East Hampton Town ZBA Regular Meeting 04/28/2026

001All right, good evening East Hampton Town ZBA. Uh, we're live on channel 22. We're streaming to YouTube. Phone lines are open. The meeting is being recorded. You may begin. Thank you. I'd like to welcome everyone to the East Hampton Town Zoning Board of Appeals meeting of April 28th, 2026. Before we begin, unfortunately, we've had a very serious car accident out here today and I'm praying for all the people that were involved in it, but it is why we only have three people on the dais two of our board members are trying to get here. They're literally stuck in traffic on the Montauk Highway. So, because [snorts] of that, we're going to start with the second hearing and hold off for the first one, which is being represented by one of our Montauk members, but they

002are expected to be here. So, we're just going to have to wing it. The first public hearing that we're going to hear tonight is Marion La Due 83 Cliff Road, Amagansett, Suffolk County Tax Map number 300-174-2-6. The description is to construct a 1,083 square feet of first and second story additions, 588 square foot attached garage, driveway, and an IA sanitary system on a lot containing dune land and beach vegetation. The relief sought is a natural resource special permit pursuant to 255-420 of the East Hampton Town Code. The zoning district is B residence X flood zone. 2% .2% annual chance flood hazard area secret class is type two. Counsel, do we have a proper affidavit of service and posting? Uh, yes, I reviewed the affidavits and everything seems to be in order and the board has

003jurisdiction over this hearing. Thank you. Member Maring, do we have a field inspection? Yes, we do. Thank you very much. >> [clears throat] >> So, um, I went as as we know that this was scheduled for a prior hearing. I went today or I went yesterday to double check that the um, there was a updated posting, which there was. It's the correct date and time. It's on a telephone pole. Um, uh, up it's up a little high, but it's posted. Next slide. Okay. Um, is it in order? Is this the Oh, I think I think okay. So, uh, my back is to the house that we're going to be talking about. I'm I think I'm looking across the road um, at uh, one of the houses right across the street. You know, Cliff Road, I

004think everyone is aware um, has some topography to it and there's a lot of um, dune land and dune like uh, setting um, on both sides of the road. Next slide. Okay. So, now I'm just getting a little bit more shot of the neighborhood. That's the you can see the telephone pole with the posting. The house that we'll be talking about is to the right of that. Of course, I'll get closer and then just a shot of the house directly to the uh, west next door. Next slide. Okay. So, now I'm approaching um, the house on this property. Um, this is the existing driveway. Um, you can follow along on the survey. This is the existing driveway leading up to the house. Um, this driveway, I guess will eventually be >> [snorts] >> um, is

005proposed to be revegetated because they're going to do a driveway on the other side of the property. Um, and I'm looking up at the house. You can see the low decking that's around the pool deck and area. That's not really in question. However, there will there's a proposed 600 square foot garage that um, I'll show you the position better that will be just to the right of that um, pool decking um, and will come in front of the existing front facade of the house for most of it. Next slide. Um, all right. So, I'm just moving a little bit to the east. Again, that's the pool decking there. You can see the front facade >> [snorts] >> of the house. Um, this area where there's vegetation here is mixed. It's some dune land, but it's

006a lot of Miscanthus and I think some other um, maybe invasives or not natives. Um, but there is sandy dune land and topography here. Um, and again, getting a little bit easier to see where the garage is planned for. It would stick out come it would come forward of that pool deck um, and then uh, go about 3/4 of a way across the front facade. Next slide. Um, again, I've moved a little further east um, and you can see some of the vegetation semi-screen from the road, but not not totally. I'm going to go behind that cloth area up onto the property. Next slide. Okay. This is sort of what the property starts to look like. It does start to slope up. Um, various vegetation there. Again, looking um, up towards where the garage is

007proposed to be and then I'm going to move start to move around the um, east side of the house because there's a proposed second story area that's going to go there. Um, so and the I think part of the septic system. Next slide. Uh, again, more just looking at the condition of the property on the east side um, and areas that will be cleared for septic and and also for more additions. Um, next slide. Okay. So, now I'm really wrapping around. Kind of going up the hill. This is the current eastern facade of the house. Um, as [snorts] you can see from the when we look at the survey, there's a proposed one story addition that is going to consume or you know, extend most of this facade out and then it's that that's going

008to wrap around to an additional um, proposed two story um, addition in the back of the house. So, um, next slide. Just a this is a straight on view of that east facade that will have the uh, first story addition on it. You can see this area it's in the cam. It's in the discussion. A lot of this property has been cleared and um, basically sort of lawn grass um, here. There are some mature trees, which I would imagine um, would be in the footprint of where uh, these additions are going to be. Next slide. I'm heading towards the back of the house. Um, so you can start to see um, the corner. This is the um, east uh, north corner of the house that I'm getting to. Again, cleared very cleared. There's a set

009of steps that's going to take us down because the property starts to swoop down um, as you get to the back. Next slide. Um, so yeah, now you can see I'm coming down. I'm really looking at the part of the back of the house. Again, there'll be two story addition um, around this part of the house. Um, cleared mostly back here. Um, next slide. Um, oh, I think I just turned my back. I'm looking up now from kind of the deep the lowest point on the rear. This property um, swoops up to um, Montauk Highway. Um, and you can actually probably see the the [clears throat] uh, railing um, there. Um, and well, you can't hear the traffic in the in this light. Next slide. Okay. Um, my back now is to that uh, uh,

010Montauk Highway and this is a full on of the current back of the house, which um, I guess will be um, I'm not really clear if this is being demolished and then a whole new second story addition or exactly what what's happening. We'll talk about it. Next slide. And then I'm just looking west. I showed you the next door neighbor's house from the road. Um, the next door neighbor has I think a pool and a deck pool deck that extends um, you know, towards the rear. Again, a lot of clearing on this property. I couldn't get around that side of the house. It's not really in play much in this application because there was a fence and there's the big decking for the pool. So, I didn't go around that side. I think that might

011be is that the last one? Oh, just more about like kind of the conditions on the back. A lot of clearing. There's some accessory structures and and such um, towards the rear. Thank you, Member Maring. I think that's it, right? Yeah. Thank you. Is there someone here to speak on behalf of the application? Um, if you're an attorney, are you an attorney? Frankly not. Okay, then I'll have to swear you in and state your name for the record. David Bear Jack Architects, Sag Harbor, New York City. Do you affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth? Thank you. You can proceed. Um, great photographs. It's great to photograph this time of year. Um, it's a complex uh addition at the rear. It's actually going to be a split level. We're going to

012drop it down a whole half floor, so it's not carrying on all the way out at the back. Um, that uh structure at the back is pretty higgledy-piggledy. We're going to take it be taking that down and basically replacing that structure with a master bedroom suite on two levels. A master bedroom suite underneath at the same thing, but we're dropping it down half a level. So, the topography that falls to the north down into the swale will be that's how we're going to accommodate that. And as you said, on the eastern side we're putting in a new AI system that's already got uh Suffolk County Health Department Yeah, preliminary approval for. And um just for the record, I was involved with this house 20 years ago um for the previous owner, and so I was

013very familiar with it and till and then it got sold and then the new owner didn't reach out to me until they realized they wanted to do something. And then they realized they Whoops, um our kids and our play set is you know, taking over the backyard a little bit. So, they understand uh what the uh lay of the land is now and what we have to do to mitigate any um any of this that's been done since then. And um basically taking your advice and on how we move forward. Um Does the board have any questions? Yes, a few. Um the So, um I don't know if you've uh had a chance to read the technical analysis memo for the application, but you know, one of the questions um is how um So, a

014lot of uh land has been cleared on this property without the natural resources special permit, taking out what was I think do protected dune land and and things like that. So, I know we'll hear from the planner in a bit, but um what is the um you know, how how is remediation going to be fully addressed in this application? >> you feel is correct and the and the guidelines for natural resources special permit. You know, I realize that the grass grew more than they should have and they're just going to try and um take it back to proper dune environment. So, you would not be opposed to us wanting you to restore the beach vegetation and the dune land. No, not at all. I mean, yeah. >> Now, my question is in 2008, there was

