Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA-02/05/2026 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 February 5, 2026 10:17 A.M. Board Members: LESLIE KANES WEISMAN - Chairperson PATRICIA ACAMPORA—Member ROBERT LEHNERT— Member NICHOLAS PLANAMENTO— Member MARGARET STEINBUGLER—Member(Vice Chair) KIM FUENTES—Board Assistant JULIE MCGIVNEY—Assistant Town Attorney ELIZABETH SAKARELLOS—Senior Office Assistant DONNA WESTERMANN —Office Assistant February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting INDEX OF HEARINGS Hearing Page Decision for Travis and Sofia Garcelon#8071 3 -4 John M. Haslbauer and Kathleen E. Haslbauer, as Trustees#8049 5 - 8 Hayley Donaldson #8074 8- 10 John Lawrence and Kerry Kimmins-Lawrence#8075SE 10- 17 Diane E. Bianculli #8075SE 18- 34 BKM Properties of Shoreham #8077 35- 37 Vinbar Realty Corp./Vincent Claps#80785E 37 - 39 Christopher Ross, Trustee of Christopher Ross Trust#8079 39 -44 Irene Vanderschuyt#8082 45 -54 Gregory Pitaro and Penelope Christophorou #8080 54- 59 February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Good morning everyone and welcome to the Regular Meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals for February 5, 2025. Please all rise and join me in the Pledge.of Allegiance. The first matter on the Agenda is the State Environmental Quality Reviews, SEQRA. 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 (SEQR)6 NYCRR Part 617.5 c including the following : John Haslbauer and Kathleen E. Haslbauer as Trustees#8049, HayleyDonaldson #8074,John Lawrence and Kelly Kimmins-Lawrence #8075SE, Diane E. Bianculli 38075SE, BKM Properties of Shoreham, Inc. #8077, Vinbar Realty Corp./Vincent Claps #8078SE, Christopher Ross Trustee of Christopher Ross Trust #8079, Irene Vanderschuyt #8082, Gregory Pitaro and Penelope Christophorou #8080 so moved. MEMBER STEINBUGLER : Second CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor? MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye MEMBER STEINBUGLER : Aye CHAIRPERSRON WEISMAN :Aye. We have one draft determination in front of us before we get to the first pubic hearing. Does everybody have a copy? This is for Travis and Sofia Garcelon. #8071 on Fishers Island. Nick would just review briefly what the salient points are in this decision? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : This is an application for the development, residential development of a vacant waterfront lot at the inner harbor of West Harbor on Fishers Island. The lot size is approximately 6,500 sq.ft., it's very small which will be about.14 of an acre.The applicant seeks five (5)variances in order to build a single-family home including a front yard setback of 16 feet where the code requires a minimum front yard setback of 35 feet, a side yard setback of 8.5 feet where the code requires a minimum side yard setback of 10 feet, a combined side yard setback of 17 feet where the code requires a minimum combined side yard setback of 25 feet, excessive lot coverage of 24.4% where the code limits lot coverage to maximum of 20% and then the penetration of the sky plane. The proposed house which is FEMA compliant is raised to a base first floor elevation of 15.5 feet but it's a two-story house which thereby then 3 February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting penetrates the sky plane. There was some opposition about the history of the lot, there was discussion that prior to the 1938 hurricane there was a residence on the site but there was no hard or strong evidence that really supported that other than one person's testimony. There were neighbors that spoke against it stating that there was never a house on the site. There was of course the history of a business use.The property while it's residential zoned R40 is also sort of a little bit of a quasi-peninsula sort of spot that includes businesses and (inaudible) zoning uses residentially. The applicant wants to maximize their GFA of 2,100 sq. ft. which is what is permitted by the code for a lot size of this nature. However, it would appear to me that a conforming house can be built. There was testimony given in both directions but I think it's a little bit excessive; in addition to the transcript provided by the applicant for an adjourned Town Trustees meeting where the Trustees clearly want to see reduced side yard setbacks, lot coverage etc. The applicant did at one point make an amendment to their application where they reduced the proposed lot coverage to a maximum of 22.76% which was a nice effort but it's still not conforming. The determination before us or the draft rather is to deny the application as there are options that the applicant can seek that would be more beneficial to the community. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Is there any discussion among Board Members on this?Okay, do you want to make a motion? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I made a motion that we deny the application as submitted. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : As amended actually, is there a second? MEMBER STEINBUGLER : Second CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye MEMBER STEINBUGLER : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye,the motion carries. Liz before we get to the first hearing would you please review for the benefit of people who are participating that way how they can testify if they so wish to? SENIOR OFFICE ASSISTANT SAKARELLOS : Thank you Leslie, good morning everyone. For those on Zoom if you wish to comment on a particular application, I ask you to please raise 4 February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting your hand. I will see you and when we have a chance, we will move you in and give you further instructions on how you will be able to speak. If you are using a phone, I see we have one phone number, please press star nine to raise your hand and then I will let you know what to do next. HEARING#8049—JOHN M. HASLBAUER and KATHLEEN E. HASLBAUER,AS TRUSTEES CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The first application before the Board this morning is for John M. Haslbauer and Kathleen E. Haslbauer as Trustees #8049. This was originally adjourned from November 6, 2025. This is a request for a variance from Article XXXVI Section 280-207 and the Building Inspector's May 22, 2025 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for a permit to construct additions and alterations to an existing single-family dwelling at 1)gross floor area exceeding permitted maximum square footage for a lot containing up to 20,000 square feet in area located at 50 Osprey Nest Rd. in Greenport. Martin, good morning. MARTIN FINNEGAN : Good morning everybody. So yes, we are back and obviously my clients were hoping and praying that it was worth the wait. As you are well aware the Town Board has amended the code to eliminate the averaging requirement for variance relief for gross floor area which permits you to consider the variance under the standard 267 criteria. As Leslie mentioned, we are here for CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Wait Martin, let me just make a slight correction. They did not eliminate gross floor area averaging, they eliminated the prohibition from preventing the ZBA of granting more than the gross floor area average in a given neighborhood. MARTIN FINNEGAN : Okay, okay. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :That might be the next step but right now that's all we have. MARTIN FINNEGAN : Okay, I think you are permitted to consider the standard town law criteria in the gross floor area. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yes we are. MARTIN FINNEGAN : What we have here is an application for relief for a second-story addition on this home which is in the Cleaves Point Subdivision in Greenport. As you know, this is a community that has houses of many different shapes and sizes, one-and two-story homes.The lot sizes vary somewhat throughout this community. We are seeking a variance in order to do February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting a full second-story addition to the house that's a 1,581 sq.ft. addition. That takes us to 646 sq. ft. above what would be the allowable GFA.The construction is all proposed within the existing footprint which is entirely conforming to the bulk schedule. We are here for just one GFA variance. As I mentioned and really just getting to it here,this is a community where there are many homes that are larger and have greater GFA than what is proposed here. As I mentioned at the last hearing there's a home just two doors down from this home that was recently constructed with a gross floor area of 4,205 sq.ft. which is 834 sq.ft. over what we are seeking here today. Around the corner on Snug Harbor there's a house that has 5,556 sq.ft. of GFA and now they received relief from this Board to maintain GFA of 4,237 sq. ft. that's 850 sq. ft. over what we're seeking.Another home nearby is 4,799 sq.ft., another at 4,205 sq.ft. and yes there are smaller one-story homes in the community as well. The applicants have owned this home for over twenty years, it's their family home that they're simply seeking to renovate and expand for the needs of their family. I would submit to you that a home with 3,371 sq. ft. of GFA is not out of character if we are looking at this under the 267 criteria it clearly would be well in character. It would not have any adverse impacts on the surrounding community especially with the home just wo doors down that is 800 sq.ft. larger.With respect to any adverse impacts or environmental conditions, the application does the proposal does contemplate an upgrade to an IA system. Obviously, if this is an addition, the application is going to be subject to all the requirements of Chapter 236 so it's a net improvement environmentally when all is said and done if this variance is granted. I would submit to you that while the variance it's about a twenty-three, twenty-four percent variance which may sound mathematically substantial but under the circumstances here this is a corner lot,the house is placed you know back so it is not something that would be imposing. As I said, it is just simply a second-story addition in a completely conforming location and since you now have some latitude here to consider something beyond the averaging. It's clear, we said it at the last hearing and that's why we adjourned, we can't achieve the averaging it just doesn't work in this community but I do think that there is there are numerous homes that would clear the way for variance relief which would be consistent with the character of the community there in Cleaves Point.With that I am available to answer any questions you may have. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The only question I had you already answered. I wanted to know about an IA system, you're increasing the bedrooms. MARTIN FINNEGAN : Yea that was part of the plan from the beginning. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : So there will be one on the first floor and four on the second and that was my question. Margaret any questions? February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting MEMBER STEINBUGLER : I think so, listing the GFA of some other homes in the neighborhood is certainly relevant but as we know GFA is allowable GFA is a function of the lot size, do you have the and that would be a better comparator, how much those other large homes how much they exceed what is permissible for their lot? I just wondered if you have that information for some of the nearby large homes. MARTIN FINNEGAN :We did have I think most of the lots in Cleave Point are comparable in size, it's the waterfront lots that tend to creep in a be a little bit bigger but the non-waterfront as you can see it's a subdivision and they were pretty much similar in size. I would say like I know the ones that are along Snug Harbor there, those lots are really not in terms of buildable land are not much bigger one of those variances was for a pre-existing nonconforming GFA but you know I'm presenting it more in terms of character and I understand what you're saying in terms of magnitude and but I don't have those. I could you know look into that and submit it but I think what we're suggesting here is you know with that 250 Ospreys Nest and other ones nearby. I mean if you drive down this street and you look at that house what's proposed here is significantly smaller. That's kind of where we're coming from with this. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Anything from you Nick? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Nothing CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Rob? MEMBER LEHNERT : No questions. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Pat do you have any questions? MEMBER ACAMPORA : No questions. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Is there anyone in the audience who wants to address the Board on this application? Anybody with a hand up on Zoom? We have a little wrinkle here, the amendment to the code which we just talked about at the very opening has not been filed by the it was sent to Albany but it's not stamped yet. MARTIN FINNEGAN : So we can adjourn? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I think we're just going to adjourn until such time that gives us the legal authority. I don't want any procedural time frame to unearth a decision you know MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Close subject to, that actually creates a precedent. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Thank you for reminding me Julie. Until the town has been changed by the Town Board at our request. However, it's not codified into law until it is signed by the 7 February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting Secretary of State in Albany and filed. That's true of any change to the zoning code. All we're doing is saying, we haven't gotten that stamped,filed MARTIN FINNEGAN : No, I emailed Denis three weeks ago and said hey, did you CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : So you knew. MARTIN FINNEGAN : He said it will be done by the end of the month. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : So we're just going to adjourn it and as soon as we get it then we will render a decision. MARTIN FINNEGAN : Perfect, okay. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I'm going to adjourn it without a date, is there a second? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Second CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye MEMBER STEINBUGLER : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye HEARING#8074—HAYLEY DONALDSON CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next application before the Board is for Hayley Donaldson #8074. This is a request for a variance from Article XXIII Section 280-124 and the Building Inspector's September 22, 2025 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for a permit to construct additions and alterations to a single-family dwelling at 1) less than the code required minimum front yard setback of 35 feet located at 710 East Rd. in Cutchogue. Good morning, Lisa. LISA POYER : Good morning, Lisa Poyer on behalf of the applicants. The application before you is for a reverse gable to be added to the existing residence. Right now, the property is located February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting in the R40 zone, it's a 6,285 sq. ft. nonconforming lot size. The house is pre-existing nonconforming with regards to the front yard setbacks. Right now, the current house construction has a as per the architect front to back gabled roof with the shed over the entry stoop.The owners are looking to change the roofline on the east side of the residence to have a reverse gable which now faces the road and then to be put another entry gable over the stoop. There's no changes to the roof overhang footprint, there's no changes to the footprint of the house in the front of the house the nonconforming section which is proposed as part of this application. The proposed roof changes don't impact sky plane, the roof change request doesn't impact lot coverage. They are doing some additional work to the house but that's in conforming locations on the rear of the existing house so for the nonconforming section of the existing house it doesn't change any GFA or height information. They're not adding a second floor in that section, they're just looking to do some cathedral ceilings in that front area and just change the look of the residence from the street. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : So the reconstructed roofline is still within the pre-existing nonconforming front yard setback. LISA POYER : Correct, it will not change, it will meet the exact current setback. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay, Margaret? MEMBER STEINBUGLER : No CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Nick MEMBER PLANAMENTO :Just to be clear because you were discussing the reverse gable which is proposed as the alteration,that still meets the existing 25.6 foot.front yard setback but we're discussing is the reduced setback of 23.3 which is the cover over the stoop. LISA POYER :That will remain the same setback as well. MEMBER PLANAMENTO :There's already a cover there. LISA POYER : Yes, they're changing it from a shed roof to a little gabled roof over that front entry stoop. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : So it's all about the little shed. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :The house is 25 foot 6 inches. LISA POYER : Correct CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay, anything from you Rob? February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting MEMBER LEHNERT : No, no questions. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Anything from you Pat? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Nope, straightforward. CHAIPERSON WEISMAN : Okay, anybody in the audience who wants to address the application? Anybody on Zoom Liz? Motion to close the hearing reserve decision to a later date. Is there a second? MEMBER LEHNERT : Second CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye MEMBER STEINBUGLER : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye HEARING#80755E—JOHN LAWRENCE AND KERRY KIMMINS-LAWRENCE CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :The next application before the Board is for John Lawrence and Kerry Kimmins-Lawrence#8075SE.The applicant requests a Special Exception under Article III Section 280-13B (13). The applicant is owner of the subject property requesting authorization to establish an accessory apartment in an existing accessory structure located at 110 Soundview Rd. in Orient. Good morning, would you please state your name for the record. JOHN PSCHENICA : Good morning, my name is John Pschenica, Architect. First of all, I'd like to thank the Board for your time and consideration in our application.As you mentioned previously that we my clients are asking for a Special Exception for the addition of an accessory apartment over their garage. The existing structure was built with space over the garage. The old design I think was to have an office or workshop over that garage which was never done, never approved. My clients have purchased the property back in April of last year. The reasoning for developing this accessory apartment is for their mother who will be retiring this year. The idea is to prepare a place for her.This application is not proposing any sort of change to the exterior February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting of the existing structure.There is no impact to the height or any impact to neighbors.This would be just an interior renovation only. With respect to septic systems, the original home was approved by the Department of Health for seven (7) bedrooms. The existing home has five (5) bedrooms so the two bedrooms that we are proposing for this accessory apartment would fill those last two places that the Health Department deemed would be acceptable.Other than that, I think it's a pretty straightforward project,two bedrooms as is allowed by the Special Exception, the Special Exception allows for a 700 sq. ft. accessory apartment, we're coming in around 550 at this particular property and that's inclusive of the ground floor entrance and the stairs going up. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : We have a livable floor area at a conforming 527 sq. ft. that's what the Building Department calculated. JOHN PSCHENICA : My plan show 550 but if they measured it differently then that's if you look at Plan A101 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : We just have to make sure that we have the numbers right that's all. JOH PSCHENICA : Sure, I have the livable area called out on A101 as 550 inclusive of the entry, kitchen, bathroom and a couple of bedrooms there with the closets. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Alright, so you know what we're going to do, we're going to call out the larger number in the decision that way we're not going to get stuck suddenly. SENIOR OFFICE ASSISTANT SAKARELLOS : Leslie, I don't know if Mr. Pschenica, did you count the 2 X 6 walls or whatever they are because I know Mike counts the interior only. JOHN PSCHENICA : This should just be interior space. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : But I believe you also mentioned that you were counting the stairwell. JOHN PSCHENICA : Right and the entry from down which the entry was about 50 sq. ft., 48 sq. ft. according to the plan. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay, what we do not have in our file and will require is some sort of confirmation of family relationship. Come to the podium and state your name please. KERRY KIMMINS-LAWRENCE : Hi, my name is Kerry Kimmins-Lawrence. I have my birth certificate that shows myself and my mothers CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Your mother's name and so on. KERRY KIMMINS-LAWRENCE : Yes :1:1 February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay, if you'd like to submit a copy for us please. We have of course inspected the property and are familiar with it from a prior you know relief and there are at least three on-site parking spaces available on that property which is the minimum required for this. Rob anything from you? MEMBER LEHNERT : No questions. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Nick MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Yea, I'm curious your driving license as submitted show that this is not your primary residence, it states that you live in East Setauket, do you want to talk a little bit about that? KERRY KIMMINS-LAWRENCE : East Setauket is our primary residence, I still have children in school. This is a second home. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well, let me remind the Board that the code was changed so that it's now required that it is solely for your use. In other words, you are using that home as you wish but it is not rented to anyone else and no one else is living in it or is allowed to live in it. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : So again,that would mean that you can't have a rental permit on the house. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The only rental permit permitted is going to be to your mother for that accessory. KERRY KIMMINS-LAWRENCE : That is the intention. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : That is a required annual renewal through the Building Department. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : There was a copy of the lease I believe. KERRY KIMMINS-LAWRENCE : I have one that I revised cause Margaret had brought up that there was something in there abut subletting, it was something that I printed quickly at the time that I submitted the application. We have no intention of subletting it's strictly the residence for my mother. There was also reference in there to the Town of Brookhaven, like I said it was just something that I had printed but I have one that I revised and took out that information if you'd like CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Sure why don't you bring that up and the takeaway is beware of Bloomberg forms. KERRY KIMMINS-LAWRENCE : I know, live and learn. 3.7 February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting MEMBER STEINBUGLER : I think the lease also should indicate the length of the lease. KERRY KIMMINS-LAWRENCE : I didn't put any length in because my mother is not ready to but I can certainly resubmit. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : The applicant also submitted some PSUG utility bills for the site. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Is there anything else you want to say to us before we ask for comments? ROBIN NEWMAN : Hello, my name is Robin Newman I have the house I'm the owner of the house across the street, 1835 Ryder Farm Lane. We do have concerns about additional noise and additional traffic and also after the lease is over for her mother, I mean they have the right obviously to rent out their place indefinitely and who's to say who else will be there? I mean the property is only meant to be a single-family home and this sort of definitely changes the use of that property and we have definite concerns about that. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I can address some of those concerns. They will not have the legal right to rent to anyone else. Should the mother no longer reside there, they will need to come before this Board, before the Building Department again and the process will take place again. Right now, the code only allows tenants in these kinds of accessory structures to be either a family member or someone who is eligible for or already on the town's affordable housing list that's it. So, it's not an open market rental that anybody can rent out at any amount of money, it's limited. We were trying when this code was passed to create.a little bit more affordable and flexible housing stock to permit families to remain in place in Southold or people who have more limited incomes. With regard to traffic, they will have three parking spaces on site as required by the law and no more. I hope that takes care of some of your concerns. ROBIN NEWMAN : It does, thank you. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : There are so many things that are you know with the zoning code update there are so many things that are in flux right now; we have to go by what the code says at the moment not by what it's going to become but we're just making sure that we have the right updated version because the code was changed from principle residence to sole use and occupancy. It is their exclusive occupancy but it doesn't have as long as nobody else is occupying it, it is exclusively yours. You don't have to be in it all the time in other words but nobody else can be. Anything else from anybody in the audience? Please come to the mic and state your name. BRIAN RETUS : Brian Retus, 235 Soundview Rd. I'd like to introduce myself as your neighbor. I've met quite a few people that were staying over at the house but we haven't had the opportunity February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting to meet you and welcome to the neighborhood. My neighbor had mentioned some noise, there's been numerous gatherings that you've had at your home over the summer. To be quite frank with you it hasn't been too agreeable to the neighbors, there's been amplified music and in reference to parking I'm not sure if you're aware cause I haven't seen you out here, I believe my wife met your daughter? Okay, there's been numerous times that the parking cause it overflows out of the whatever space they have on the property into the street in front of the neighbor's house that came up before. There's a curve there if you're familiar with it, they're parked on the curb in the curve which is very dangerous people come around that turn pretty quick and there are people walking dogs and walking their kids on both sides of the street.That is a concern of mine. Also, as far as the GFA, has that been calculated to include the accessory apartment? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :The GFA in this instance has not been calculated because the GFA did not exist as a regulation when this house was built, you were there when the house was built I believe. BRIAN RETUS : Yea CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I remember you, your face. BRIAN RETUS : Yes Leslie, you did our house too. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : That's one of the things we actually discussed because we're going to look at all of this in the zoning update because part of the dilemma is, Special Exceptions ZBA this is a little educational class on zoning,ZBA retains what's called original jurisdiction on Special Exceptions which means they come directly to us (inaudible) first. Now what does that do?The place where GFA is calculated is the Building Department. This is a process that's been in place in this town for since 1957, 1 guess. We need to look at all of that because what we're really the ultimate goal of this update as far as I'm concerned and I'm obviously on that committee that's working on this is to make sure that we keep our neighborhoods safe, in scale right with enough place you know places for parking; when you have a party everybody over, everybody parks all over the place we all know that we all do that in every neighborhood throughout the town that's a one-off deal. If this was happening morning, noon and night that would be a matter for Code Enforcement but if public parking is allowed on the street it's allowed on the street. I mean that's going to vary you get that, it's going to vary from neighborhood to neighborhood from time to time. BRIAN RETUS : No I do understand that, I just wanted to bring up the concern. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I think that's something you know talk to your neighbors about and have a conversations. 14] February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting BRIAN RETUS : I just met them. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I think you're going to meet them again I have a feeling. Okay, with regard to GFA you're right because if you were say put an addition on your house and it went to the Building Department for a permit and suddenly that house was going to be way too big it might already be too big based on this legislation for the size of your lot, you're going to wind up coming before the Zoning Board.They're going to calculate the potential livable floor area of an attached garage. BRIAN RETUS : Which wasn't done back then because it CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It didn't exist, the code was passed in 2022 for limiting house size to lot size. Since we've been working with it, we've found a number of ways to improve it. There has been some as has been often the case with code unintended consequences, meaning how do you know until you try it kind of thing. Then when you try it and you say oh, oh this is burdensome for property owners or there seems to be some injustice here or there. We found it difficult to say to somebody, hey listen, you have to spend a lot of money hiring a design professional to calculate gross floor area in your whole neighborhood without any assurance that you're even going to get what you need because you may or may not work to your advantage. It didn't seem fair so I managed to get that little part of the code tweaked as an interim step until we look at the bigger picture of how we may improve kind of a user-friendly fair way of making sure that homes are not mcmansions, over scaled for the size of their lot that's all this was meant to do. So, having said that, what Special Exceptions do is,there's boxes you check off, you either conform to these boxes and you get it or you don't and you don't get it. It's not like a variance where there's wiggle room and you know you maybe say can you make it a little smaller your deck or whatever, this is a straightforward matter. I think the Board has everything we need in front of us to make a decision unless there's something anybody else wants. A.T.A. MCGIVNEY : I just want to reserve the ability to discuss this (inaudible) because the code when they changed the permitted use in a dwelling allows you to use one of the units for your sole exclusive use. They changed it to use so people didn't have to decide that this is the only home but they didn't do that with Special Exception.The Special Exception still says it has to be your sole exclusive occupancy so the distinction is drawn because it should have been changed in both places to use. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I see what you're getting at. A.T.A. MCGIVNEY : It wasn't a Special Exception for that reason February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : We can put that in findings and facts. We'll just make a note of that because there's every intention of correcting those you know, if you've ever looked at the code you look at these things and there's a table and then there's Joan's sitting there, she's going to, get this, there's a little asterisk, see section whatever,okay so you go to that section and it says see that section; that's what happens when over twenty years you do piece meal changes to the code. You gotta cross reference them, if you change it here it has an impact over there right and that's a difficult thing to do it's like shifting in sand.That's what we're trying to look at, it's gotta be consistent, it has to say the same thing when it's the same goal or intent in more than one place without all these little footnotes. That's what Julie is referring to the fact that the code was changed in one place in terms of the definition of accessory apartment occupancy but it wasn't changed in the Special Exception standard. That standard required principal residence originally and then we said, well listen, if you go to Florida for you know half the year why are we penalizing people you know as long as they're not renting it out to somebody else it doesn't make sense. People have the right to be in more than one place. We used to get tax returns and everything you know to make sure that it was a principal residence cause the law required us to. It's a work in progress as I said.Thank you for that clarification. Okay, anything from anybody else on this one? BRIAN RETUS : Leslie I don't know if you recall the problem that we had with Mr. Defiore as far as building the home? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Oh, I do. BRIAN RETUS : We were quite concerned when he built it as to what's inside the house.There's quite a few bedrooms, there's three wet bars and if I remember correctly what he said was, he also the basement was finished is that correct? KERRY KIMMINS-LAWRENCE : It is finished. BRIAN RETUS : He had done that according to his statements to me and to the Board that it was done put his wife's mother and father in that apartment. Wouldn't can you not use that space? KERRY KIMMINS-LAWRENCE : It was our understanding that that was not permissible to be used as an apartment it's just a finished basement it is just tiled floors and sheetrock. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : As far as this Board is concerned, there are two kinds of apartments, one is within the principle dwelling and that is now as of right. When this code allowed them to be an accessory structure in 2010 that code then said,okay but you will need to have the Zoning Board evaluate what the impacts will be if it's going to be in an accessory structure which is very different if it's inside your house. February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Leslie, you can't have both. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : You cannot have both, but they're using it as a finished basement they made a proposal to put an apartment above their garage which is legally allowed and that's it they get one.They're allowed to put it wherever they want. BRIAN RETUS : It used to be clear, this does not require another environmental study, correct? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : No BRIAN RETUS : Okay CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : They have a septic system that's sized for it. BRIAN RETUS : Okay, well if nothing else I got a nice a good education from you folks today and I'll speak to you in a couple of minutes and introduce myself less formally. I feel much better that the reason for having the apartment is for your mom and I would do the same. I just want to make sure that everyone understands the concerns of the neighborhood and things like that. I don't want to reiterate what we went through with Mr. DiFiore but we've had some issues with (inaudible) and most of my neighbors aren't here, many don't Zoom because it's the winter (inaudible) good time to do this.Thank you. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Thank you for your testimony. Is there any other comments or questions from anybody? Motion to close the hearing no wait did you want to, are you ready to close? Okay, close the hearing reserve decision to a later date which will be about two weeks from now when we have our next meeting. MEMBER STEINBUGLER : Second CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye MEMBER STEINBUGLER : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye,the motion carries, thank you for your time. 17 February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting HEARING#8075SE—DIANE E. BIANCULLI CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next application before the Board is for Diane E. Bianculli #8075 SE. Applicant requests a Special Exception under Article III Section 280-13B (13). The applicant is the owner of the subject property requesting authorization to construct and establish an accessory apartment in a proposed accessory structure located at 450 Saltaire Way in Mattituck. DIANE BIANCULLI : Good morning my name is Diane Bianculli and this is my son Phillip Bianculli. Thank you for taking the time to hear our proposal today. I'd like to briefly walk through our accessory apartment plan and explain how it complies with town code and fits well within the existing neighborhood. Multi-generational living allows families to support one another while making efficient use of existing housing all without changing the character of the neighborhood or increasing density beyond what the code already allows. Multi-generational living allows older family members to remain close to loved ones. It is a built-in support system, encourages shared responsibility and mutual assistance. It reduces isolation while maintaining independence. A long-term benefit is that it can also lessen reliance on assisted living or institutional care. The accessory apartment is an efficient use of existing housing. It is a better use of existing infrastructure and land while also aligns with the intent of the regulations and code. This has an environmental impact because it encourages sustainable land use by promoting shared resources such as utilities, parking and driveways, code compliance. A proposal alliance of the Town of Southold town code specifically the general standards and use regulations that apply to accessory apartments.We reviewed the relevant sections carefully and made sure the design meets all of the required criteria.The accessory apartment aligns with the Town of Southold town code by preserving neighborhood character and efficient apartment size layout and utilities. One of our main goals was to make sure that this does not negatively impact neighboring properties. The apartment is designed to maintain privacy with limited visibility from surrounding homes. Existing screening helps maintain privacy and additional vegetative screening can be added if needed to further reduce visibility.This proposal is designed to blend in with the existing neighborhood. The accessory apartment is within the allowed size limit and remains secondary to the primary residence.There will be no change in the overall appearance or use of the property in the neighborhood character will be maintained. It keeps housing within the scale of single-family neighborhoods, it maintains appearance of one primary residency and it is less disruptive than new construction or high-density development. No curb appeal means that throughout the year I apologize throughout the years I have added a front porch which has added to the charisma of the neighborhood and I do believe that the year-round resiliency of the community will be maintained.There is adequate space on the property for more than three off-street parking spaces which meets the requirements because parking is provided on site February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting there will be no impact on street parking or traffic flow. The accessory apartment provides flexible housing while staying within the town's guidelines. It allows the property to be used efficiently without expanding beyond what the code allows or impacting the surrounding neighborhood.The accessory apartment will be 704 sq.ft.which is below the maximum allowed size of 750.The layout includes two bedrooms and one bath with one of the bedrooms intended to be a home office. The entire living space is located on one floor as required by code. The layout includes two bedrooms and one bath I'm sorry I'm repeating myself.The property will be equipped with a sanitary system that is adequate to support the proposed use, an IA system will have to be put in. We've made a strong effort to ensure this proposal is compliant, respectful of neighboring properties and consistent with the intent of the town code. We believe it's a reasonable and an appropriate use for the property. This helps to maintain housing cost for families, it provides financial resiliency during life transitions and it can reduce commuting and transportation costs. The community benefits, it encourages long-term residency and neighborhood continuity, supports local schools, businesses and services and enhances community ties into generational interaction.That's it. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay, we typically in order to prove family relationship we usually ask for birth certificate, can you supply one of those? DIANE BIANCULLI : Not at this moment, can I bring it over later to the office? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yea, yea sure we can,get it later that's okay, we don't need the original just a copy just make a xerox of it okay?You are proposing to install an IA septic system? DIANE BIANCULLI : I believe that is what we're going to have to do, yes. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :We have confirmation from the Building Department of a livable floor area of 664 sq. ft. for the size of the unit which is conforming to the code. The survey you submitted which was just up there, shows conforming setbacks from the rear and side property lines and an existing shed which is also in the conforming building envelope. This is interesting because the code when it was put into place was designed really to try and get more housing units out of what was already built which is why we said,well if you've got a barn out there why not be able to use it for you know a secondary dwelling for a family member or somebody for an affordable unit. That code got modified over time and so on. Right now, the town is looking at how we can accommodate some of these smaller secondary dwellings called ADU's,accessory dwelling units on various properties throughout the town where residential zones allow them to be? Again, not necessarily to commercialize it but for family living and so on but this is the first one that we've had that's actually a proposed brand new doesn't exist yet structure. It is an accessory and it is conforming in size to what an ADU is allowed for in there but so far, we haven't had something that's just been trucked in. Now, with the eventual recognition by the February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting Town Board who are our legislatures that accessory dwelling units are a viable not everywhere all the time you know we want them to be scattered not all lumped together so somebody says it's all being dumped in Mattituck or wherever. We're looking at that code which will allow us to try and increase our housing stock especially affordable housing stock which is a crisis out here as we all know and we don't want to see a bunch more huge subdivisions created.So,we're looking at that now and what I'm trying to get at is, we are going to have to figure out what to do with a brand-new unit that is again caught in this situation where we don't really have the code in place to address it. If it were say, I don't care what it was, let's say it was a storage building that was sitting there, you would have checked all the boxes but now because you're bringing it in which is mostly what a lot of these ADU's eventually are going to be they're going to be these tiny homes, little ones that are brought onto the site, some of them will be stick built on the property but most of them will probably just modular things that will be brought in it's cheaper that way. That's our job and we will just have to figure this out in a way that's fair. I think what we should probably do is at this point let's see if anybody else wants to I know there's somebody who does want to talk about this in the audience and maybe on Zoom I'm not sure but let's let that happen and then I'm going to ask (inaudible). DIANE BIANCULLI : We do have copies of the plans here. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay, good. DIANE BIANCULLI : Should I bring it up? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Please MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Leslie, before we have the public speak perhaps the applicant can talk about the finished basement or rather the basement? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :Yeah I was going to question that too.One second, before you testify, Nick had a question for Diane over here. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : For the applicant, I understand that there is a proposed basement under the structure. DIANE BIANCULLI : There's a crawl space, we haven't really discussed the basement we've discussed I know I have to have a four foot crawl space. I'm not sure about doing anything more than that. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I thinkthat answers maybe one of the questions, it's a foundation with a crawl space so you have access for plumbing etc. February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting DIANE BIANCULLI : We haven't really discussed the basement, someone else brought that up but we never discussed it.That was what the initial plan was, can we do a basement? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I think probably not in a unit like this, I think that's pushing it. Certainly, mechanically you need to have a crawl space for ventilation for plumbing and so on. That would certainly probably as soon as somebody sees a basement they think, oh oh somebody is going to expand it, it's going to be livable floor area, it's going to be inhabitable, somebody is going to be down in that basement. I'm afraid that people argue well, it's storage, there could be drainage impacts and all other kinds of impacts from basements. I suspect that these ADU's when they are trucked in will be on a foundation on a crawl space, they will not have basements. DIANE BIANCULLI : (inaudible) A.T.A. MCGIVNEY : In addition to that, although the Board tries very hard to give information they are not endowed to advise you on whether you can or can't have a basement it's just in conversation what we think will happen so just making it (inaudible). CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : (inaudible) it's funny because that's really kind of a Building Department and Code Enforcement jurisdiction but they all overlap. I mean you know it's not inappropriate to talk about all of those things at a public hearing cause neighbors get concerned and they have a right to speak and to be heard and have their concerns addressed. ELLEN LEMONDA : My name is Ellen Lemonda, I live at 350 Saltaire Way Mattituck right next door to Diane. I had sent a letter already in advance. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : We have it. ELLEN LEMONDA : I figured by some of the discussion already. I have some further questions regarding the application and some of the ADU codes. The first thing is the height requirement, is there a height requirement and if so, what is it? I'm not good at your site and I don't know CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The height would be the same as an accessory structure I think. ELLEN LEMONDA : That's what I'm saying, is there a restriction? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The higher is goes the farther the setback from the property line basically. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : 1 think for a basic like a shed it's sixteen feet. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yea which is not yea 22 foot high, 18 and 22. Do the plans show the height. February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting ELLEN LEMONDA : No CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : We don't have them either so if she's going to submit them now. ELLEN LEMONDA : I didn't see the height on it. PHILLIP LEMONDA :Twelve foot, 13.3 from the ground. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay ELLEN LEMONDA : She signed an affidavit stating she was not within five feet of a farm. I'm not sure what the relevance is of being within but we back a farm and I don't understand how she signed this affidavit stating we weren't within five hundred feet of a farm. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The reason we look at whether an agricultural property is near a residence often has to do with stuff like crop dusting, noise from plows things like that. ELLEN LEMONDA : We back a farm and her affidavit is inaccurate. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : We do inspect the property, despite the snow although sometimes when you're looking for a swimming pool covered with ten feet of snow you know it's a little crazy should I Google Earth this thing. So, we did see that there were farm fields back there. ELLEN LEMONDA : Yea I mean we back at this okay so that affidavit is incorrect. Also, I believe she's required to have three parking spaces, two allocated to the main home and one to the ADU dwelling. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :That's correct. ELLEN LEMON DA : Does the one for the ADU dwelling have to be in the back yard? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : No, it can be anywhere on the property. ELLEN LEMONDA : In her driveway, she could have as many cars as she wants in her driveway? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well, she's required by law to have two anybody in an R80 or R40 or you know R20 zone required to have two spaces for a dwelling on-site and one for an accessory dwelling unit so that's a total of three. Now if you have guests that what we heard earlier they park wherever they can find a place to park but that's not a constant thing. ELLEN LEMONDA : So the driveway does not have to be in the back then? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : No February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting ELLEN LEMONDA : So, they can all park in the front driveway she'll have to walk around to the back in the rain and in the snow CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yes ELLEN LEMONDA : with her groceries and everything else? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yes ELLEN LEMONDA : Cause we were concerned about a driveway being in the back yard and how to turn around and the lights of the cars shinning right into our back windows. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It won't happen. ELLEN LEMONDA:The lot calculation,we were told initially and it's not figured in the calculation the driveway but we have heard that unlike whatever other reasons you figure lot calculations for an ADU separate dwelling that the driveway is supposed to be considered for the lot calculation. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well,they're not increasing any the only increase in coverage on the lot would be the footprint of the proposed accessory dwelling that's it nothing else is being changed.They do not exceed the permitted 20% lot coverage. ELLEN LEMONDA : Right now they don't but the driveway is not included in the calculation and my question is, should the driveway have been figured in the calculation? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : No because driveways at this point although again, with this code change that may change because we want to look at permeable but right now driveways are not part of lot coverage anywhere in the town for anything. If you built a brand-new house and built a big driveway your house would count but the driveway wouldn't. ELLEN LEMONDA : Again, there's no mention on the application of the survey of the full basement that she had said to us that she would like to do or the front porch of the new dwelling and none of this is figured into the lot calculation either. Is there any requirements as far as lighting because if the front of her house faces the back of my house and she has to put outdoor lighting or spot lights if she's going to be walking all the way to her back yard is there any restrictions on how much lighting or whatever she can have? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : No,the code has we have a lighting code that would apply to this and any other property town wide.We have a dark sky compliance code now in place been there for a long time and so any lighting there would have to be down lighting you know whether it's like February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting path lights for a walkway to the back, something like that. That's a town wide code, it's not specific to this application. ELLEN LEMONDA : Alright, and I just wanted to state that we moved in 1987.and we build our home on this lot because we loved the open space provided by the farm behind us and the quiet street with minimal traffic. Every year it has remained that way until now. It is heartbreaking to think we are losing so much of what we love and worse, we cannot understand what is to be gained by this. She and her son both own homes in the Town of Southold now and I don't see how this helps the community but only their own personal gain.That's what I have to say. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Thank you for your testimony. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Excuse me Leslie if I can ask,the neighbor just said something that I'm curious about, Mrs. Bianculli your neighbor mentioned that you and your son each own homes in Southold; I expect the site that we're discussing is your primary residence. DIANE BIANCULLI : Of course, it is my only residence. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Does your son own a house in the Town of Southold? PHILLIP BIANCULLI : I do, I live in Southold. DIANE BIANCULLI : At this point he has a house. PHILLIP BIANCULLI : My plan is to move into my mother's house out front and then as she gets older in order to keep her out of a nursing home me and my girlfriend and our family would be there and I would either rent my house out to somebody on the town list or the affordable housing or sell it to I have a numerous amount of families that are still renting most of them being local small business owners MEMBER PLANAMENTO : The other property that you own? PHILLIP BIANCULLI : My house in Southold,yes. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Right because the property that your mother owns my understanding the code allows your mother as the property owner to have the ADU that then she can chose if she wants to downsize she could live in the ADU and then she could make the larger home available to a family member or to somebody that qualifies to be on the affordable housing registry. DIANE BIANCULLI : Yes February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting A.T.A. MCGIVNEY : I just have a couple of follow up questions, in the application you have a note saying that you don't have plans for the modular unit. DIANE BIANCULLI : I just handed them in. It took time because they wanted me to give them half down and I would lose that money A.T.A. MCGIVNEY : This is what you handed in regarding now your plans are that you have a lease so you have a lease signed with your son though who currently owns a primary residence in the Town of Southold? DIANE BIANCULLI : At this moment, yes. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Is there anything else you want to PATTY YOUNG : My name is Patty Young and I do live next door on the opposite side at 550 Saltaire Way with my husband Bill for forty years. I personally brought down to the ZBA office the copies of our Saltaire Estates Covenants and Restrictions that have been in effect for over fifty years. The very clear statement says, one home per lot in our neighborhood. So, we're opposed to this for a multitude of reasons and we live in our neighborhood for a reason where our small pieces of property twenty thousand square foot lots with one home. Building a second home of this size on this sized lot will cause detriment to the rural character of not just my personal property or the Lemonda's surrounding them on the other side but to our entire neighborhood.You can drive down the road and you will see the second home on this lot. It will also block the views for the people across the street,the people next door or just people walking on the street. It will block our sky view and that's an important thing, we live out here for darkness, the sunrise from the east will be blocked by a structure even though there is we do thankfully have a buffer of some trees but they get changed out, they are not higher than eight feet.This home will be higher than eight feet, it will be higher than thirteen if it has to be placed on a foundation. I don't know how much higher so that does impact us. It also environmentally impacts us with the surfaces that now water will run off, will there be water drainage problems to the neighbors, does it impact the wildlife? Like we said, it is a beautiful open area, we love open space. I know the Board works hard to have open space for our town and it is blocked. Our most personal concern as Ellen Lemonda mentioned is privacy.We now are going to have a back yard with a home ten feet off our property line. Right now,we have one family living there,there will be two. It is not a personal attack we are blessed with a lovely neighbor but we are losing our privacy. We have a swimming pool, a patio,we have a deck and there will be ten feet off our property line and ten feet off our backyard area so you can look at it like you're allowing quarter acre zoning to build a new house in Mattituck.We hope you consider that,that we live purposely in this beautiful rural low-density area and this decision will really affect our lives and impact the character of our neighborhood. We hope you don't allow this apartment to come in and we February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting hope that everybody will consider and keep Southold Town so special because we live here for a reason. I was raised here, I still have family here, I've been here literally my whole life and it's personal to have this taken away. So, I hope you consider it,thank you. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :Thank you for your testimony. MEMBER STEINBUGLER : May I ask a question? You mentioned Covenants and Restrictions we did receive your letter and we did receive the copy of the C&R's that was included either by you or the neighbor on the (inaudible) both provided them. You (inaudible) those Covenants and Restrictions have been in (inaudible)for forty or fifty years, is there evidence that they're still in effect? My understanding is that (inaudible). PATTY YOUNG : This is our association Board President Dave Chiaro. A.T.A. MCGIVNEY : Are you talking about the Covenants and Restrictions for your HOA? PATTY YOUNG : Yes A.T.A. MCGIVNEY : Okay cause those are private that's a civil matter between you and the homeowner. There were Planning Board Covenants and Restrictions in place many years ago but they are no longer in effect so the town has no Covenants and Restrictions that they can enforce because they are not town issues.The Planning Department told us.What you're talking about is Homeowners Association Covenants and Restrictions which the town and the ZBA cannot get involved as a private matter. DAVE CHIARO : Good morning, my name is Dave Chiaro and I live at 1230 Saltaire Way. I am the President of Mattituck Saltaire Homeowners Association with the caveat, I am not representing the association at this hearing, I am merely expressing my concern. A.T.A. MCGIVNEY : As an individual homeowner? DAVE CHIARO : Yes not as the president. First, I would like to say, I applaud Diane for her taking care of her family. However, not in this way. May I ask, so the request of this application is to put a separate dwelling now on the property in addition to the one that's there, is that correct? A.T.A. MCGIVNEY : The size of it qualifies it as an accessory dwelling unit, it's under 750 sq. ft. For it to be a dwelling or called a second dwelling it would have to be over 850 sq. ft. DAVE CHIARO : So then it is not a separate dwelling so it has to be associated with the primary dwelling, correct? The reason I ask this is because the Homeowners Association has two separate properties that are for the exclusive use, there are forty-four lots, forty-two homeowners. We have a separate beach access which is controlled locked and have a separate February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting tennis court which is a community those two properties are community for the sole use of the actual Mattituck Saltaire homeowners. My question to this is, and again I extrapolated out with my what could happen with this type of application and the approval of this application; meaning allowing okay we already know that Diane wants to live there with her son but we're all going to die at some point and time and we also have in our Association an awful lot of rentals. We've already heard now I don't have a name attached to it, I heard from my Vice President that she received a phone call from whomever cause she's tried to call back and it didn't go it was like a ghost call and the said oh if this application goes through you can bet we're going to go ahead and put one on our property. Why, because we're'talking about renters so we have residents up there that are seasonal and they're going to come up there and they're going to throw another unit in the back there so now they can double their income or they can use the primary for them and then they can use the secondary. I understand, all things perfect everybody's gotta say this is (inaudible),this is a relation. However, where is the document that said, that this is my cousin, this is my whatever that doesn't actually have a birth certificate has the same name. These things and we've experienced it up there with the home that's actually right next to mine where the individual moved in, he specifically moved in to say okay I'm going to be an owner here, he lives in Syosset he now has this house and he said oh, I'm not going to be bothered with a rental permit and he told me, he says, oh my cousin is coming to my cousin from Albany is coming to use the house. Well, when his cousin showed up with Alabama plates my daughter went over and talked with her in fact, she was a renter so all things you know everybody likes to say everybody is going to be honest and give us a straight answer.The reality is, we don't get it and why because it's a very desirable area. So, with that in mind now, going ahead and approving this application we're opening up the slippery slope realizing again, you yourself said that there's no real precedence to this thing. So, again I'm extrapolating out and saying these are the worst-case scenarios. We already talked about the traffic volume, the parking, the over development because now we have these forty-two or forty-four, we now have doubled effectively doubled.Again, we are looking into the future. The last thing was, you know the association I have a note here,the association would be punished for the town's short sided policy decisions allowing these things and now all of a sudden, we as the homeowners have to deal with the over population of the over development. So that's our concerns and another note, do not punish the homeowners for that state mandates and municipal planning failures. All we're really saying is this is that we don't believe that now this property is a half- acre so what we're effectively doing is we're saying it's okay to put an effectively a dwelling or a residence on a quarter of an acre yet the town wanted to have open spaces as far as in fact five-acre for new development.We just don't understand that,our concerns are there and again I'm not representing the association, I'm representing my own opinion. 27 February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Thank you for your testimony. Is there anything from anybody else? Is there anybody on Zoom? MEMBER STEINBUGLER : More of a curiosity question, I think the application mentioned a pool and Leslie said hard to find in the snow but it looked like there might be a pond or something in the yard. PHILLIP BIANCULLI : There was an above ground pool and it has been since dismantled. MEMBER STEINBUGLER : I think one of the neighbors letters indicated and I think somebody mentioned today the possibility of a deck or a porch and that would contribute to lot coverage and I don't actually remember where the lot coverage came out but do you have plans for a porch or a deck? DIANE BIANCULLI : When you (inaudible) house there would be a small deck. PHILLIP BIANCULLI : Like an entryway. MEMBER STEINBUGLER : An entryway. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay, anybody else, Nick? MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I sort of have one comment which I don't know how appropriate it is to this particular hearing but I think for the homeowners it would seem to me that any home by right in the Town of Southold can have an accessory apartment inside the house provided it meets a certain square footage, there's a calculation of the livable square footage not the GFA or the size, it has to do with the existing house. So, I find it interesting and I've served on this Board almost actually maybe over ten years when I think about it, this is sort of the first time that we're sort of having this conversation where there's a bit of opposition because there's a issue relative to affordable housing or for aging in place all the other things we all sort of want to appreciate but it would seem that for you Homeowners Association which we sort of addressed we don't have control over, we're working on behalf of the town which the zoning allows an apartment in a house. So, the conversation here is having it as an accessory so in theory if this was an addition even to the existing house it wouldn't be before us. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yea, they could expand the foundation of their principal dwelling by up to 25% as of right,just go get a building permit. If her son was living in the house instead of in this smaller unit which creates some privacy, I presume there'll be the same number of cars, there'll be the same number of people, there'll be the same number of people going to the beach you're not coming in with you know a great big family or anything like that. They're not February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting allowed to rent to great big families. If you want to respond that's fine but you have to come up to the mic cause we record these. ELLEN LEMONDA : I don't mean this as a personal attack in any way but Phil is going to live in the main house with his partner with her children with at least two cars and Diane and her partner Steve are going to live in the house so it is bringing a lot more people to the neighborhood. Another thing that bothers me that I should have mentioned before is, her lot is either a quarter or a half-acre and the same requirements of what size the second dwelling is is the same as we lived on ten-acres it's proportionally not doesn't make sense to me that she's going to have this house and this house and then the farm. She's going to be ten feet off of everything. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : You're allowed by right to have 20% lot coverage. How you chose to use it ELLEN LEMONDA : It's at 16 now. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Right so then she still have 4% to expand. She could put up a giant Morton building by right which could impact you know view sheds and other things. ELLEN LEMONDA : So if she puts up this porch if she replaces the pool who's going to recalculate that? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It's done by the Building Department when the plans are submitted. If they're not conforming to the code if they're more than she's allowed that's why she comes here but she's not here for any of those things, she's here because she wants to add this small secondary unit for a dwelling for her son. It's not transferable by the way to anybody else. Somebody said something about what if they die, it's extinguished they start over. ELLEN LEMONDA : So Phil would have to apply for this again if something God forbid happens? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : They would have to verify who's going to be in it, they're going to have to show a lease, how much the lease has to be at least an annual lease it can't be a short term rental. I live here too, we're neighbors everybody does end runs around these darns gone rental codes. I mean it'.s everywhere; these Air B&B things are proliferating; the town is doing its level best to grapple with it cause it's having an adverse impact on all of us. We do not make the laws; we grant relief from the laws that our legislators which are the Town Board elected officials decide about. It has a vetting process; it goes through a Code Committee you know there's a lot of people on that that have expertise. Look, the town has a housing crisis which is not just us it's all over the place and that's what we're all trying to figure out,what are we going to do when families can't live here anymore and the schools are empty because there's no kids February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting in the schools cause no one can afford to have a family out here. There are flip sides to everything, if you sit there and you look at it one way you say, oh yea that's wrong then you look at it and say wait a minute that's what's going on with this code update and I really hope all of you will consider going to the Town's website, having a look at it and when the time comes and there's a public hearing you know come and tell us what you think because the code is there to protect us. We are supposed to be balancing the reasonable rights of property'owners which we all want cause we own property with the welfare of our community, our neighbors and that's our job here. It's not always an easy one especially when things are in flux bike they are right now. We welcome everybody's input; we consider everybody's input and we feel we come to a better more informed decision that way. Bear in mind, when we do grant an approval, the approval can be based upon a certain set of conditions which you know can involve lots more screening to create visual privacy if it's an open property line and you don't want the neighbors to be seeing your swimming pool and you're running out there nude. I mean we do that all the time. So, we will have a look at what is reasonable, we'll transcribe this, we'll reread what everybody said that's why we make sure we have it written down so we're not just saying,whoa that's not how I remembered it well, we have it recorded so our memories wind up the same. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : One other thing, I don't know if other members looked at the plans but I just wanted to make a comment. The original plans that were submitted at least in my application showed one bedroom with an ensuite bathroom and then a second area that sort of was implied a bedroom was labeled as like a den of a family room now it's labeled as bedroom number two, you are by right allowed to have up to two bedrooms but only one bathroom. There's a storage area adjacent to that bedroom which looks like it can easily be converted into a bathroom so I just wanted to mention that relative to the plans. DIANE BIANCULLI : It's going to remain a storage room because we need a little area to put things away. We're just going to have one bathroom. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Right but it would seem difficult for the other bedroom occupant to be able to use the bathroom but maybe it's a design choice. PHILLIP BIANCULLI : It's only going to be my mother and her boyfriend in there,there's going to be nobody else. DIANE BIANCULLI : It's just going to be like an office space. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : That's what the original plan said, office. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I have a question of Julie, I'd like a further explanation of the Covenants and Restrictions were filed with Suffolk County, why are they not valid? 30 February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting A.T.A. MCGIVNEY : Kim had requested information from Heather in Planning and that was the research that Planning came up with. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Did you say that there was a sunset clause and they have expired? A.T.A. MCGIVNEY : There's no clause automatically renewing them so they're no longer valid. It was just from Planning. I didn't research this myself, I can but I did not. MEMBER ACAMPORA : There is paperwork here that shows that they were filed with Suffolk County in 1966 by the Clerk of the County. BOARD ASSISTANT : We asked Heather and Jessica they would know. A.T.A. MCGIVNEY : We didn't get a copy of them but Kim put it to the Planning Department to ask them if they were still in effect and the Planning Department said no. So, to say anything other than that, I would have to research or request from Heather and Jessica the actual C&R's. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : You know, even when they're filed with the county unless they're filed in perpetuity which these were not,they expire. MEMBER ACAMPORA:They are filed in perpetuity. It says in these documents that they are filed in perpetuity. I don't understand what Planning CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Let me explain what the issue sorry Pat I didn't mean to interrupt you, go ahead. MEMBER ACAMPORA : I mean I just think that rather than hearing from Planning I'd rather hear something from the county. If they were filed with the county, we should know what the county's process is. A.T.A. MCGIVNEY : But they were imposed by the Planning Department for the subdivision so they have to filed with the county to put everybody on notice. MEMBER ACAMPORA : So, again why wasn't anyone notified about this? I mean we have a lot of homeowners associations throughout the town that have Covenant and Restrictions,are they all going suddenly find out when something comes up that that no longer exists? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Pat, as you know there's a difference between Covenants and Restrictions imposed by a homeowners association which is a civil voluntary matter. You know, you buy a property, you join the homeowners, you abide by the rules the homeowner's association decides that you want for your neighborhood. When a subdivision is created by law through the Planning Department creating the subdivision, approving a subdivision. If the Planning Department files covenants and restrictions, it could be the size of the roads you know February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting it could be different setbacks or lot coverage than what the code allows in the zoning code of the town those then are legal documents filed by a Town Board agency. They have the force of law before the Zoning Board. Homeowners Association, C&R's do not cause one is civil, one is a personal matter, the other is a municipally sanctioned limitation on the establishment of a subdivision.Just so you understand what we're talking about back and forth here. The HMO we understand we've heard from you but there are also in our records from the Planning Department that when the subdivision was established by the Planning Board in 1966 or, something did you say Pat? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Yes CHAIPERSON WEISMAN : They put covenants and restrictions on what could happen in the subdivision so now what we need to look at is, are those still in full force in effect which then we would have to consider in the decision. If they are not in full force and effect then they're nullified, they don't apply.That's what we're looking into. A.T.A. MCGIVNEY : Pat, Kim just showed me the Covenants and they do expire they were set to expire on January of 1982 so as far as homeowners knowing what's going on that's why they're filed. When an attorney or somebody represents a person purchasing a piece of property or building a piece of property, they're filed so that they can go over that at the time that the person purchases or builds. So, if some were to come along now if they were in effect let's say these were in effect from the Planning Department if someone were to come along now and as an attorney, I represented them I would say to them well, they have these covenants and restrictions you have to read them and understand what you're getting yourself into. But these did expire so that's not relevant at this time. Does that help? MEMBER ACAMPORA: Not really because I still feel that it's a responsibility of someone to notify whatever organization it is that they are expiring and what is the process of what they have to do to get them back in place. I mean I just think it might be a town wide issue, I'm not sure. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It probably is. A.T.A. MCGIVNEY : That's why they're filed is that so somebody goes in and does a search and sees what's applicable to the property and how long it's in effect. I'm not following because the way I see it is, if again if I was representing MEMBER ACAMPORA : (inaudible) an attorney if I'm buying a piece of property and it has C&R's that are expired it was the responsibility of the attorney to let me know that those don't exist anymore so you don't have to worry about them? 321 February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting A.T.A. MCGIVNEY : The attorney representing you purchasing the house and they do a title search, yes that's their responsibility. Sometimes they're just listed in the title search and then you have to ask them for an actual copy of them and sometimes they're in the title report but that's really a matter between you and an attorney or even if you're using someone who is not an attorney I don't know that you should be but it's between that person to go over what exactly pertains to the piece of property at the time. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :We're actually going way overtime we have other applications before the Board. MEMBER ACAMPORA: I'm sorry, I'm just not clear about how this process works when you know people think they have Covenants and Restrictions that prevent certain things from happening in the community there. If an attorney of a new buyer doesn't tell the new buyer, oh this is expired how would the rest of the people in the whole community know that? A.T.A. MCGIVNEY : At some point the people in the community had to have done a title search when they bought their pieces of property. MEMBER ACAMPORA : Well if they did it before what was that 1983 or something like that'82? A.T.A. MCGIVENY : These were filed when the subdivision was approved so nobody probably would have bought nobody could have bought one of these parcels until the subdivision was approved. So at that time when the subdivision was approved MEMBER ACAMPORA : I just want to understand to see how it works. DAVID CHIARO : David Chiaro, courtesy copy for the Board of the Covenants and Restrictions 1982 and the one from the county. To clarify, you are telling me that the Covenants and Restrictions are not in effect or our association, is that correct? A.T.A. MCGIVNEY : For your association that are private covenants and restrictions that's between you and the association but the Planning Board the Town of Southold requires the Planning Board to put Covenants and Restrictions on certain pieces of property. This Board can only see if they're still in effect or not, it's not this Board who decides them. As far as the ones that are from your own Homeowner's Association that's an agreement with you and the people who live in the development as to how you want the rules to be moving forward. It's not a governmental decision to have to have those Covenants and Restrictions. We can take all the information that you're giving it's the same one that Kim showed me that expired in 1982 and not the Planning Board's ones not the homeowners? I'd be happy to look at everything and then we can adjourn this. 33 February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting DAVID CHIARO :These are for you. A.T.A. MCGIVNEY : What do you want to do? Do you want to adjourn this and take a look at all this stuff or do you think that you have enough information to CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I think I have enough information, I don't know how do you Board Members what do you want to do? Do you want to adjourn it to the Special Meeting or do you want to just close it? MEMBER LEHNERT : I'm fine in closing it. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I am too. A.T.A. MCGIVNEY : These were submitted already so we do CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :They're in our record. A.T.A. MCGIVNEY : Okay CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I don't know what else we're going to get between now and two weeks. A.T.A. MCGIVNEY: No just to make sure everyone feels satisfied that enough research was done. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Alright, anybody else, anybody on Zoom. Okay motion to close the hearing reserve decision to a later date. Is there a second? MEMBER STEINBUGLER : Second CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye MEMBER STEINBUGLER : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting HEARING#8077—BKM PROPERTIES OF SHOREHAM, INC. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next application before the Board is for BKM Properties of Shoreham, Inc. #8077. This is a request for variances from Article III Section 280-15, Article XXIII Section 280-124 and the Building Inspector's October 21, 2025 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for a permit to construct additions and alterations to a two-family dwelling and legalize an accessory shed at 1)dwelling less than the code required minimum front yard setback of 35 feet, 2) shed less than the code required minimum rear yard setback of 5 feet located at 7600 Main Rd. in East Marion. Would you state your name for the record please? VIC PRUSINOWSKI : My name is Vic Prusinowski 533 Elton St. Riverhead, NY. I represent the property owner. This is a thankfully a de minimus request for a variance. The project started about a year and half ago, this property owner purchased the property.There was a Certificate of Occupancy that was issued in 1990 for a nonconforming two-family dwelling with three accessory buildings that are not allowed to be habitated. The property owner purchased the property, building permits were filed and approved from the Building Department to renovate bring up to code the existing property and it's going to be resold. Since then, the project is completed, we've passed all the inspections but in the final inspection there was a one-foot difference in the rear setback and in the front, what happened was, we had an existing step I call it a little patio, you have pictures of it. What the contractor did because the wood was all rotten he just replaced it all as is, did not affect the scope of the footprint of the building so the setback that was in place the 23 feet for over fifty years never changed but we replaced the material for a safety reason and then Mike in the Building Department says, in the Town of Southold there is a code and you have a thing in the code that says if you replace the wood you still have to go for the ZBA to get the relief on the front yard so that's what we're here. We're here for those two reliefs on the front yard on a pre-existing.This variance will have no negative impact on the character of the neighborhood, in fact this project is a positive to the character of the neighborhood because the buildings were run down over the years, it's been brought up to code. If you went and inspected the property,the project is done the house is up to code, all the inspections were done.The electrical we have a Suffolk County Health Department permit which was part of the building permit application so where we are right now, we're just waiting to get your decision on the variance so then we can complete the process of issuing a C.O. for the property. The material which I sent they replaced it with Trex which is a better material than wood. If we had known about the some of the towns, I do work in all the towns,ten towns most of the towns if you do something like that it's not, we don't have to get them cause it's a pre- existing nonconforming setback but in the Town of Southold you have to and that's why we're here today. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Most of the work is interior in this I take. February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting VIC PRUSINOWSKI : Yes it's all interior, we did not expand any of the scopes.The three sheds in the back are storage strictly, they're not habitable. Like I said, we have the process of the building permit has been finished, we're passed all the inspections we just need this so we can finish to get the C.O. issued for the property. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :Well apparently it was discovered that the shed the rear yard setback is 4 foot 9 inches instead of the required 5 feet. VIC PRUSINOWSKI : Right so we're off by a few inches in the back but that's been that way for fifty years. It's not you know because nobody has looked at it in that long so. MEMBER LEHNERT :The only thing on the deck you replaced was the decking itself none of the structural member? VIC PRUSINOWSKI : No we just took the rotten what happened was, the head of the company Eastern Building showed up, the deck was rotten. He said, well let's just rip up you know so we didn't go outside the footprint or anything like that so that's where we are. If we had known we would have contacted the Building Department and Mike doesn't have a problem with it he just said you have to go to the ZBA because that's the way it's issued in the code. MEMBER STEINBUGLER : Was there any concern that the survey setback disagrees just a little bit from the Notice of Disapproval? VIC PRUSINOWSKI : Well we had the survey we had the property surveyed twice not for the Building Department for a second time for the Zoning Board application so the setbacks that are in the as built survey that we submitted are the actual unless the guy has you know the guy has a license so and he for some reason the in the back which I found you know was only a few inches off I guess it's been that way and I guess when the inspector went back there he must have did a ruler and but then that was confirmed with the second as built survey we got for your application. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Nick MEMBER PLANAMENTO : No questions. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Rob MEMBER LEHNERT : No CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Pat anything from you? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Nothing February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Anyone in the audience? Anybody on Zoom? Motion to close the hearing reserve decision to a later date. Is there a second? MEMBER LEHNERT : Second CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye MEMBER STEINBUGLER : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye we'll have a decision in two weeks. HEARING#8078SE—VINBAR REALTY CORP./VINCENT CLAPS CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next application before the Board is for Vinbar Realty Corp./Vincent Claps #8078SE. Applicant requests a Special Exception under Article III Section 280-13B (13). The applicant is owner of the subject property requesting authorization to construct and establish an accessory apartment in an existing accessory structure located at 2230 Mill Lane in Mattituck. The one thing I want to point out, the apartment is 745 sq. ft. one bedroom on the second floor of the barn. The livable floor area determined by the Building Department is at 795 sq. ft. not 750, 1 don't know why there's a difference. JOAN CHAMBERS : I don't know either but I will redesign the floor plan and carve those square foots out by you know I mean the barn is the size of the barn so the most I can do is just do a void on that right hand side where it connects to the part that's going to stay the barn. I'll just make a bigger void and get it down under 750 and bring in some stamped drawings for that. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay, perfect. JOAN CHAMBERS : There's no reason why it has to you know be larger it's you know it's going to be a one bedroom apartment.This is Dr. Claps's sister is moving in. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :That's what my next question is. 371 February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting JOAN CHAMBERS : He originally planned to have his son move in and his son unfortunately passed away a beautiful young man so I guess the family is kind of regrouping. Dr. Claps has done some great things on that farm, he caught that farm house just before it was garbage and we worked on it and fixed it all up and now he's got the barn and they've got their chickens and their vegetables and it's the family farm it's really nice to see it come back. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Can you submit some documentation of family relationship? JOAN CHAMBERS : Yes I will. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : And the amended plan and JOAN CHAMBERS : The amended plan and a lease with the sister. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay MEMBER STEINBUGLER : Do we need to I mean there's a lot of space on the property but do we need a sketch showing the three parking spaces? JOAN CHAMBERS :There's plenty of parking there that's for sure. (lost the sound) CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : You will be submitting, I just want to put this into the record, cause I think that's that right, we're ready to close subject to receipt. We're going to close this subject to receipt of an amended floor plan showing 750 sq. ft. maximum in conformance, a lease with the sister and a proof of relationship. JOAN CHAMBERS : Will do. What is the amount that the Building Department came up with again? CHAIPRERSON WEISMAN : They came up with 795 sq. ft. maybe you can go in and talk to Mike or something and say what's the issue here? There's a motion before the Board is there a second? MEMBER LEHNERT : Second CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye MEMBER STEINBUGLER : Aye 38 February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye. Motion to recess for lunch. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Second CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye MEMBER STEINBUGLER : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Good afternoon everyone and welcome to the meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals, motion to reconvene. MEMBER STEINBUGLER : Second CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye MEMBER STEINBUGLER : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye HEARING#8079-CHRISTOPHER ROSS,TRUSTEE OF CHRISTOPHER ROSS TRUST CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The first application before the Board this afternoon is for Christopher Ross,Trustee of Christopher Ross Trust#8079.This is a request for variances from Article XXIII Section 280-124, Article XXXVI Section 280-208A and the Building Inspector's October 6, 2025 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for a permit to demolish (by Southold Town Code 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 10 391 February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting feet, 2) less than the code required minimum combined side yard setback of 25 feet, 3) more than the code permitted maximum lot coverage of 20%, 4) the construction exceeds the permitted sky plane as defined by Article I Section 280-4 of the Town Code located at 3340 Park Avenue (adj. to Great Peconic Bay) in- Mattituck. Is there someone here to represent the application? PAT MOORE : Hi everyone. We're here regarding the Ross application, the Trust and as you know from driving by and the pictures we've given you, the house is there. It is for the most part completed from the outside,the project stopped when they were ready to do the finishes on the inside. I would ask respectfully that Appeal 7896 from 2024 be incorporated into this record because it's the same house.The basis of the variances are all they have not changed in fact it's even more compelling in that the house is there. So,the character of the neighborhood that original design and what's been built was purposely kept small within the same footprint of the original structure. Architecturally it's a beautiful little house, it is the one-story original one-story the L portion is the two-story portion and we are here purely because of a demolition by definition which is we think based on where we were in the progress of the job the existing foundation that was under the 1984 portion which is the new portion of the house the original house. In 1984 that addition with building permits and plans was built with cement block foundation when the house as it was proposed as it was shown on the plans and how all the permits showed was raised, lifted that is raised and in order to expose the existing cement block foundation it was discovered that the cement blocks were hollow. They were structurally unsound they were collapsing, there was no rebar so the bottom line is that, the foundation that should have been the most new foundation the most current to code foundation was structurally defective. That's what prompted then I think the ultimate determination of demolition. Rather than go through the area variance standards because again, it is the same house, the same standards and the basis that was the original approval we don't change the character of the neighborhood. There's no feasible alternative at this point the house is there and it's completed. The amount of relief is substantial numerically but it was what was approved originally and what was constructed. As far as the physical and environmental conditions most importantly the sanitary system was replaced, an IA system was constructed it's in the ground. The original sanitary system was in the beach and that was abandoned. So, again, we're rehashing all the same issues that were addressed in the 2024 variance. I'll make my last point after we have North Fork Woodworks Contractor explain the process and what was and he complied with the plans and the ordinance. SCOTT EDGETT : Good afternoon how's everybody? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Good how are you doing? 40 February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting SCOTT EDGETT : Good, good I'm Scott Edgett one of the owners of North Fork Woodworks. Again, if we can look at this site map here and if you don't mind if I can just walk over there and point to something? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : No go right ahead. SCOTT EDGETT: I'm going to refer to this section as the appendage here which they just we just called that an "L" but I'm just going to call that the appendage here. The house is as Pat mentioned exactly as per plan, approved plan.What happened was, when we raised this entire house on the original plan this was all brand-new foundation and this was existing foundation that was about three feet high that was supposed to be extended about thirty inches. When the house was raised in the air, we determined that this was unsatisfactory not only-to put the existing house back down on but of course construct anything new. We would have assumed during the construction of this addition in the eighties that this would have been poured solid with concrete in the blocks, it would have had tie downs, rebar that's kind of what would have been expected. It was unforeseen during inspections prior to beginning this work. Instead of just extending these two walls here instead of extending those up thirty inches all's we did was remove to the footing the existing footing and just poured new walls here and here, this was already happening and this was already happening. During our framing inspection John our Inspector just asked us to send a de minimus letter just so that everything was documented and that's what actually triggered this hearing today.So,as far as demo or anything of that sort, the house itself does maintain exactly how the approved plans are set. The interior walls, the windows, the sistering of all the floor joists and you should have some pictures documenting I do have some today too as well that show that all the floor sheathing and you know most of this is just kind of cut around new windows and stuff but this is all as per approved plan. The only discussion is where I was supposed to raise these two walls thirty inches, we took them down (inaudible) and put the house back down onto the foundation. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Thank you Scott. You say the IA system is already in there? PAT MOORE : It's installed. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : And it's landward? PAT MOORE : It's in the front yard, yes. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I just want to let you know that the reason the de minimus was denied which was May 16, 2024 was because the Board of Appeals believes that there's a big difference between additions and alterations and a total demolition. Now, the problem is the code doesn't define what a total demolition is, it says fifty percent of the dwelling but they don't even clarify whether it's the square footage or the area of the walls or is it the value in 741 February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting which case you need an appraiser to come in and say this is what windows cost for replacement now and doors cost. So,that's one of the things I think I've mentioned it to Pat that I think our code needs to clarify better because a demolition kind of assumes that the existing C.O. or a Pre C.O. goes away it's extinguished and you start with a blank slate. Well, you're not starting with a blank slate in this case but we can't make that distinction or determination. I just wanted the record to reflect the Board's thought process in doing this, it wasn't to be punitive,we knew we were gonna probably see the same darn thing again which is exactly what's going on but we nevertheless had to follow what the law requires us to do. SCOTT EDGETT : If I may just say something else, based on that Leslie which we all appreciate and you know love how our we're growing and there's always growing pains in these things. For the homeowner itself that's I think where it gets tough because they're spending a substantial amount of money saving so much of a house that we're cutting and doing surgery and inserting small pieces. That's why we felt like you know we saved and went through so much expense on the homeowners (inaudible) on the builders to save so much to you know to accommodate the you know some of the variances that they required. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Sure, because there's this pre-existing setbacks and all of that that are very nonconforming that under most scenarios would not be repeated when you know but this is such an unusual lot shape that it's very, very limiting as a building site. The building envelope is very constrained. PAT MOORE : If I could just add one more point with respect to the code because it does in the nonconforming lots with a conforming use, so that's a residence in a nonconforming lot. There is the provision of 280-125 that says, repairs and maintenance and it includes that major structural alterations or demolition necessary in the interest to public safety, that in and of itself when a project is midway and you have a situation like this where you clearly find that what everyone including the building plans and the C.O. would reflect a conforming could comply and foundation and we find what was in fact a very underperforming foundation. The code does give the Building Department, does allow, for what is necessary to demolish and reconstruct for public safety and wouldn't the foundation structural integrity be public safety? I would say that it is. So, it's you know the Building Department and the Zoning Board and I think the town has in the code now the ability to give relief where it's obvious that the project is making every effort and I know the contractors were in constant contact with the Building Department. It was not a rouge project and nobody you know nobody was talking to the Building Department, they went ahead into things without the Building Department involvement at all. That was not the case here and many times on some of our projects that come in for a demo by definition.The project is going through in a regular course and something is found and our code allows for it and we keep forgetting provisions that the code that are in 421 February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting there that would allow for this kind of work. So, every time I read the code, I find something new and that provision was in there and I think we could be a little more flexible and not delay projects for we're up to almost four months that that house has stood there stagnate still and you know and the family hopefully will be ready to reactivate the file soon the construction soon. The family is here, the neighbors are family this house the project everybody wants it to be completed in time before the season because otherwise it does disrupt the rest of the community with the summer. Thank you very much, I appreciate your understanding and any other questions we're here. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Even though it's the same as the prior relief I want to enter into the record what we're looking at here. A side yard setback of 5 inches where the code requires 10 feet, combined side yard setback at 1 foot 7 inches, the code requiring a minimum of 25, lot coverage at 46.5%,the code allows a maximum of 20% and it intrudes into the sky plane. I just want to put that into the record even though we will incorporate the prior and make reference to the prior variance relief that was granted. Another thing that is problematic with all of this is that one of the things we're trying to do is to in support of the comprehensive plan is to preserve the quality of our neighborhoods, the character of those some of them modest homes, and because it's so expensive to try to preserve some of these homes builders will say it's cheaper to tear it down and just do a new one. Again, those are all tradeoffs cause when the code was written it just didn't want you to tear down everything and then start from scratch. PAT MOORE : I would agree that's why the code needs to we need some careful consideration because we've made all these provisions in the code to preserve the size and the character and all of a sudden the project is doing that and now midway, three quarters of the way through the project oh, you've taken one beam more than it was anticipated it's demolition and now everything you've tried and all of the expense which is always more expensive to preserve than it is to demolish and build new it's all hurting the homeowner. This has to be fixed, I'm hoping it gets fixed before the next time I have to come before the Board.Too late for them but CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :You appear with such frequency I would not say I don't know if that's going to happen. I would like to say in my lifetime but PAT MOORE : Very optimistic. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Let's see if there are any questions that the Board may have, Rob? MEMBER LEHNERT : I have no questions. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Nick February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting MEMBER PLANAMENTO : No questions. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Margaret MEMBER STEINBUGLER : No CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Pat MEMBER ACAMPORA : No CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Anybody on Zoom?Anybody in the audience who wants to address the application? Ready to close? Motion to close the hearing reserve decision to a later date. Is there a second? MEMBER LEHNERT : Second CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye MEMBER STEINBUGLER : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye PAT MOORE : If you can message it to the Trustees cause we're at the Trustees and CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : You're going to have to go back before them. PAT MOORE : We did, we've applied but they probably won't put us on until they know that the Board has approved it so if there's a way of communicating that it's CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : We can say that we've heard it and that we will have a decision at the next meeting just to update them on the timing but I can't legally say what the outcome is going to be until we vote on it and you know. February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting HEARING#8082- IRENE VANDERSCHUYT CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next application before the Board is for Irene Vanderschuyt #8082. This is a request for a waiver of merger petition under Article If Section 280-10A to unmerge land identified as SCTM No. 1000-52-5-18 which has merged with SUM No. 1000-52- 5-17 based on the Building Inspector's October 16, 2025 Notice of Disapproval which states that a nonconforming lot shall merge with an adjacent conforming or nonconforming lot held in common ownership with the first lot at any time after July 1, 1983 and that nonconforming lots shall merge until the total lot size conforms to the current bulk schedule requirements (minimum 40,000 sq. ft. in the R40 Residential Zoning District) located at 875 and 975 Bayview Ave. in Greenport. PAT MOORE : Patricia Moore on behalf of the applicants. I'm going to introduce you because this is Irene that's her family and Hutch because by Hutch that's Norman, they have from you can tell from the chain of title they have owned the property a very long time. I sent over an outline to help clarify because when I was going through and filling out your form and I was following the single and separate I think my title company misidentified a John as John A. instead of John J.which made me so confused, I had to call Irene yesterday again and say whose who here because they had John and Christopher at some point where it would have been a grandfather would have owned the property because of the age. So, I went through again, did it nice and simple and hopefully I think this gives you a better outline of the chain of title and the family tree. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : What you've submitted is the opposite of your application in terms of which is the developed lot and which is the undeveloped lot. PAT MOORE : I apologize, I think when I was filling it out I got myself confused on which one was the improved and which was the vacant so when I went back again I was like, let me just double check everything and I had the survey in front of me so that I could identify 18 as the vacant, 17 as the improved. I don't know what happened when 1, 1 think the way the questions go I assume you're you know I don't know what I was doing but anyway that's why I redid and I said alright let me make it nice and clear which is the vacant and which is the improved. