaudible) on the property line (inaudible). MEMBER DANTES : Okay so then there’ll be evergreen screening that blocks the visual view of the deck from the neighbors. I think that was all. Do any of the members of the Board have any further questions? Is there anyone in the audience who would like to speak? Hearing no further questions I make a motion to close the decision reserve close the application reserve decision for a later date. MEMBER GOEHRINGER : Second. MEMBER DANTES : All in favor? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye. MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye. MEMBER GOEHRINGER : Aye. MEMBER DANTES : Aye. (See Minutes for Resolution) ?? June 1, 2017 Regular Meeting HEARING # 7056 – LESLIE BLACK: FM and JM PEYSER LIVING TRUST MEMBER DANTES : The next application is #7056 Leslie Black FM and JM Peyser Living Trust request for a variance under Article XXIII Section 280-124 and the Building Inspector’s January 19, 2017 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for a permit to legalize an “as built” second floor deck attached to a single family dwelling at 1) less than the code required minimum rear yard setback of 50 feet at 1420 Village Lane Orient, NY SCTM#1000-24-2-6.1. Is there anyone here to represent the applicant? MIKE KIMACK : Michael Kimack for the applicant and the applicant is also present. This application is for a second story deck over an existing first story portion of the structure of the house. The deck basically had always been there since before 1927 when the house was located about 300 feet closer to the water. The house was moved in 1954 we had pictures of the deck also being present on there. It is the deck is accessed from the bedroom the door is there basically you just walk out onto it. There’s a requirement also that we go to Landmarks which we have already done and they approved it. I’m waiting for the certificate of appropriateness that was done over a month ago. It’s pretty straightforward, there’s no it’s non-conforming simply because it’s sitting over an existing house which also happens to be within the 35 foot setback within the 50 foot setback. MEMBER DANTES : Does the Board have any questions? MEMBER GOEHRINGER : Did you start construction on this? MIKE KIMACK : Yeah it’s a partialized build Gerry. MEMBER GOEHRINGER : So it’s going to have a proper railing and everything around it? MIKE KIMACK : Yes. As a matter of fact I think you’ve got those drawings. We had two meetings with Landmarks. They basically asked if you look at the drawing it created a V the deck basically was flat the roof was like this it created a V. Landmarks asked if we could close that to make it so that you don’t see the V there’s no and then also show a presentation of the railing and the railing is going to be a post and wire horizontal wire railing and that was chosen simply because it wouldn’t be as visible plus the fact from the owner’s perspective if you’re sitting on the deck you can actually see rather than having a baluster every four inches. MEMBER GOEHRINGER : So you’re talking that stainless steel MIKE KIMACK : Quarter inch stainless steel every four inches horizontal yeah. MEMBER GOEHRINGER : Which is almost invisible when you look at it from far away. ?? June 1, 2017 Regular Meeting MIKE KIMACK : And actually that’s kind of the deck if you looked at the 1927 to 1954 pictures Gerry that’s what they had on there except it was this far apart they had the horizontals going across it. That’s pretty much it. MEMBER DANTES : Pat do you have any questions? MEMBER ACAMPORA : No what the gentleman said is pretty straightforward. MIKE KIMACK : I don’t normally have a lot of these. MEMBER GOEHRINGER : No it’s usually on the water or in the water. MIKE KIMACK : This one was moved back. We always have an interesting (inaudible) when we’re here. MEMBER DANTES : Nick? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : No I have no questions. MEMBER DANTES : Are there any other variances in the neighborhood similar to the variance your being applying for? MIKE KIMACK : I’m not quite sure if there are. The area basically is fairly well mixed essentially. The house (inaudible) had been moved pretty much intact. It used to be an old bowling alley actually way, way back when it was yeah and as a matter of fact the floor is still there and has been refinished so essentially the house was moved up and it has sat in that location since ’54 which is before the code and with the deck on there. It simply was damaged during the storm and is being replaced. MEMBER DANTES : Have you applied for a Pre C.O. for the deck? MIKE KIMACK : No we did not. We applied for a building permit and only because if they went out there it needed a stop work order on it and then there was a letter of disapproval issued indicating that we needed ZBA for the setback and we needed Landmarks which we had the approval we had the vote I’m just waiting for the appropriateness. MEMBER DANTES : Would the deck qualify for a Pre C.O? MIKE KIMACK : Eric I don’t think so. I don’t know I mean had that been the situation I would imagine they would of told me so. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : In light of your question I was going to say there’s a certificate of occupancy from 1974 which clearly states ?? June 1, 2017 Regular Meeting MEMBER DANTES : Yeah but it doesn’t indicate a deck does it? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Well from what I read it says a private one family dwelling with an addition and I think the addition is obviously the structure but clearly MIKE KIMACK : It never specifically said the deck. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : It never spelled out but MIKE KIMACK : Maybe that’s what the Building Department picked up and it was vague perhaps and they felt that they weren’t in the position to say equivocally that a Pre C of O would be issued as a result that the deck was not defined expressly. In any event we’ve done the round robin on it. MEMBER DANTES : Right no, I understand. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : This just better defines it then when they received their approval then it’s recorded. MIKE KIMACK : Going forward with the Landmarks approval and hopefully with the ZBA approval everything and with the building permit in place everything will have been done according to code caught up to code and all the permits will be appropriate. MEMBER GOEHRINGER : What kind of material is the deck being made out of? MIKE KIMACK : It’s cedar all wood. MEMBER DANTES : The only two things I would like are just a copy of the what was it subject to receipt for the copy of the Landmarks Preservation Certificate and MIKE KIMACK : I’m going to check with Damon today to see if it should have been issued I’m not quite sure what their timing period is. The meeting was over a month ago but it’s possible it should be coming soon. I’ll get you a copy. MEMBER DANTES : I think that would strengthen our decision and then just citations for other variances in the neighborhood that are front yard setbacks and I’m sure there are some and are there any other questions from the Board? My apologies rear yard setbacks. Is there anyone else in the audience who would like to speak? Hearing no further questions I would like to make a motion to close the decision subject to receiving the two additional items information requested and reserve decision to a later date. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Second. ?? June 1, 2017 Regular Meeting MEMBER DANTES : All in favor. MEMBER GOEHRINGER : Aye. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye. MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye. MEMBER DANTES : Aye. (See Minutes for Resolution) HEARING # 7061 – DAN and CARLA MESSINA MEMBER DANTES : Next application Dan and Carla Messina #7061. Request for variance under Article IV Section 280-19 and the Building Inspector’s March 3, 2017 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for a permit to legalize “as built” additions and alteration to an existing accessory building (garage) at 1) less than the code required minimum side yard setback of 5 feet at 835 Pequash Avenue in Cutchogue NY SCTM#1000-103-7-24. Is there anyone here to represent the applicant? JOAN CHAMBERS : Yes Joan Chambers. MEMBER DANTES : What would you like to tell us? JOAN CHAMBERS : The Messina’s purchased the property with this addition to the accessory building already in place and it became evident on their certificate of occupancy that the accessory building was only the one car garage and this L-shaped addition that was added was not permitted or included on the C.O. so they asked me to basically clean this up. I went to the Building Department and subsequently we are a foot over the side yard setback. It’s just an unheated storage space that extended the garage but unfortunately the original garage was four feet off the property line so they assumed that they could build in line whoever built it the prior owners. MEMBER DANTES : Pat do you have any questions? MEMBER ACAMPORA : No. ?? June 1, 2017 Regular Meeting MEMBER DANTES : nick? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : No I visited the property and actually I think the neighbor to the south their house is even closer than the accessory structure so just as a point of comment I think there’s a lot of landscaping there to a very private property and it’s you know I won’t say a pity but this is a structure that was built in an earlier time. MEMBER DANTES : Gerry? MEMBER GOEHRINGER : When did they take title to this property? JOAN CHAMBERS : That’s a good question. MEMBER GOEHRINGER : I’m just looking at it right now, 2005. JOAN CHAMBERS : Yeah the C.O. is from ’98 for the accessory building but you know I don’t know that off the top of my head. I’m assuming just from talking to them that it’s been in the last ten years that they took occupancy of it. MEMBER GOEHRINGER : So in effect they took title to the property subject to no C.O. on this portion of JOAN CHAMBERS : I don’t think they were aware of it. MEMBER GOEHRINGER : Yeah I don’t mean it sarcastically I mean it pragmatically. So there’s no idea no conscious idea to do anything else I went through the entire building and you know it’s a storage building. JOAN CHAMBERS : At this point they just want to you know bring their certificate of occupancy into compliance with what’s actually on the property. They haven’t discussed any future plans with me so it’s just is going to remain unheated accessory storage. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Actually Eric I did have a question unrelated to the application there is a beautiful gazebo not gazebo pergola structure, does that require a permit or JOAN CHAMBERS : You know if I can answer that you know I’ve been getting permits for thirty five years now and it used to be pergolas were always just totally ignored even when people set them on their property lines. I saw this again and again and again and in the last eighteen months. I’ve done a lot of applications for as built work and in every instance the pergola is now being flagged as a structure and I don’t really know where this definition changed in the Building Department but now even small you know really you know they’re kind of I think making a decision on the size of the pergola so if there’s eight posts that go to the footings you know with really big rafters that you could actually grow grapes on they’re sending it back to ?? June 1, 2017 Regular Meeting me and saying we need an application for that to be a structure. If it’s a single wall along a property line that you’re going to grow roses up more like a trellis they’re letting it go. It seems to be very discretionary at this point. It used to be I was kind of surprised that you know a 10 by 10 deck required a permit but a 20 by 30 gazebo or pardon me arbor wasn’t but now that seems to be shifting although I haven’t actually seen any change in the code. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : And I’ve seen that just you know through the Building Department also. It striked me that it’s also something that probably does need a permit so I don’t know if there’s actually two different applications because attached to the actual as built structure is a second sort of pergola trellis and I don’t want to get into the definition but maybe that’s something that we should just include that the applicant should. It sounds like you’re willing to (inaudible) JOAN CHAMBERS : Absolutely, yeah they want to clean the property up. Strangely enough Amanda and I went back and forth on one of the projects and she had an issue on whether or not it was attached to the primary structure or free standing or attached to an accessory structure so I really don’t know you know how they’re going to if this was attached to the house she’ll consider it an addition but if it’s attached to an accessory building or free standing she’s been letting some of them go to the point that I kind of argued that some of these ones that have been attached to the house they become an addition and we often have side yard setback issues with them. So people say well that’s my arbor and they push it to the limit. If we actually detached it from the house she was willing to let some of them go which seems to be kind of quibbling. So I don’t know it’s something maybe you know a sit down with Mike Verity and we can get something clear but I have no problem applying for an application for you know for their pergola. It’s been happening more and more the last year and a half. MEMBER DANTES : How big is this pergola? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : It’s big. It’s probably at least 12 by 20 I’d say if not larger. It’s a beautiful stone base with a pergola and JOAN CHAMBERS : And I’m quite sure it’s not on the original C.O. It’s not mentioned and there’s no drawing of it so you know I’m guessing that it’s not but it’ll require another application. I never put an application in for it. MEMBER DANTES : How close is it to the property line? JOAN CHAMBERS : I think it meets the setbacks it just MEMBER PLANAMENTO : It’s actually on line with the house so it’s just I don’t think it’s an impediment I do think just to clean it up it might be beneficial. ?? June 1, 2017 Regular Meeting JOAN CHAMBERS : You’re absolutely right. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : And would it be appropriate cause on the garage accessory structure is the second one. It’s smaller; it’s not represented on the survey but is it possible for them to amend the application to include that? JOAN CHAMBERS : This application to include the arbor? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : No there’s the small arbor attached to the garage. JOAN CHAMBERS : Oh yes, yes. MEMBER DANTES : To the left? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Yes so where that little dip in the shape creating the L there’s an arbor that squares it off. JOAN CHAMBERS : Right in there exactly. Right but that wouldn’t have setback or rear yard setback issues I don’t think so that just might be a building permit application. This is the only original survey I have. MEMBER DANTES : It’s in the L you can draft it yourself right? JOAN CHAMBERS : Oh yea. MEMBER DANTES : So maybe you draft the arbor on there and then hand it in to us and when we stamp the plans then it’s there. BOARD SECRETARY : Does it need to be on the stamped site plan? MEMBER DANTES : I don’t think so cause it’s within this L here so I mean it’s not affecting the setback. JOAN CHAMBERS : If we add the arbor on the garage plan it’s a simpler thing to get the site plan updated and (inaudible) certified. We might as well just do that and then bring you copies and then I’ll do a revision for the Building Department too and I will (inaudible) that’s a great idea. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I’m sorry I got confused cause there’s two different conversations. One is the accessory structure that there’s an application for. It sounds like Joan’s going to update everything and resubmit that to us to include that arbor. MEMER DANTES : She’s going to put the arbor and the small arbor on the plan. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Both of them. ?? June 1, 2017 Regular Meeting JOAN CHAMBERS : Might as well yeah. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : And then separately you’ll do for the Building Department regarding a permit for the free standing pergola, arbor, trellis I don’t know. JOAN CHAMBERS : You will have an updated site plan with the two and then we’ll just check the setbacks. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : And it would appear that the free standing one is outside of our purview cause that’s a separate dialogue and we’re just asking for the updated stuff for our process. Thank you. JOAN CHAMBERS : Thank you. MEMBER DANTES : I’d like to point out that the existing garage for the original section does have the benefit of a Pre C.O. dated June 5, 1998 and it does have a non-conforming setback the existing garage had a non-conforming setback at four feet and the applicant continued the existing non-conforming setback with the addition. Are there any other variances in the neighborhood that are similar to this variance? JOAN CHAMBERS : I don’t know. MEMBER DANTES : Can you ask the office and find out? I think it would enhance your application. If there are any this far down Pequash but I know there are in the Fleetwood section I believe. Are there any other questions from the Board, anyone in the audience who would like to speak? Hearing no one else because there is no one else in the audience I would like to make a motion to close the decision reserve for the submission of the written documentation that was requested and to reserve decision to a later date. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Second. MEMBER DANTES : All in favor? MEMBER GOEHRINGER : Aye. MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye. MEMBER DANTES : Aye. (See Minutes for Resolution) ??