015an administrative NRSP that required um turf lawn sod and ornamental vegetation being prohibited. There's a little bit of a question as to whether or not that would those CNR's were ever filed with this with the clerk in Suffolk County. Do you Do you know the status of that? >> myself. That was done for the previous owner and that was put into the deed and then then the new owner bought it and didn't really pay attention to the fine print. Oh, okay. But they have been filed with the clerk. They're the CNR's have been filed. >> 2008 Yes. Administrative permit. Okay, thank you. >> now follow through to to keep it in compliance is fine. So, how would you go about um putting together a methodology to naturalize the property or you're just going to leave

016it you leave it up to us or maybe we'll have the planner address that when she gets up. How you can go about that. Really as you have you want it. You know, basically to to put the AI system in, we're going to have to do some serious digging and new foundation and whatever. And then once that all that you know, soil and dirt on the side is put back into the topography we want and then we will just plant out um whatever is appropriate and whatever the board requires. So then maybe we'll see what our planner has recommended and you can address it when she's done speaking. And then just along the along those lines of So, um can you talk more about what's going to happen to the topography really on the on

017the front and the side of the lot. So, you know, cuz it the the the dune itself, what's the structure of it, right? It's sloping up um and it undulates on the east side of the house. Um obviously you're going to put in a septic system. You're proposing a large garage at the front. So, how what is the grading going to look like? Trying to keep it as much the same as it is. There I do have a drawing and I think it was submitted there on the on the early applications a cross section looking from east that showed the elevations of the AI system relative to the building. I can pull it up if you want. And that basically follows the existing topography. Um there's probably about 9 in where we have to bring

018it up just a little bit on one of the expansion tanks, but you know, I think we've fitted in there okay without doing anything serious. So, you know, the driveway is basically going to be that angle of the existing dune and the garage will be sitting there up to the 20-ft setback front yard setback and then basically that topography from the street will be back to what it was. Thank you. So, I think we're ready to hear I'd like to hear from the planning department. So, we can get back to you on the re-veg and then we might have additional questions, which I do have too. Yeah. So, I'd like to hear from the planning department right now. Good evening, Board. Morgan Sider for the Planning Department. >> Morgan, do you affirm to tell the

019whole truth and nothing but the truth? I do. So, the property is on the north side of Cliff Road and it slopes up to the south side of Montauk Highway. Uh the proposed additions and garage total an additional 1,083 sq ft of gross floor area and 1,227 sq ft of building coverage, which are a 48% and 93% increase from the existing conditions. The property has historically been noted to contain beach vegetation and received an admin NRSP in 2008 for the construction of a swimming pool. And as it's been stated, a condition of approval for that permit was the covenant on the property prohibiting the establishment of turf lawn sod or ornamental vegetation. Uh the beach vegetation on the lot was removed without the benefit of an NRSP with about 10,000 sq ft of clearing occurring

020since the last CO issuance in 2013. There are still mature trees on the lot that are considered to be part of the cleared area since the understory has been removed, but it does look like a few of those maybe more than a few of those trees are within the footprint of the proposed additions. Um it's kind of difficult to quantify the impact the uh proposal will have on the protected natural resources just because they have been mostly eliminated from the lot. Um the Planning Department does feel strongly that the beach vegetation and dune land character be restored to the maximum extent practicable as part of the application since the property is currently not in compliance with the prior approval granted on the lot. Uh just Let me I'm wondering if maybe the 2013 CO clearing

021limits are a good reference point. I'm not sure if those can actually be achieved considering the size of the proposal, but um I'd be interested to hear what the applicant has to say on on what maybe what's possible. I It's one thing um I want to know is there should always be, you know, access around the house just for the homeowners, you know, to be able to actually navigate around the structure itself. So, re-vegetations that go right up to the structures themselves aren't usually actually that practical. Um and I can answer any questions the board has. So, so in terms of them wanting to do what we're recommending, they probably would be agreeable to what you've put in the town, which is um areas not pro uh the planning department recommends that any areas not

022proposed to contain structures be restored to native soil and re-vegetated with dune land plant species >> [clears throat] >> with the exception of the clearing boundary around the residential improvements to allow for sufficient navigation around the house. So, they're pretty much agreeing to that. Okay. And also I I think one of our conditions of approval would have to be their submission of that CNR. Yes, proof that it was filed. Proof that it was filed. Okay. Remember Yohan? I just want to double check. So, um obviously there's an existing Oh, sorry. This is not No, maybe Morgan knows. So, so the new driveway, so we have a garage and then there's a new driveway that if I'm looking at the survey correctly, looks like it's like two or three times existing survey. I'm sorry, the existing

023um And I I know that part of the septic is going to be in the driveway, but It I guess it's this gray area. It's not actually Oh, I see the >> Is it like it's within that red dotted line, right? Uh yeah, it's significantly larger. Now, you have to speak You have to wait, sir. You have to speak at the dais. Thank you. Yeah, I'd say that's an accurate Okay. Thank you. of the driveway increase. And then I mean, we don't have any uh plan and you know, there's nothing in the record yet about restoration plan, re-vegetation plan. No, not yet. I guess it would be up to the board's discretion on when that gets submitted, whether it be before the record closes or prior to the issuance of a building permit. I'd like

024to see it before the record closes. This is I think it's too significant to not It's such a big part of the application, I think. So, but we can talk then. Mhm. Remember Yohan? Would there be any problem with submitting it prior to the issuance of a building permit? It would be reviewed by the planning department. So, we wouldn't delay the applicant in going forward and Is there any part >> we don't really I mean, the planners are the ones That's their job, not ours. >> Right, but we often get them. >> But, I'm just saying it we could condition that, I think, as a condition of approval so that we could move forward. And then, are there any areas of this property that could or should be protected with any kind of easement? Any

025easement or anything? >> Um I'm not sure that this is a property that's necessarily suited to that. I mean, again, once that protective vegetation is down, it's it's there and it's protected. Um the property also can't really be expanded any further if this is approved. >> Correct. Right. Okay. Thank you, Morgan. Thank you. Is there any wells Anyone else in the audience that would like to address this application? Are there any callers? Uh this is Matthew Scherrone calling from the LTV landline just to demonstrate that our phone lines are up and operational. We have no additional callers at this time. Thank you. Does the board have any additional questions or we Would you like Could I have a question? We don't have time. I know. I just I know. I just I got this, Jane.

026Thank you. Would you like to summarize the public hearing? First of all, I want to thank you for your time. I know it's a hard job. Um just to clarify, the driveway that's there now is just basically moving to the east. The driveway will not be anywhere over the sanitary system. That's not allowed. So, the actual square footage of the driveway is only going to be in the front of the of the garage. And I'll clarify that later when I can get Yeah, we tried to get this in, you know, 9 months ago and David Sacks did his best job he could in in the satellite aerial. So, the driveway is basically just going to be, you know, this area in front Yeah, that's all going to be designated as all of that. Okay, so

027the survey is not reflecting your plan for the for the driveway is what you're saying. >> That's correct. Yeah. Thank you, sir. Okay, thank you very much. Um I don't know. I think we can I think we can um can It can be a condition of approval about the revegetation plan prior to the issuance of a building permit. The planners will be able to look at that. That's their area and what they do. So, I'd like to go ahead and make a motion to close this public hearing, Member Mary. And I would also just make a condition that they update the survey, too. >> Yes. Okay. >> the re-veg areas and the driveway. So, that would be a condition of a building permit. >> Yeah. a building permit. Yeah. Update the survey and yes. But,

028we're not leaving anything out. No, we're not leaving anything out. All right. Do you want to motion it? Hold on. Okay. In the matter of Marion Leddyer, sorry if I'm not saying that correctly, 83 Cliff Road, Amagansett, Suffolk County tax map 300-174-2-6, I make a motion to close the hearing and close the record. Second. I concur. Oops, sorry. Um the next one we're going to go to the first public hearing, which is Oh, is Karen here? Yes, okay. >> [snorts] >> 176 DeForest Road LLC. Let me get my notice. This uh 176 DeForest Road LLC, 176 DeForest Road in Montauk, Suffolk [snorts] County tax map number 300-33-3-4. Description is to install underground propane tanks, reconfigure a driveway, and implement a revegetation plan on a lot containing freshwater wetlands. Relief sought is a natural resource special