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : So, 17 is the improved lot, 18 is the vacant PAT MOORE : 17 is the improved no, no the house is 18 MEMBER STEINBUGLER : No PAT MOORE : Again wrong? February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : You got it wrong. PAT MOORE : Oh my God, I'm losing it. MEMBER STEINBUGLER : The tax bill is pretty clear, 18 is residential vacant land and 17 says seasonal residence. PAT MOORE : Okay, I apologize clearly senior moments are creeping up sooner than I thought. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Alright, well the most important thing is the narrative history, both lots were owned by co-owned right in both names. However, when you look at the title chain, they were all relatives right? PAT MOORE : They are all family, yea correct. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : That gets you to first base, you qualify for the waiver. PAT MOORE : So, thereafter you're familiar with Bay Ave. I'm very familiar I've lived north of that. This is a subdivision from the thirties but in fact these two lots are the larger lots in the subdivision. Many of the lots here on both sides of the road are 50 X 200. The larger lots are this size and there aren't that many of the larger lots. In a few instances I've had clients that have bought two lots, demolished the historic homes that were there and built a humongous so some of the houses that you see on that block they're some of the bigger houses, very impressive homes. They have in fact changed the character of the neighborhood because by creating two combined lots they're able to build much larger homes with a great deal of 400 feet of waterfront at that point, excuse me 200 feet of waterfront. In this case the family has kept the two lots separately, we went and got the house was originally built by your father yes and they used the Grumman crates that Grumman would use during the war would ship things in wood crates. If you were to have a chance to go inside the house, everything is still of the wood from the wood crates that was used for the shipping of parts to Grumman. The Building Inspector and I we went through and did the Pre-C.O. inspection cause it dates back without a Pre-C.O. He still considered it a seasonal dwelling because just the age of the house and the amount of insulation of lack of insulation he's still considering it a seasonal house even though the house has heat but realistically it's you know it's not good at this time of year it's generally not used. I've also given you the background here where the family had anticipated building on the vacant lot a little cape not very large and right before COVID then COVID hit and Hutch nearly died during COVID. Fortunately, he's here, he survived than goodness. The plan is still there, they have one and only son who works out here in the summer time now works at the Long Island Welcome Center on the Long Island Expressway. He's a lovely young man but he has some developmental disabilities so realistically this is his home and the goal here is to continue to have the family live on the property and be able to live out their life on the property. February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting Again, this merger came complete sudden surprise because they've always received separate tax bills, the lots have been treated separately, there was a plan to build on it and I unfortunately had to give them the information as far as the merging of the property. If you want us to review anything further regarding the lot, the only thing that is slightly if there's a slight encroachment of the shed you see it on the property line?The shed was originally from the seventies, it was a metal shed and if you still look under well you can't now because it's covered in snow but under that shed is the slab for the original metal shed that once it rotted out it was replaced with one of the wood shed the prefab wood sheds.When we were out with John, he said Well, you either need a variance or we'd have to move it in any case cause it's right on for purposes of this variance my guess is you generally try to correct whatever encroachments there might be. He's prepared to move it;we'll move it to a conforming location so most likely it would be moved into the front yard otherwise I have to get Trustee approval to move it to the back yard but no matter what that shed it's a simple pick up and move to a conforming yard at some point. The other structures all pre-date, they're all pre '77 so the house parcel has a bulkhead, the vacant lot has a little bit of a bulkhead and a rock revetment. All of these marine structures pre-date they were from the sixties and they have been maintained. The property is it's in perfectly good condition and does not experience flooding, it is high and dry, it is protected and it's identical to all the other lots that are either smaller or of equal size on Bayview. I do have just comments on the LWRP, the LWRP talks about inconsistency but I would disagree.This is the legislative intent here is the waiver of merger to give families that were merger occurred particularly when the family owned the property. Quite frankly I think it's exempt from LWRP but even if it wasn't it is fulfilling a legislative purpose which is,to protect homeowners that where properties have merged after it's been owned by the same family for many times generations, in this case certainly generations. As far as fostering a pattern of development,this 1933 subdivision and Bayview is fully developed.There are homes of equal, similar size, similar lots all along Bayview. Bayview for the most part is I would say primarily a seasonal community, some year-round residents but most of the homes on Bayview are second homes or seasonal homes. It is consistent the reestablishment of these lots are consistent with the LWRP. Any other questions that you might have? MEMBER STEINBUGLER : I have a couple, when I did my site inspection I did trapes around and what I want to explore is, your point that the properties the two parcels have been treated separate,the split rail fence spans both properties and makes it look like they are one large lot. The protection of the shrubbery on both parcels is of a similar nature, it looks like there is some netting or fencing to try to keep maybe the deer nibbling down and if I look on the survey the concrete block wall that is between the home the seasonal residence and the Arshomamoque Harbor extends past the property line which suggests that you know they were treated as a single lot and it seems like the encroachment of the shed the fact that it straddles the property 47 February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting line also suggests that the parcels were treated as one. What evidence is there besides the tax bills what is the evidence that they have been treated single and separate? PAT MOORE : Let me start with the spilt rail fence,this is a seasonal community; Hutch tells me that in particular a couple of prior owner generations of kids would oftentimes trespass and head to the water and smoke and drink by the water and so ultimately you said, I put up a fence to keep the kids out and obviously they controlled they owned both properties so you want to control most people don't put a fence between two properties that doesn't make sense we've had lots of applications for a waiver of merger where it's been again, fenced in you fence the perimeter of the control of any land that you might have so that you keep the outsiders away not insiders in. The split rail fence has been there for yea why don't you come up because you can address NORMAN VANDERSCHUYT : Thank you for hearing this. It's a summer residence and I live in Huntington with my wife and my son and we come out here on the weekends as much as we possibly can and work and school allow. What happens when we it used to be very heavily with shrubs and what not and the kids would come down there and they would drink beer and have parties down on the beach and one time they had a fire down there and it got out of control and we just felt we had to do something. This is the third generation fence we've always had something and we had I built it myself just to keep the kids out and that rotted away and now I have what I have now. It's a less intrusive fence that I could possibly think of the split rail and it's really just really and we cut the lot back and planted grass just to make it more exposed and number two to keep the bugs out the ferocious but that's the history of the fence. I mean it's just there wasn't PAT MOORE : Yea I think he had mentioned to me the vacant lot had some mature trees on it previously and they were destroyed by a lightning storm or had some damage to the lot. NORMAN VANDERSCHUYT : We had some gigantic maple trees beautiful but they ran their life and one was literally destroyed by lightning it just split it right in half and the other one, two, three of them just died from just old age and but essentially the lot has never been touched. The over incringement there was just bad measurement I don't know what happened there. PAT MOORE : Also I would point out that the bulkhead was installed thereby by uncle and your father NORMAN VANDERSCHUYT :That was way, way back. PAT MOORE :Yea and he owned not only these pieces but I think that the bulkhead also carries on in other directions as well no not on the other side? Okay, I stand corrected. 8 February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting NORMAN VANDERSCHUYT : All the other bulkheads were done individually by the property owners but this the concrete blocks that was done when Jay was a kid he was eighteen. IRENE VANDERSCHUYT : It was done in the sixties. PAT MOORE : So all of this is normal maintenance that you do for any property that you might own. Also, keep in mind as far as the chain of title, the vacant lot was actually purchased first, they had intended to build their home on that property.Then they coddled together the money because the other the house parcel your family was leaving for Kansas, I think they were relocating to Kansas. NORMAN VANDERSCHUYT:Jay was in the army and he got an offer for a job out there and they just got up and left and he said let's go so the whole family left and we bought the house and the lot and we were broke I mean it was not easy. IRENE VANDERSCHUYT : (inaudible) were even merged (inaudible) CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : If you're going to add to the testimony you have to speak into the mic NATHAN VANDERSCHUYT: In 1983 the law came into effect I guess it was July 1st and we bought that property in September and they would never have sold this knowing it was merged. IRENE VANDERSCHUYT : My dad didn't know it was merged. NATHAN VANDERSCHUYT : I didn't know what the difference anyway I just I'm too busy doing a hustle trying to pay for everything. IRENE VANDERSCHUYT : We were working at that time. MEMBER STEINBUGLER : I'm sorry I have a question Pat, I think you said that perhaps that one of the Vanderschuyt's mentioned that the vacant parcel was purchased first but I think this information says that the parcel with the house the seasonal residence was purchased in October of 1983 and the vacant lot was purchased in September of 1984 almost a year later IRENE VANDERSCHUYT : It was'83. PAT MOORE : It's possible that I had them the vacant lot being 17 and the house being 18 so I'm going to have to go back A.T.A. MCGIVNEY : You should have eminent also. PAT MOORE : I can pull the single and separate. 491 February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting NATHAN VANDERSCHUYT : The same bologna but a different role it's just the you know I don't remember. PAT MOORE : One came before the other yes. MEMBER STEINBUGLER : That's clear. I did want to ask about the you know the idea that no one understood that the lots had merged, I wonder maybe this is a question for the Vanderschuyt's but were you represented by an attorney for the purchase of the second parcel? IRENE VANDERSCHUYT : Yeah CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : But that was purchased prior to the merger law. MEMBER STEINBUGLER : The merger law took effect I think July of 1983 and both purchases were after July of 1983. PAT MOORE : Here's the interesting fact of the merger law is that up zoning alone does not cause merger it has to be in the code that the lots merge. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Common ownership. PAT MOORE : I don't recall the date that the code actually said that if you own two lots in the same name that it merges. There's a period of time there in the early eighties where the code was,they were debating what to do and in some subdivisions were grandfathered because they were on the exempt list and other lots were not on the exempt list and then the merger as a matter of case law it's that you don't have an automatic merger when there's up zoning, you have to have a code that says, the fact that you've got two in the same name they merge. So, the eighties was a bit of a blur of when in fact they came up with the merger law and the code retroactively decided that the date was the July'83 date but if you go back to the code of that year it's not clear that it automatically caused the merger just by the sheer fact that you may own the two properties in the same name. So, I'm going by what the code says which is saying that July being that the magic date but ultimately the waiver of merger law was adopted because there were so many situations like theirs where parcels were purchased, they were inherited,there were lots of situations where people did not know that they had merged. MEMBER STEINBUGLER : Sure, you know I didn't have the benefit of being here and understanding all the discussions and propositions in the early eighties but reading the code as it stands now it seemed clear to me that it took effect July of 1983. Both of these parcels were purchased after that and held by the same owners and it occurred to me that if legal counsel were representing them through the purchase of either or both parcels that counsel would have been privy February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting to what was being done in the town and would have advised that there was a possibility that the parcels would be merged. PAT MOORE : In theory, maybe but in practice that's why the waiver of merger law was adopted because that was not the case. The only people out here cause I was in the eighties, were those that were you know the Nickels,some of the lawyers and I even worked for Rudy Bruer and the theory was, you could put it didn't matter, let's say if you had if he had used his middle initial on one parcel and no middle initial on the other then they were not in the same that was considered CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Checkerboarding. PAT MOORE : All kinds of things were being done to preserve the single and separate based on the understanding of what the code said at the time. We're kind of retroactively applying today's rules to what was being done in the eighties but I have to tell you, there would be no need for the waiver of merger law and it's been on the books for a while and it's been tweaked over the years for equity. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :Well merger upon death was eliminated because many couples Margaret just so you know, many couples who tried to what we call checkerboard put one lot in the husband's name the other in the wife's name and then of course they're going with if one of them passes the other one is going to inherit then they suddenly wind up in the same name and automatically merge.That law was changed to eliminate merger by death which is unfair. PAT MOORE : We had other cases where we came to the Board because a family had inherited a property and there was no knowledge that the lots had merged because of whatever ownership prior ownership might have taken place so people were splitting up an estate where a brother would get a hundred thousand and the sister would get the lot and all of sudden you find out that the lot is not buildable. There's been a lot of history on waiver of merger and his first reaction was, she's my wife what other name would I put on this property? If something happened to me,what do I do, it should go to my wife. IRENE VANDERSCHUYT : It's like we're being punished for being married. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :Well look, like many laws that were put in place for good reason there are consequences that weren't contemplated that can appear over time to produce unfair or inequitable results and it gets changes as a result. This stuff is always a work in progress always and you know it's there NORMAN VANDERSCHUYT : The whole street there it's fascinating all the different types of houses how they evolved over the years.When a stencil was put down, I mean it was in theory well this is how it should work but only get the personalities involved and all the stories' people have a 50 X 200 lot and then the house it's all house. Right next door just a little tiny summer place. IRENE VANDERSCHUYT :That would have had been merged too. February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay well, let's get back to your particular property, we've had a nice philosophical conversation. PAT MOORE : As I said,the family has owned this since the sixties,the improvements to the property have been done since the sixties when the parcels there was no question that they were separate there was no merger law it was pre-zoning and the improvements have remained so you know bulkhead where it is and how it carries over and it goes a little bit beyond which is probably a good thing because you generally extend a bulkhead. Today you do a return but, in those days, you do an extension so it wouldn't erode and then you go beyond that and there's rock revetment. This and a couple of others on Bayview are fortunate that they have these old cement bulkheads that are protecting the waterfront. That's a valuable asset and it's no reflection on the fact that it's they're two separate properties these improvements were made and have continued. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay let me see if the Board has any questions, Rob anything? MEMBER LEHNERT: No questions. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Nick MEMBER PLANAMENTO I was going to ask both what Margaret just asked relative to the continuation of the fencing and the bulkhead which would imply one lot.The vacant lot has the viewing platform so how is that independent of the house? PAT MOORE : That's a little the one that is it's not really it's for your son waterskies it's a waterski platform that little wood area? NATHAN VANDERSCHUYT : Right, I guess you know way back when she was a little girl they'd come out and there was a path that went down there and it just it was the water down in front of the house is very shallow and then it drops off a little bit deeper like by one foot and that made it better to have a boat land a boat and get the old folks down the beach and into the boat that's really what happened down there. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : But then that supports the fact that the two lots were being used as one. PAT MOORE : No it supports the fact that the same family owned these two properties and they owned further down I mean it was just an access point.You're assuming things that the lots were treated and believed to be a double sized lot. If that were the case then the house would have been right in the middle and accessory structures would have built beyond that but this really the house is the important thing and it sits properly in the middle of that one lot and all of these ancillary platforms and beach things are temporary original from the sixties. MEMBER STEINBUGLER :The house was built in the fifties? PAT MOORE : Oh,earlier. February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting MEMBER STEINBUGLER : Forties?So, I don't think the house being located where it is, is pertinent to the lots being treated as separate.They would not have been PAT MOORE : Even in the forties if you own a piece of property that's double wide you would put your house in the middle of that double wide, you're not going to shift it all the way in the middle of what would be one lot. A.T.A. MCGIVNEY: Not if you thought that you might sell it off some day,so I think that you're assuming that the people would put it in the center. NATHAN VANDERSCHUYT: My father and my uncle A.T.A. MCGIVNEY: I'm just saying that's your assumption too. CHAIRPERSON WEISAMAN :Wait,wait,wait this Board has ample precedent because a lot of people knew they owned the two lots next to each other,didn't know about it being merged for one reason or another and that is a valid statement because this town never informed the public in any way. They continued to give them separate property tax you know references as though they were separate lots. There were a lot of things alright I think an ad was probably put in the Suffolk Times which may or may have not been read by somebody. The point is, many of those lots that were adjacent that were not developed with structures were (inaudible)there was grass put down,the grass was mowed the whole thing had a cyclone fence around it to keep kids from playing in this empty lot,occasionally they put up a jungle gym for kids to play on. We have actually had problems with lots that were adjacent that had major accessory structures like swimming pools put on them or garages but the fact that somebody put a picnic table on a lot they thought they owned next door you know cause they want to use the space this Board has not considered that enough development to say that that's a basis for denying a waiver of merger. How many have we seen over many years you know, a lot. Many with sheds on you know stuff like that so or encroaching because nobody knew exactly where the property line was which is the case here. That's the history of this, it's been a complicated law from its inception. That's just to give you some background on this whole whether it's developed or not. I mean at first,we required,okay, if there were trees on it we don't want a single tree cut down that's it. That means it's undeveloped you haven't touched it it's just that's it.Then was development was defined as evolved over time to where okay if you want to put up a picnic table and a shed on it that's not supposed to happen but so remove it you know what I'm saying. We have to be reasonable here too you know in terms of how the code should be interpreted. To me the most important thing is, what is the character of the neighborhood, what is the subdivision look like, does the lot size qualify to be comparable to others, is it a buildable lot?All of those types of things which are in the standards and the most important thing is chain of title. If it hasn't transferred out of family ownership. Now as soon as we get the correction as to which is the developed and which is the undeveloped lot PAT MOORE : I'll have to look at it a fourth time, it's driving me crazy. My single and separate maybe switched things around I don't know. .53 February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :You need a lawyer Pat. PAT MOORE : I have to have the survey next to me because the single and separate was so confusing. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :Alright, is there anybody on Zoom who wants to say anything about this? Can we move on? PAT MOORE :Any other questions? CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Motion to close the hearing reserve decision to a later date. Is there a second? MEMBER LEHNERT :Second CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye MEMBER STEINBUGLER : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye,the motion carries. PAT MOORE : With the correction of which is the vacant lot and which is the developed? MEMBER LEHNERT : Yes, please thank you. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Thank you for your patience. HEARING#8080—GREGORY PITARO and PENELOPE CHRISTOPHOROU CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next application is for Gregory Pitaro and Penelope Christophorou #8080. This is a request for a variance from Article XXII Section 280-105B and the Building Inspector's October 31, 2025 Notice of Disapproval based on an application for a permit to construct a padel court (accessory to a single-family dwelling) having proposed court walls ten (10) feet in height, at 1) walls are more than the code permitted maximum six and one half (6-1/2) feet in height when located in the side and rear yards located at 2465 Wunneweta Rd. in Cutchogue. 541 February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting CHIS RIVERA : Good afternoon, Chris Rivera on behalf of Gregory Pitaro and Penelope Christophorou. If Donna could put the picture of the padel court it maybe just a little bit easier to that's it right there,thank you.The actual padel court which is the blue area there the playing surface is 33 feet wide by, 66 feet long. The actual glass which is the corner piece right there where's she's pointing to in the back wall, that is 13 feet wide by 10 feet high. Of course, the other (inaudible) 33 foot by 10 feet high the wire mesh that you see above that, that 3 foot that's kind of an optional piece that you can have on the court. The actual playing is based on the walls the ten (10)foot walls. The surface of the court which is the 33 X 66 is composed of a ten-inch compact gravel with a half inch porous asphalt then covered by Astro turf and in this case, they'll probably use the green Astro turf. Built into the court system is two and a half- perforated pipe connected to a drainage crack that we're going we already dropped eight-foot dry wells for the garage as well as for the padel court by the garage for this to drain into the dry wells there. That whitish cement looking border around the padel court is actually just a two- inch slab to keep the padel court secure with the gravel except for any asphalt and that will be covered with crushed blue stone and with probably blue stone slabs as stepping stones and what not. I also included in the package landscape design that was MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I'm sorry to interrupt, the image that we're looking at that Donna had up, is that a stock image or is that the proposed? CHRIS RIVERA : That's the proposed, you can have all glass wall I mean it really depends on MEMBER PLANAMENTO : What I was getting after was more of the setting cause there's a house that's substantially different from CHRIS RIVERA : That's just off the internet the picture is off the internet actually. This is the padel court that they are proposing to build on their property. MEMBER STEINBUGLER : Is the proposal to include those mesh extensions? CHRIS RIVERA : No, no. MEMBER STEINBUGLER : Does the proposal include lighting? CHRIS RIVERA : No, no lighting. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : This is at grade? CHRIS RIVERA : Yes CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Because we have plans submitted that were below grade and I'm saying, wait a minute. February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting CHRIS RIVERA : Originally in order to avoid coming to the ZBA we were going to sink the padel court and only have a 6% foot fence, drop it. Two of the building inspectors said that was fine but then it was vetoed by Mike who said no you have to go the ZBA he wouldn't allow it to be sunken for whatever reason. Then we went to grade and that was what brought us here. It's actually we're here for the fence, apparently you can put a tennis court or a padel court or racquet ball court but it's the fence that obviously brings you to this MEMBER PLANAMENTO :One moment, Leslie this goes backto tennis courts and zoning update that you're allowed a tennis court there for fencing should also be included. CHRIS RIVERA : Yea it should be, it would avoid a lot of(inaudible) problems and delays coming to you folks. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I think the idea was that in the maximum fence height on residential properties is 6%feet so the idea was you can put it, at first it was just in the back yard now it's side yards as well as back yard and then we had the deer fencing at eight feet, that's a whole other story and then people started to decide to do what you originally decided which is well, let's just put it below grade and then the height from grade will not require a variance because we'll make it only 6 foot above grade or something. Then that produced a whole bunch of drainage problems, plus the code really never anticipated doing an end run around the code by dropping things into the ground so here we go. We get to deal with all of the issues that arise. CHRIS RIVERA : It would have been cost prohibitive to drop this below grade. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Of course, I would have thought so. CHRIS RIVERA : It actually blew me away when I got the proposal. Just the cement work, retaining walls was over sixty thousand dollars in cement work and whatever. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : So, we're looking at no lighting. CHIRS RIVERA : No lighting. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Plans at grade and the top of the fence at the highest feet is 10 feet. CHRIS RIVERA : Ten feet, two inches. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Ten feet, two inches, these are the glass walls. Now, why does this particular sport required a ten foot high fence? CHRIS RIVERA : It's very similar to I have to call it between a racquet ball and a tennis it's played with a reduced sized tennis ball. It's a rubber ball but it has less pressure and smaller than a tennis ball which allows it to be less noisy for one thing and a little bit slower and it's played February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting with a similar to a pickle ball court racket it has holes in it. I have pictures of it if you'd like to see it. It's played off the walls basically and that's why it has to CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Like a handball court. CHRIS RIVERA : Yes like a CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Squash or anything like that. CHRIS RIVERA : Yes, any of those. What's interesting is that the glass actually muffles the sound more than if it was like a wooden wall whatever or a cement wall. It's rather quick I don't know if you've ever watched it on a video or something it is much, much faster than any tennis game and probably faster than even a pickle ball court these days. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well, what about the impact of noise on neighbors? I mean you've got some landscape screening proposed around it? CHRIS RIVERA : Yes CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : on the side and rear yards? CHRIS RIVERA : Yea and where you see all the landscaping by the padel court on the right hand side that's basically an empty lot there and then in the back of the court there's a I think there's an old fence it's either six or eight feet high of a stockade fence. David from Creative Environmental Design, we have there twenty green giant's arborvitae green giants and five cryptomerias and both of them are extremely fast growing and the green giants grow there's twenty of those and those are the white open circles they grow between three and five feet a year.The cryptomeria can actually reach fifty to eighty feet. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It's also very wide, green giants are more conical. CHRIS RIVERA : Yes, they can go as and you can actually trim them both that way but the cryptomeria is like unbelievable. I was reading online that I could be you know come to thirty feet wide at some places. As I said, they grow three to five feet a year so they will be pretty much camouflaging everything there. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay. MEMBER STEINBUGLER : Did you bring any examples of variances for fences over six feet in the neighborhood? CHRIS RIVERA : I didn't bring them but they are definitely there. If you go down Nassau Point Rd. on the left-hand side there's a tennis court right on Nassau Point Rd. with a ten-foot-high February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting fence.That's what you need for any tennis court whether it's on an acre of land it's just mainly to keep the balls within the court. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Unless you like to lob a lot. CHRIS RIVERA: It's interesting in this part which I don't know is that you actually where the two openings are on the side, you're actually if the ball goes out of the court you can actually go outside the court and hit it back into the court but you have to be a real professional to do that. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It's called a tweener in tennis. MEMBER STEINBUGLER : I had a question about the garage, is the second floor habitable space? CHRIS RIVERA : No, it's still under construction right now. No, it's not habitable space. MEMBER STEINBUGLER : There's stairs leading up to the second level. CHRIS RIVERA : There are stairs yea it's just going to be storage. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay, there's no one in the audience to address the application, is there anybody on Zoom?Anything else from the Board? Motion to close the hearing MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Do we want to ask Chris to get the actual variances, the examples of those tennis courts or CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I don't need them. I mean we MEMBER PLANAMENTO : I think it goes hand and hand, it's the character of CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I mean CHRIS RIVERA : You granted a tennis court you had to grant a fence. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yea, okay motion to close the hearing reserve decision to a later date. Is there a second? MEMBER STEINBUGLER : Second CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting MEMBER STEINBUGLER : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye. Nice to see you again. We have a couple of resolutions here to do. Resolution for the next Regular Meeting with Public Hearings to be held Thursday, March 5, 2026 at 9:00 AM, so moved. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Second CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye MEMBER STEINBUGLER : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye. Resolution to approve the Minutes from the Special Meeting held January 22, 2026 so moved. MEMBER LEHNERT : Second CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye MEMBER STEINBUGLER : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye. Resolution to grant a one-year extension to #7860 Mark Riesenfeld 800 Village Lane Orient SCTM No. 1000-25-1-15 to expire on June 16, 2027 so moved. MEMBER STEINBUGLER : Second CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye 59 February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting MEMBER STEINBUGLER : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN :Aye. Resolution to grant an extension to#7561 Christopher and Amy Astley 480/320 North View Drive Orient SUM 1000-13-1-6 to expired on November 18, 2024, project built beyond permitted scope. Do you want to put a time frame on this, it's not on the resolution? Do you want to do it for a year? BOARD ASSISTANT : I believe that you can probably do it to like November 2027 1 believe it is. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Oh yea because'24, '25' 26 when would it be BOARD ASSISTANT : It would be the end of six years. CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay, lets do that.So,to expire you want to say what November 30? BOARD ASSISTANT : Keep the same date as CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : November 18, 2027. BOARD ASSISTANT : We'll look at the records just to make sure. MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Second CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye MEMBER STEINBUGLER : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye. I'm going to make a motion to close the public hearings and to adjourn, is there a second? MEMBER STEINBUGLER : Second CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor? MEMBER ACAMPORA : Aye MEMBER LEHNERT : Aye MEMBER PLANAMENTO : Aye 60 February 5, 2026 Regular Meeting MEMBER STEINBUGLER : Aye CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye 63. February 5, 2026 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 : February 19, 2026