029permit pursuant to 255-420 and a variance from 255-430 of the East Hampton Town Code and any other relief necessary. A wetland setback variance of 18.8 ft is required to install the underground propane tank 81.2 ft from the western wetland where 100 ft is required. The propane tanks will also be 81.4 ft from the wetland to the south and 83.6 ft from a wetland to the north. Zoning district is A-10 residence zone X flood zone. Secret class is type two. Council, do we have a proper affidavit of service and posting? Yes, I reviewed the affidavit and everything seems to be in order and the board has jurisdiction. Vice chair, do we have a field inspector? >> I'm just going to say to Morgan, so I have three photos, right? Yeah, I added three more. Okay, thank

030you. >> from my files. No, I apologize to the public because I've just spent 2 and 1/2 hours trying to get from Montauk to here in this traffic thing and we were supposed to have a meeting about some additional photos. So, I'll give you the ones I have and then we can go through looking at the survey for description. Uh the property was the property The parcels properly noticed. You'll see the notice here alongside permits and the work from the signs for the work for the next. Uh I'm just taking a look from there down the driveway. I'm looking my way up into to get into the site. Next. This is Now, I'm up Now, there's a dump truck I can see through a tree. That's the area unfortunately. I don't maybe Morgan supplement with

031a couple of photos. I had some good photos of where this is going to go, but we can tell from the survey. You can see the house in the distance. This is on a significant parcel of land. So, the area around here Give me the next one. Do we have one more? Is that it? Oh, you added these. Okay, so these these tanks that are sitting up on the ground that are going to go in. Um Let me see that other photo. What else do you have? And that's just of the site. >> Yeah, I think this is around the area where they're being installed. Next one. Yeah, is that it? Is that what you have? Okay. So, the one thing that I want to make point of is that the area where the We'll

032see it in the survey. If you put the survey up, the area where the survey uh shows us to be the the future parking pad is well marked out. Uh so is the area where the tanks are to go and the new septic system, which is on here, is installed. There were photos of all of that. Uh there's This is not a complicated uh site in terms of what we're looking at. We're looking at a location for the parking, the septic, and the the tanks. And you can see the tanks on the survey here in the corner of that. That is all well marked out on the site and the site is well protected with fencing. So, wanted you to know that the site, to me, seemed to be in order and we can move

033forward with the rest of it. Thank you. Is there someone here to speak on behalf of the application? Yes, good evening, board members. Karen Hope from Timmy Latham on behalf of the applicant 176 DeForest LLC. Here with me this evening is Bobby Wright from Men at Work, the contractor on the project. Um as board member Yellen said, this is a pretty straightforward application. Uh we're requesting to install two underground 1,000-gallon propane tanks adjacent to the proposed reconfigured driveway and parking area, and we're implementing a 15,498 square feet revegetation plan as depicted on the Walbridge survey in that kind of a a light green color. Um we've also provided a landscape plan from LaGuardia Architects. Uh the property itself is roughly 18 acres is and is constrained by various pockets of wetlands, which you can see

034on the survey. Uh the underground tanks are proposed at the most conforming places on the property and roughly 90 ft from the house. The IA sanitary system, to which an NRSP waiver was issued, was recently installed as well as the sediment control fencing, which was reviewed by uh Morgan and deemed acceptable. We also have a DEC permit for the project that is before you, um and that has also been uploaded into the the the um OpenGov portal. I have some some aerial photographs if the board would like to see just showing the existing site conditions, but I think the photographs pretty much tell a story of of what the site looks like. Um the area where the propane tanks are going to be buried is is is already disturbed. It's cleared. Um and, you know,

035as as part of the the TAM, there were some conditions that were recommended in terms of some modifications to the re-veg plan to include more woody native species, which we will certainly do. Um so, we we can modify the re-veg plan to incorporate that. Board has any questions, happy to answer them. Board have any questions? I I don't. I was on the site and I could see it was well marked out. So, it's just a question of what we think about the location, but it seemed obvious to me what the plan is looking at the site. So. Anybody else has a question? Does anybody else have a question? >> start over? I concur. >> [laughter] >> No, I was on the site. Can we now hear from the planning department? >> [laughter] >> Morgan Slater

036again for the planning department. Uh this is a pretty straightforward application on a very unique and constrained oceanfront lot consisting about 18 acres of land within a Morland habitat containing a dwarf forest and extensive freshwater wetlands. The lot is within the Montauk historic district as well and the original residence is known as Tick Hall, uh which was built in the late 19th century. The structure was destroyed in a 1997 fire and subsequently reconstructed in the following years. There are wetlands on all sides of the residence and some animal species of special concern are known to call the wetlands in this area home including the spotted turtle and blue-spotted salamander. Wetland dependent species also rely on wetland buffers for nesting, foraging, and shelter and it they also act as a corridor to other wetlands within the

037same system. The application is for the installation of propane tanks and some work to the driveway. There are not many places on this lot that meet minimum wetland setbacks and the propane tanks do seem to be proposed in the most conforming location on the lot. There is currently no setback between the existing driveway and the wetland and one of the parking areas. Uh the driveway is being reoriented to be 1.8 ft away from the wetland. The planning department recommends that the driveway separation from the wetland be maximized as much as possible. There is an approximately 15,000 sq ft revegetation proposed and the planning department recommends that this plan be revised to include a larger proportion of native woody species to imitate the Morland habitat and provide a high-quality wetland buffer. And I can answer any

038questions the board may have about the application. Any questions? I don't really have any questions. >> the revegetation number? I'm sorry. Uh it's 15,000. 498 What does it entail? Yeah, yeah, I thought that that yeah, 15,000 is a rough number. Thank you, Morgan. Is there anyone in the audience that would like to speak to this application? Do we have any callers? We have no callers on the line at this time. Karen, is there anything you'd like to summarize? Just that you know, as the board would be inclined to close the public hearing and we will modify the revegetation plan to include the native woody species or additional wood native woody species acceptable to the planner. So, if there's anything else that the board as as I said has questions on, happy to answer them. Well,

039if approved, I think that could be a condition of approval prior to an issuance of a building permit. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, do we have a motion? I'd like to make a motion in the application of 176 to Forest Road LLC 176 to Forest Road, Montauk, Suffolk County Tax Map 300-33-3-4 to close the public hearing and the public record at this time. Second. Concur. Concur. Thank you. Next public hearing is Lee Cohen and Erica Fleischman, 23 Glen Ways in Springs, Suffolk County Tax Map number 300-103-0-13.1. Description is to remove existing decking and to construct 273 sq ft swimming pool, 286 sq ft pool deck, pool fencing, pool equipment, a 450 sq ft accessory structure, 70 sq ft sauna, 330 sq ft of decking walkways, 460 sq ft driveway extension with EV charger, 405 sq ft

040porch, a grill area, window well, retaining walls, planters, and an upgrade sanitary system on a parcel of land containing freshwater wetlands. Now, before I continue, >> [clears throat] >> uh there have been uh a number of revisions made to this project which the agent or the applicant can address when they make their presentation. The relief sought is a natural resource special permit pursuant to 255-420 of the East Hampton Town Code and eight variances are required for this application. Variances of 98 ft, 75, 66.5, 54, 30, and 19.5 are required from 255-430 of the town code to allow the proposed pool fence to be constructed to sauna 25, window well 33.5, decking 46, I'm assuming ft, porch 70, and grill area 80.5 ft from freshwater wetlands where a 100 ft setback is required. >> [clears throat]

041>> One variance of 42 ft is required from 255-430 of the town code to clear vegetation 8 ft from the edge of wetlands where a 50 ft setback is required. One variance of 10 ft is required from 255-1110 of the town code to construct the proposed pool equipment 20 ft from the northern front yard lot line where a 30 ft setback is required and any other relief necessary. Zoning district is a B residence zone X flood zone. Secret class is type two. Council, is the affidavit of service and posting in order? Yes, uh you guys are all good on the affidavit of notice and posting. Member Kylie, do we have a field inspection? We do. Uh first slide is the first posting. Uh it is proper. I believe this is done from Shore Ridge Road.

042Next slide. The second posting is done on Glen Way. This is standing Glen Way Road facing the front elevation of the house. Unfortunately, uh there was a 30-yd dumpster and a van in the front. Um this is the existing driveway which is proposed to move. Next slide. This is the best shot of the front of the house that I could get. And next slide. As I move left around the house which is going south, uh this is where the property abuts the wetlands. The property is somewhat elevated from those wetlands. Next slide. So, moving towards the side of the house, just I don't know why I took a picture of an air conditioning unit, but I did. >> [laughter] >> You've been staring at the board long enough, you did. And next slide. Uh this

043is the back of the house. There's a substantial screening along the back of the house. Next slide. Uh this was a elevation shot from Shore Ridge Road. I just where the proposed pool would be. Uh what the visual impact would be. So, next slide. Uh this is the approximate location of where the pool would be on the north side of the house. Next slide. Uh this picture is of the abutting neighbor and uh there is some existing uh vegetation there, but uh this would be a visual impact where the pool location would be. Next slide. I did not take that photo. >> [laughter] >> Thank you, Member Kylie. Do we have someone here to speak on behalf of the application? Yes. Okay. So, let me swear you in. Yes. Do you affirm to tell the

044whole truth and nothing but the truth? I do. Proceed. So, the application is for an RSP and variances to allow construction of a small pool including pool equipment, drywell, and fencing, a wood terrace, and an accessory structure. Also proposed are porch, deck steps, and a basement window egress well for the residence. These items are all proposed in area that is currently improved with a wood deck, which is why I asked to leave this up. This wood deck is being removed and then all of those other accessories will be filling in that currently improved area. Um the existing uh retaining walls and planters are also proposed. The existing septic system is proposed to be abandoned and an AI >> [snorts] [clears throat] >> IAOWTS installed as far as the [laughter] wetlands are possible. Additionally, the previous

045gravel driveway and EV charger are proposed to be relocated northerly and further from the wetlands. After reviewing the TIM, a revised survey dated April 13th, 2026 was submitted showing a number of improvements now proposed to be removed or removed from the scope of the project. The sauna and the grill are no longer proposed. The existing outdoor shower is proposed to be removed. Proposed drywalls are shown for the proposed outdoor shower next to the pool house, for the pool, and for the house. Gutters and leaders are proposed for the structures. The pool fence is now 70 ft from wetlands and the variances for clearing, sauna, grill, and pool equipment are no longer needed. That reduces the number from eight to four. Proposed clearing is now only 600 sq ft and will remain well below the allowed

046clearing limit. Lot coverage and total lot coverage will both increase slightly, but will remain well under what is permitted. As suggested in the TIM, a substantial amount of revegetation is proposed along with a 1,000 sq ft scenic easement and a wetland buffer all along the southerly part of the property. This easement area along with the IAOWTS upgrade, proposed drainage components, and revegetation will mitigate any impact to the wetlands from the proposed work. >> [snorts] >> The hardship may be self-created in that the owners are aware of the constraints posed by the wetlands, but this should not preclude the granting of the variances. Due to the wetlands located on the southern portion of the property and and the street, almost any work would require a variance. The property is further constrained as a corner lot. Granting

047these variances will not cause an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or create a detriment to nearby properties. The proposed improvements are very common in this area, swimming pools in particular, and while the variances may be substantial, this is due to the size of the lot, the presence of the wetlands, and two front yards. Further, all the mitigation will likely improve the environmental conditions of the wetlands and the property. And finally, the owners who are here and would like to speak to you, >> [snorts] >> um, agree with the recommended project conditions. Thank you. Does the board have any questions? Yeah, could Lori tell us what has changed on the relief requested as far as I know you eliminated a few things, but others have changed slightly. Could you So, the sauna is

048no longer proposed. The grill is no longer proposed. The pool fence has been moved from right abutting the wetlands to 70 ft away from the wetlands. And where is that on the survey? It is up here now. It had been around the whole property. Right. So, it's up here and then it it closes over here. And so, on the what I'm not sure what side it is, the west side, it's no longer going to go down all the way and all around the entire property. Yeah, he's showing the green is where it was previously proposed. Now, it's up here. And up here. Okay. Um, and then the clearing, we're no longer clearing down by the wetlands, but instead we're putting a scenic easement on the wetlands, a wetland buffer, and revegetating a significant part of

049the southern portion of the property. Mhm. So, you no longer need any clearing there. Is that correct? Okay. That's right. We've eliminated four variances. The only clearing is needed up by the septic system, way to the, um, uh, towards the, um, No, right here. Just here. This is the only clearing that's required there. Lori, can I just clarify something you said at the beginning? Maybe I misheard you. I think you said the all the additional improvements are going where the existing deck on the house is. >> Not all of them. Okay, so then I get So, the deck is The current deck. Yeah, it's the dotted line. Right. Right, it's a wrap-around deck. Right. So, the proposed porch is going in its place. These two proposed decks are going in its place. These planters are

050going in its place. And the part of these stairs are in its place. Not all the improvements, obviously, because >> Okay, so you I think you meant the proposed porch improvement is mostly going in its place. Okay. >> the pool terrace, and the accessory structure, and the septic system are further away from that existing deck. And And the wetlands. And the proposed accessory structure, I mean, that's obviously it's it's more than 200 sq ft, so it can't be a pool house even though it's near a pool, right? >> house, and I'll let my clients address that because it's very specific to a need of their sons. Mhm. I Well, go ahead. Go ahead. I'm sorry, just one more. So, the uh, um, when it says lands proposed landscape screening, I'm looking kind of towards the

051top of the survey, north of the pool, proposed pool, and that So, that area, I mean, I guess it's considered cleared because the understory is gone, but there are some very mature lot of mature uh, white oak trees there. So, disturbing the white oaks, but they are going to be planting a privacy barrier for their swimming pool cuz it's up against the road. So, none of the trees will be No, no. taken out. Some trees will have to go because of the septic system. And that's a pretty good stand of white oaks, and a lot of them in the central part of it are going to go. But as was mentioned by member Mearing, uh, it is considered cleared because the understory is gone. I get that. Uh, the the deck that we currently see

052along Glenway, which, uh, exists now, will be removed completely, and just a small deck that's part of the staircase into the front of the house. Two small decks. Okay. And then the stairs back, that's all. Yeah, so that'll be they'll be reconfigured though from the existing one now that kind of goes the width of the house. That's coming off. Okay, just a quick back to the pool fence for a minute. Sure. Uh, is it going to go along the property line on the Shorridge side? Yes. What you had indicated was a little bit less. No, it's up here. It's right on the road. >> going all the way up to the property Up on both roads. Okay, then I So, just for the record, Lori, could you could you for the record just state the

053four variances you're now requesting? Yes. We still need variances for the proposed pool fence, uh, the decking, the porch, and we no longer need Oh, and the pool equipment we don't need one for either anymore. We've moved it. So, where's it going Where's it going to be moved to? Is it going to be conforming to the setbacks? >> And it's Oh, okay. A window well, thank you. Yeah, pool equipment. And the window well is the other thing that needs the variance. And that area that, uh, where the sanitary system existing is going to be abandoned is all going to be revegetated. >> Correct. Yes. My clients would like to address you. one more time, the pool fence variance now is what's the number? Is it on Um, let me see it on. Well, we're 70

054ft from the wetlands, so it'd be 30 ft. Oh, you said okay, you are 70 I I couldn't get I scaled it off. It's not on the survey, and they didn't put it on the list of variances, but I scaled it off in the office today, so it'll be a 30-ft variance. Thank you. Thank you, Lori. You're welcome. Okay, how I didn't see the the retaining wall diagrams in the file. How how high are the retaining walls? That I actually don't know the answer to that. They're not tall retaining walls. There's grade there it's just grade changes on the property. And there were two of them. Yeah, there's Yeah, there are. There's one up here, two and two. It's like a foot at most. Wait a minute. There's one, two, three. I think there's one

055What are they? Three or four, Lori? retaining walls. I see three. Well, here's Here's one here, here, and here. Yeah, these are just grade changes. They're about one one to two feet. >> Right. The purpose. Okay. So, you're saying the wall retaining walls are one to two feet high? They're they're basically landscaping features to correct the topography and enable flat areas. Yeah, because it's really sloppy there. You have those planters, are those also elevated off the ground? I don't know the answer to that, but I don't think it really matters too much, does it? Are we good? Are we ready to hear from the planning department? >> No, my clients would like to speak to you personally. >> Oh, okay. Sure. I'd like to explain their pool and accessory structure to you. Sure. We We

056Cohen. Erica Fleischman. And I do have to swear you in. >> Questions. Do you both affirm to tell the the whole truth and nothing but the truth? Yes. Yes, yes, double swear in. Double swear in, that's a first. >> [cough] >> Um, uh, so we bought the property, uh, we we'd love to be able to use it to its maximum potential. Um, the our plan is obviously this relatively small [clears throat] pool and accessory structure. Um, for us, uh, it's us, and our family includes our son. Our son happens to be a competitive water polo player, and, uh, for us we look at this pool as like a small facility that he can kind of train at. Um, he competes year-round, swims five, six days a week, uh, travels internationally to compete, and so to

057for us to be able to have a small facility with the accessory structure for him to do some training in along with a small pool, um, is just great for our our family. So, that's kind of what we're the purpose of this for us is to kind of do this for him and help support his, uh, his goal of becoming a Division 1 college water polo player. He's 10. That's very exciting. >> Yes. >> [laughter] >> What is the actual accessory structure for? Um, it's going to be, uh, a small home gym, uh, workout facility, yeah. >> of some sort. Size room? Yeah. And does will it have plumbing? No. Bathroom? No. Sinks? No. No plumbing? No. So, no need for septic at all. No. No water? No. Not. No. >> [laughter] >> Don't be

058over with the overall size of it. Sorry? What was it? 300 something? 400 something. 400 something. 400. Okay. Any questions, board? No, I don't. Thank you. Thank you. I'd like to hear from the planning department now. >> [clears throat] >> Todd Borsack for the planning department. Do you affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth? I do. Um, so this parcel is located on the southwest corner of Glenway and Shorridge in Springs. Um, the project before the board is to construct a number of new structures and expanding existing structures, uh, on a constrained property. The [clears throat] project, uh, is proposing to demolish an existing approximately 700 sq ft of decking, uh, and to construct a new swimming pool with decking, a new 450 square foot accessory building, a new porch on

059the north side of the residence, decking on the east side of the residence, window well for basement egress, a new driveway with vehicle charger, retaining walls, and fencing. The project has gone through some significant revisions since the original assessment was written. The applicants have been eliminated the proposed sauna and grill area, reduced the amount of clearing, include included revegetation buffer to wetlands, proposed a small scenic easement over the wetlands and minimal buffer, and relocated the proposed pool fencing to a significantly better setback. The wetlands within jurisdiction constitute an integral part of the natural environment and more specifically the hydrological system. These wetlands are notable for containing significant amounts of standing water at points throughout the year and are also connected to several extensive wetlands throughout the Barns Landing area. In addition to diversifying the landscape,

060these wetlands are a link between the land and the water and provide a rich habitat for many plants and wildlife. These wetlands are especially important in the absorption and storage of floodwaters, which help to improve water quality. The project before the zoning board proposes some significant changes to the existing improvements on the parcel, which includes a substantial total lot coverage increase. The project had included notable variance requests for structures in close proximity to wetlands. Those variances have either been eliminated or reduced since the notice for the project was posted. The proposed fencing has been proposed with an improved setback of I have it at 60 ft. There is a section of the fence a little bit further south. I had it at 70 ft originally, but I think it's 60 ft. The sauna and the

061grill have both been eliminated entirely from the project. >> [clears throat] >> The proposed driveway expansion has been relocated further north on the parcel and increased its setback to approximately 65 ft. In addition to the relocation of the fencing, the pool equipment has been the pool equipment equipment has been relocated to a conforming location, eliminating the front yard setback variance that was requested. And the existing outdoor shower at the rear of the residence is proposed to be removed along with the construction of a new conforming outdoor shower to the north of that accessory structure. Shower in the back. The project includes the removal of the existing decking, which stretches around the eastern and northern sides of the residence and is instead proposing steps with a deck landing on the east side, an additional small decking

062on the northeast, and a proposed porch on the north side of the residence, all in the same approximate footprint as the existing decking. Overall, the proposed decking and porches surrounding the residence should have approximately the same impacts as the existing improvements. The proposed window well requires a significant setback variance located at only approximately 33 and 1/2 ft from wetlands. However, given the small size and minimal impacts, the board may find this request reasonable. The proposed window well may be in order to increase the intensity of use of the basement of the residence, which could lead to an increase in impacts. However, the applicants are proposing to relocate the existing conventional sanitary system, which is set back only 25 ft from wetlands, to a modern IA sanitary system, which is set back 117 ft, a noteworthy

063increase in mitigation for the increased use of the basement. To the north of the existing residence includes an accessory building, swimming pool, pool fencing, and a few associated structures. These structures all meet setbacks to wetlands, but still require careful review and may speak to the over overall overdevelopment of the parcel. These structures make up the bulk of the new improvements on the parcel and are situated between the 100 ft setback to wetlands and the 30 ft front yard lot line setback for accessory structures. The previously proposed pool equipment has been relocated to eliminate the need for a front yard variance and is now conforming to all setbacks. The grade surrounding the swimming pool is proposed to be raised from the existing approximately 10 ft to a proposed 11.8 ft and that would just be along

064the southern side of swimming pool. To the north, they're going to have to lower grade slightly, but it'll be very minimal lowering grade up there. I think the grade up there is around so it wouldn't be a significant regrading up there. Presumably, the change in grade is partially to allow for a deeper swimming pool proposed to be 5 ft deep and also maintain the required 2 ft separation to groundwater. These structures are conforming to wetland setbacks. However, they still provide a substantial increase in coverage, total coverage, clearing, and overall intensity of use on a constrained and non-conforming property and need to be carefully considered in light of the NRSP standards. The proposed total lot coverage especially is a significant increase over the existing conditions with a 129% increase and a lot coverage increase of 66%

065with the inclusion of the covered porch and new accessory building. That said, the parcel does not currently have any parking on the property itself and the proposed driveway is over 900 square feet of that increase in total lot coverage. As mitigation, the applicants have proposed to upgrade the existing sanitary system in what appears to be the most conforming location available on the property. In addition, the proposed outdoor shower appears to now be directed to a dry well and a revegetation of the parcel is also included along with scenic easement. The proposed revegetation is approximately 2,550 square feet and it would increase the buffer to the wetlands where possible. The existing structures on the property limit how much of a buffer can be established in many places, but the proposed revegetation is a worthy mitigation measure

066to help offset some of the increase in improved services proposed in the project. In addition to the revegetation, the applicants have included a scenic easement over the wetlands themselves and a 10 ft buffer. The proposed easement has limited value considering its small size, but is still worthy of consideration as additional mitigation. The planning department recommended that any new structures be concentrated north of the existing residence when we wrote our assessment and the applicants appear to have taken that into consideration and eliminated any new proposed structures south of the existing improvements and either eliminated or improved proposed variances where possible. The board should still look at the scale of the improvements, the level of development, and how those meet the NRSP standards, but the project as a whole has has improved since the planning department assessment

067was first written. >> [laughter] >> Other than that, I can answer any questions you might have. Board have any questions? I have a couple. One is have you reviewed a revegetation plan for this site and what's going to look like? The the proposed revegetation just came in somewhat recently, so we haven't gotten a plan or anything like that. >> it so I'd be interested to know what's going to happen to protecting the site and the activity from Shore Ridge Road, what's going on up there. And then I my question was I got it. I got the statistics. I've heard what people said. It's hard to understand about the clearing numbers because it seems to me when you're there and then you look at the amount of work they're proposing that we'd be pushing much further

068up in the total clearing numbers, but I see what they hear and you know they're they're well they're below what they're allowed. >> Right. But it is going up uh 800 700 ft. >> Yeah, something like that. Yeah. 2700 ft of additional clearing. So at what point we're looking at 2196 and it's going to go to 4800? I think the numbers on the new new survey might be less than that. Oh yeah. I'm looking at them here. So but either way, I think it's just a matter of perception when you're at the site. The existing clearing is shown as 8100 square feet and the proposed at 8700 square feet now. And those that's the correct. Okay. That's what I my survey said. That's what I had. >> 600 square feet. Yeah. Of increased that's after

069revegetation. Okay. And some of that's going to be attributed to the the new configuration of the driveway. Well, yeah. I mean the driveway to the that's in the north would would have required some level of clearing, so I don't know how the you know how the give or take on that is in the area to where the driveway was proposed is was partially cleared, so I I I'm not I'm not 100% certain as far as how much of that can be attributed to one or the other. Yeah. I you done. Thank you. So a couple things. Number one, Lori I think when she started out she said what's proposed here is sort of common improvements all around. I'm paraphrasing, but so I know it's a big neighborhood, right? But there's something you know when you

070look around things look very modest. So do you have any views of you know this amount of addition and development or pool or anything relative to the neighborhood and the character? >> have I don't have enough knowledge of the area to really speak intelligently on how it compares to other things that have been approved in the neighborhood. So I would I wouldn't say anything just because I'm not certain. And then I don't know if stop me if I can't do this, but I was obviously many of us are on the site. There is an active building permit right right now I think for internal in the house, but you know, there's a very large dumpster sitting very very close to the wetlands and things like that. Is there anything I know we don't have jurisdiction

071over that permit, but is there anything we can do to just like put up a project limiting fence while that's going on or moving the dumpster away or something like that? >> of that. That'd be a question for the applicant. I think yeah. >> so. But it's but it's something I can ask, right? To Does her to ask? Yeah. I mean cuz the wet the wetland's very exposed to the dumpster. >> and there's not much of a buffer there now. All right. We'll come back to Lori on that. Okay. Tyler, there were a number of letters from neighbors mostly objecting. They all addressed the wetlands and the vernal pond and that whole area. Can you comment on what you see there as Yeah, I mean it certainly gets standing water at times. When we did

072our wetland inspection there there was standing water a significant amount of standing water and it certainly has a high high value any anywhere where there's standing water can have species that you won't find in other wetlands. And it could be >> [clears throat] >> impacting fresh pond I believe you said. >> the I think potentially it might these wetlands likely run south toward down towards fresh pond they're all interconnected. I mean it's pretty far away but you know not out of the realm of possibility that it's within you know that watershed. Okay. >> [snorts] >> They proposed a 10-ft buffer to the wetlands 10-ft buffer but that seems to >> easement? Scenic easement A scenic easement is a 10-ft buffer the revegetation is more is more than that yeah. >> And then that lends right

073into an area of revegetation so they might be one leads to another here. You know what I'm saying? There's an area of revegetation a buffer and then the wetlands are the easement to the wetlands so all of that seems to me to be one mass I don't know if that's going to be coming under your scrutiny here the area of revegetation the 10-ft wide buffer really a conjoin they're all together. Right. Right. There's no separation in any of that. Yeah yeah yes absolutely yeah yeah the revegetation would be right up to where the existing clearing line is. That reveg line kind of wraps around the entire southern portion of this property at this point. >> Right. Yeah. Essentially as far north as they can on the east side and then the west side goes up

074there I think like 70 ft or something like that. >> Right. Pretty substantial on the backside there's not much they can do on the on the east side though. >> Note from Lori that they were going to not remove but rather abandon the existing septic system just fill them with sand take the tops off and do that. That's what your plan is now. Yeah. I mean typically they will pump it out and fill it with clean sand. That's our typical septic abandonment very less it's going to be originally was proposed to be removed but that's much more detrimental to the wetlands in terms of the Yeah. And >> So yeah I mean I would like to ask cuz I hadn't didn't I was not aware of these letters that we hold this open for a

075week so I can review them and respond and also They do come in late. >> give you a calculation on the full amount of vegetation that's going to be buffering those wetlands. And I think the revegetation plan should be a condition of approval. Yeah I agree. Yeah there's several letters I think I saw at least five. come in earlier. There were a number of letters yeah that we can certainly forward to you. Would we record >> That's fine but I still like to be able to respond so I have a week. Would you like to so is one week enough? >> Plenty. Okay and you can just respond to us within that week? Yes. Okay good. And Lori just one more time on the shower the one that's in the sort of northwest part that

076is still in the application right? The new shower. >> that's attached to the accessory structure is still proposed the shower that was behind the house has been is being removed. Okay just wanted to cuz I thought you said you were getting rid of the old showers never mind. Nope nope. Keep that shower the boy's going to be working out in that shed we don't want him coming in the house until he's had a shower. Yeah no problem. Is there anyone else so I'm sorry I'm sorry You have another question? The thing I mentioned about if if it's possible I mean there's a lot of activity going on really right in or around the wetland. >> We could ask our builder to put up a fence I mean it's it's just a project limiting fence because

077there's no consultation being caused by wood being dumped in a dumpster. We just don't want it to make its way over to the wetland. It keeps people out there's a you know again proper like big enough >> orange construction fence up to just keep people from going into the wetlands. >> Thank you. Their builder can do that. It's really the only place they can put that dumpster right? Yeah and that's a cleared area so that's why it's there and accessible to the house. I hope they're covering it at night was it covered when they were out there? I don't know if they're covering it I mean >> [snorts] >> It has to be covered at night. It has to be covered it's it's in the it's in town code you have to cover your >>

078we'll tell the builder to make sure it's covered. When you're there you don't know. Is there any is that That's it for me. Is there any I already addressed the audience do we have any callers? No. Would you like to address the applicant? All right hold on one second LTB I'm sorry. Thank you. Can you state your name for the record and I'll I'm sorry. Kristen Bibolar. Do you affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth? I do. Thank you. Hi thanks for the opportunity to speak You're very welcome. I unfortunately haven't gotten a chance to meet my neighbors and I'm sorry this is how we're meeting but I you know it's I'm glad to hear that they're downsizing I am one of the letter writers I didn't realize it didn't occur

079to me that they wouldn't be shared with with [laughter] the applicants so or that they wouldn't be available to them. They they all did I'm glad. Otherwise I would have copied them but I I just I'm glad to hear that they're downsizing somewhat I'm still in my main concern is the protection of the wetland the vernal pool is directly abutting what is now their driveway the dumpster is not covered I keep running back there and pulling plastic and things [laughter] out of the wetlands most of the wetlands are actually on our property which is 15 Glenway which is also known as 49 Robins Way because we're on the corner so our house faces Robins Way and our backyard and the wetlands is on the Glenway side. I I just am concerned mainly for the protection

080of the wetlands and the vernal pool there is a lot of wildlife back there it's really wonderful and it's a special thing that all of us get to enjoy when we live out here and I just really would hate to see any harm done to it I'm especially concerned about the driveway I couldn't quite tell if they were planning on moving the driveway because currently it is right there on the vernal pond. It would be great if if there I thought they were asking to expand it if they're asking to move it or expand it I would just hope it moves further away from the wetlands and not closer to them. Also I'm concerned about the casement window that's actually one of the things that's specifically recommended against by when you have a vernal pond

081because a lot of the wildlife that lives in those areas will fall into the window you frame and then not be able to get out so I I couldn't quite tell where that was happening if it's on the wetland side or not and you know that's and I'm glad to hear that they're putting in what it sounds like is a low nitrogen septic >> [laughter] >> a lot of acronyms but I assume that's what they mean. And just you know I I am opposing the application but if you decide to grant it in part or in whole I just would ask that >> [laughter] >> you do everything you can to make sure that the wetlands and the vernal pool in particular are protected I also wanted to note that there is bamboo growing on

082their property it was there before they bought the house the former owners used to sort of hack away at it so it never kind of escaped but it now comes into my property and it's slowly making its way down to the wetland Yeah and I would really appreciate it if that could be part of a condition if you're going to grant it that they remove it you're shaking your head. We'll talk to them. >> [laughter] >> I appreciate your comments but unfortunately the removal of the bamboo is not a part of this application. Got you okay well thank you very much for letting me speak. You're very welcome. LTB do we have any callers? We do not have any callers at this time. Lori So yes just to answer a couple of questions the driveway

083has been moved it wasn't originally proposed I can't see this. It was originally here and then it was going to be here and right now it's up here we moved it north at the recommendation of the planner. The casement window can have protection there can be a fence around it that will keep the wildlife from falling into it. We are doing an IAA nitrogen reducing septic system and I can talk to my clients about bamboo management and we'll get back to you in writing on that. You want to submit that as part of your when we leave the record open? Yes. A bamboo okay what are you proposing with the bamboo? Probably a root barrier. That's what we're doing at Chris Leathers and it's what we're doing at the Mayo project if we if that

084one gets approved. Both of them we were going to remove the bamboo that wasn't in the wetlands and put a root barrier to keep it from spreading. Council are we okay to go forward with a root barrier it's not Um Yeah. >> With this application? It would need Does it need a variance? >> Where I don't know where I don't know where the bamboo is I've no idea. Right. Could you that's what I'm concerned about I'm not sure I'm not sure if well we'll have to From what I understand your property is here. Yeah. Right so the bamboo must be here around our septic system. Do you mind if I I can't see where >> [laughter] >> But this is so this is the wetland here. Yeah so it's it's starting back here and it

085goes that way and that way and So yes it would need a variance. No. For the root barrier? Mhm. So they can they can manage it You just can't put a root barrier in? Yeah yeah I just added I guess through this any other relief necessary hey Tyler. Mhm. >> [clears throat] >> Um I don't know where where it would go I mean you got to submit I mean it's tough to I can't just make a call without seeing literally anything so that's not going to I need more than that. And it would have to be left open more than a week I mean we'd need a whole methodology. Yeah I don't know I mean you know, bamboo management is such a tricky prophecy because it's rarely successful. And it's very disruptive if you're trying

086to pull up the roots by there and you pull it up by its roots and then it's by the wetlands. So, that's another issue altogether. >> [snorts] >> So, I don't know what the board wants to do with that. I would it'd be inclined to just I don't know. I'll I'll respond over the course of the week. And we'll talk to counsel as to whether or not it's okay to include it in this application. He said it is because It doesn't require a variance. >> wants to know where it's going. I don't I can't So, we can't >> no idea what it is. We got to Yeah, it's I mean All right. The lawyer's going to let us know, right? Well, it's going to be one of the things we left open. >> Update the

087survey or show a different diagram with that. >> not going to help on the neighbor's property though. They're going to have to do their own root barrier. Right. I mean, our our we can only contain our own. Mhm. Only on your own property. Mhm. Okay, we're good to I'm going to make a motion to leave the record Let me get my notice. Where did I put it? I know, I'm doing it for him. Thank you, Terry. I don't know who's chairing this meeting. Um Let's see. In the matter of the application of Lee Cohen and Erica Fleischman, 23 Glen Way, Barnes Landing Section, Suffolk County Tax Map Number 103 -9-13.1, I'd like to We'll leave the record open, Lori, for 1 week for methodology on root barrier and your response to the letters submitted into

088the record about neighbor opposition. And we'll leave it open for How long would you need cuz the root barrier That's a little bit more complicated. >> 1 week. 1 week? Okay, we'll leave it open for 1 week. Do I have a second? Second. Okay. Concur. Very good. Thank you. All right, let's move on to the next one. Okay, our next application is a continuation of a public hearing. It's on Nigel Curtis, 393 Cranberry Hole Road, Amagansett, Suffolk County Tax Map Number 300-128 -1-28.2. Description is to relocate an existing residence to a more landward location and remove a 185 linear foot geo cube sandbag on a parcel of land containing barrier dunes, beaches, dune lands, and beach vegetation. Relief sought is a natural resource special permit pursuant to 255-4-20 of the town code and any other

089relief necessary. The residence and decking are proposed to be moved from 12 ft and 5 ft from the dune crest respectively to 32.1 ft and 27.9 ft where a 75-ft setback is typically required pursuant to 255-4-40 coastal setbacks. Zoning district is an A residence AE flood zone, elevation 10. Secret class is an unlisted action. Now, did we We continued it We didn't have to do it They reposted and re-noticed it anyway. Oh, okay. Okay. So, the affidavit of service >> Everything's good for this for the continuation. They re-posted >> We already did a field inspection, but we might as well refresh our minds and do it again. Member Mary? Oh, okay. >> [laughter] >> Okay. Uh this is Uh okay. Um All right. Brian, are you going in order of like I can't I don't

090remember the order that I had they had been in. >> Just in the order that they're >> [clears throat] >> Okay, so see what I can do here. So, can you just go back to the one before? Obviously. Um all right, so that's obviously the front of the property that where it had been posted. That's the existing driveway entry. The You can see the house um in the background behind some of the trees. Next slide. I'm not sure if these are in order, but I'll try and recall. Next slide. Oh. Oh, yeah, that was the They're not really in order. I just threw them out. >> yeah. Um that was a little closer up of the posting and the and the real estate sign on the front. Um and obviously this is on Cranberry Hole

091Road. Uh next slide. Um okay, this is the current um eastern side of the house um and that abuts the uh most intact dune land um that stretches to the east and then I think onto the property next door. Um this is Well, they've we've changed the position, right, of where the house is going to be moved um right cuz Brian, right? So, now the house is really moving forward. Before it was going to be moved forward and I think a bit to the east and that's changed, right? So, this We're going to see pictures of this dune land which I think is now mostly out of play in a sense, right? Because of how Well, it depends on where they put the driveway. Next slide. Sorry. Um this is the current front facade of

092the house um and the steps. Again, this whole thing will be moved uh moved forward. Um next slide. Um Oh, this was Yeah, so as I I was I come into the driveway and that driveway it currently extends um sort of almost parallel to Cranberry Hole running to the east. You can see the house in the background again. >> [clears throat] >> Uh this is I think this is across the I think the I can't remember when I shot this. I think I'm looking at the dune land on the east side of the house from Cranberry Hole Road. Or was that I can't tell if that is the house across the street. What? Off there. Okay, so this was probably looking across across to the neighbor across the road. That's the dune land on that

093side. Sorry. Next slide. Um okay, so I come around the back of the house. Um this is There's a back deck um and then there's the uh wooden walkway that goes to the steps. Um I did take some shots. I got down the steps to see the current condition of the cubes and the beach. Next slide. Um okay, yeah. So, there are uh So, this was taken what? A month and a half ago or something. So, I went down the steps. Um basically the water is, you know, quite close to uh to the edge of that stairway. Next slide. Um okay, this is from the beach um pictures of the uh multiple sets of cubes and then you can see the neighbor's uh house to the west in this shot. Next slide. Um Yeah, now

094I'm looking at the cubes in the other direction. I believe I'm looking east along the uh You can see the current house up above and then looking towards the neighbor to to the east. Next slide. Um more about the cubes and the current staircase, the current position of the house. You can see the buried cubes. So, there's I think Brian, it's a three something layers. Um and then this coming around the side of the house, you can see the dune land uh the water, the current house. That's It's it Okay, sorry. I was I took these quite a while ago. So. Thank you, Member Mary. It was good for me to refresh as well. >> Is there someone here to speak to this application? Good evening, Chairman Savarese members of the board. Richard A. Hammer

095from Bianculli and Hammer. I'm hopeful I can be brief because essentially what had happened is at the last hearing, the original plan was to propose to relocate the residence to the eastern side of the property. I think the the TAM and Brian recommended that we propose relocating it to the western side of the property as we retreated from the the eroding coastline which we agreed to do. Uh the hearing was continued for two things. One is we had to update our construction protocol which is submitted there. Uh you'll see in the construction protocol, there are a couple things that we addressed as well. One is we relocated the stairway so that it is parallel to the water as opposed to walking straight down. That was at one of the suggestions. Uh we also uh you

096know, had the the protocol updated to include the relocation of the west cuz that had kind of happened right before the hearing. Uh we also reduced the the driveway that's proposed. If you look look in the uh uh, part of the plan was to relocate it using the areas of the clear driveway as a temporary staging and and we did reduce that parking area to the east significantly. Uh, the more important reason for the continuation was to address the, uh, uh, addition of some additional beach compatible sand, uh, which what made this not no longer a type two. I think it was going to an unlisted action. I submitted a, uh, revised plan, uh, from First Coastal Engineering. Billy Mack is here with me. I'm not the expert on this, but in terms of the

097access, I think his original plan called for access from the east side as we are relocating the residence there. The new plan calls for a different access point and it does show a profile of the, uh, uh, of the proposed restoration of the the, uh, um, the angle of repose along the front of the property after the sandbags are removed. It also does address the removal of the the access. Uh, and you can see on the plan it shows the construction access that's taking place essentially due east of the existing residence right now. Uh, you know, the plan would be to remove the house, relocate the house, and then at use that, you know, the disturbed areas to access the beach and then restate, you know, to add the fill that's required there and to

098plant it with beach grass and, uh, you know, any questions on that. I have Billy here with me because, uh, he's the one that's more familiar with the installation or removal of these, uh, things. I was here about five or six weeks ago and there was a a hearing for a similar project that had removal of geo cubes on the end of Surfside is my recollection. The difference here is we're doing a little bit of restoration what we think is is warranted based on the the duration of the the geo cubes and the need to get these out. But the the town wants these removed, the landowner wants them removed, and that's why they're proposing to relocate the structure, uh, is to facilitate the ability to remove them and hopefully when the residence is relocated,

099we won't have the same erosional exposure that we do in its current condition. I think the hope is that we will find some kind of, uh, you know, a come, you know, in a erosional shadow or wherever where this becomes a more stable coastline. You can see in the pet pictures that you were looking through, there are geo cube structures on both sides of this property right now that remain unaddressed to my knowledge by the town. Uh, it's just where the ones in front of the board seeking approval to do this tonight. And other than that, I'll answer any questions or refer you to Billy if you have more questions. I don't think the zoning issues on this are controversial at all. Everybody want, you know, the the town comprehensive plan, this coastal erosion hazard

100act basically says retreat from the eroding shoreline. This is the best possible location that we can identify on the property and the new location for the sanitary system, all that follows where we are relocating and that's why the protocol was revised accordingly. Can I just confirm confirm the date of the most recent survey, February 12th, 2026? Uh, you know what? I cannot because my files are in Montauk. You couldn't get there till today. >> Yeah, I know. I turned around and came back cuz I wasn't going to make it for the hearing. So, I had the whole file assembled, ready to bring with me. Uh, the only thing I was Charlie was able to print out a couple of things, so I had something to refer to tonight, but my actual >> Sorry to put

101you on the I can't refer, but I do believe it's attached to the construction protocol. I can look it up on my phone. >> the date that one set. Is it there? [laughter] Pretty sure. Is that it right there? I just want to make sure I've got the right driveway. That's what I thought. Yes, very good. Thank you. What is the status with the DEC? The DEC, uh, took an unusual stance on our application to relocate the residence, but we have not gone back to address their comments until we get through the town because typically they will, uh, follow suit. Uh, but they were saying, "Oh, it doesn't meet wetland setbacks." Nothing meets wetland setbacks. I do think it's an achievable, uh, approval that we'll get, uh, but I think they were kind of waiting

102for more input and and thought through it. We have significantly revised our plan since we originally submitted to the DEC. I should have. The, uh, the proposal [clears throat] location little relocation of the house is going to make it FEMA compliant for elevation. Yes, that is correct. Okay. It has to, actually. >> [laughter] >> Yeah, I know. It's not optional. Although there is some concern as to whether or not, uh, you know, I just saw it on the town website. I I don't I don't know, maybe Brian has more information in terms of the three and a half foot of freeboard versus two foot of freeboard and exactly how that's going to be implemented, but I think we did design it for the three and a half foot because we anticipate that's what they're going

103to require. >> the roof height. I don't know if anybody else has any other questions. I I'll going to have questions for Billy, though. Thank you. Okay. I [clears throat] do not have any questions, Randy. Not right now. Thank you. You can state your name for the record and I'll swear you in. Uh, Billy Mack, First Coastal. Hi, everybody. Do you affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth? I do. Thank you. Thank you. So, a big part of this application going way back has always been the geo cubes, their existence, and then then the willingness of the applicant here to take a stance and now have them removed. So, when the last time we had a bit of a hearing here, we talked about the protocol around removing them, what happens

104to the material that's in there, just how much volume is there. Take us through step by step how you see this happening. They're going to be removed, how they're removed, what happens to the material, and what do you You were talking about the angle of repose. What do you predict here? I know we have a drawing, but I'd like to hear from you just how you see this happening. Sure, sure. Um, so we did, uh, modify the construction access to come through the driveway. Mhm. Um, so that seems to be the shortest path to get to the structure, the geo cube structures. Um, what we're proposing to do is to expose the bags completely with an excavator Mhm. and then stockpile that sand immediately landward of it. Then what we can do is literally strap

105the bags because they all have these strapping to them attached to them, slice the bags open, pull the plastic out, the remaining plastic, all of it will come out because it's it's very durable. So, all we have to do is let the sand exit these geo cubes. That sand is beach compatible sand cuz that was exactly what was required to be installed. And that sand will remain and will utilize that sand to stabilize the eroded bluff. So, when you take it out, the bags get lifted up, you slice the bag, and that material will wind up up on top of the existing bluff, not down. >> we'll slice it in location. So, that sand will remain exactly where the bag is. That'll reduce the amount of restoration we have to do where the bag was.

106Okay. So, that's the most ideal location to place the sand because that otherwise we'd be leaving a a sheer cliff. Okay. So, one of the other questions that was raised in the past was just how many geo cubes are there? Mhm. Is there a buried layer in behind? How many cubes are we dealing with? What we can see is obvious. We can all go down and visually see that. If there is another buried row, this complication of lifting them, dropping the sand, reaching ones below could get a little bit cumbersome. You've got this all planned out. You don't think that's going to be a problem. I'm not sure what's buried down in the surf. The second question would be that when you're down and you go down the stairs at high tide, you realize that

107the water is coming very close to where where you'll be working. How do we stabilize that? How is that going to happen? You're going to work that angle of repose back further into the existing bluff in order to come up with something we can plant? So, the way we're proposing to do this is actually working from the top. Okay. Um, so we'll need an excavator to do that. So, that excavator will be placed on top and work from essentially the western side to the eastern side and exit out. We don't expect there to be doing any material, uh, will be delivered from the top as well. So, everything will be accessed from the top. So, now we have a number of bags there emptied and there's a lot of material. You're going to reshape it.

108You're going to work it from the top. You'll probably change angle of repose. And do you Can you anticipate if you're going to be needing more material at this point? You don't know until you're in I think we're supplementing it with another, I think, 200 cubic yards. I don't have my paperwork Yeah. on me, but it's something like that. >> something that But it'll be it'll be fine. >> Yeah, I'll again beach, uh, compatible sand. Okay. And that's kind of a fluid analysis as you go. Yeah. Okay. So, in terms of a protocol, um, we'll discuss it with Brian in terms of a protocol. You see it's coming into an existing staircase, working strictly from the top, and then all the the detritus, the stuff that we don't need, you're going to take away, which

109will be the bags that are you cut open. Exactly. >> And the sand is all compatible and then you'll refashion that with a long-term planting plan. That's correct. >> Say that's your protocol. And the, uh, that'll be revegetated with, uh, Cape American beach grass. Yeah. Uh, which is exactly what exists there right now. Okay. Those are my questions for Billy. Thanks. Anybody else has any other Any other questions? I think we're Okay. Can we hear from Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Can we hear from the planning department, please? Uh, good evening, Madam Chair, board members. Brian Frank on behalf of the planning department. Do you affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth? I do. Um, so, uh, just for the very quickly for the benefit of member Kylie, there is

110an extensive history to this property. There was, uh, uh, an an entire environmental review, um, including an impact statement, um, regarding the, uh, a proposal to leave the geo cubes on the beach indefinitely and in perpetuity. Um, that application was ultimately denied. There was an Article 78 filed against, uh, the zoning board. Uh, this application in this hearing is at least in part of a result of the stipulation of settlement at Suffolk County Supreme Court that kind of, uh, directed, um, the applicant, I think, willingly to come back and and see if they could get a permit to resolve this. There was an initial hearing or there was initial application. The residence as Andy said was originally proposed in the southeast corner of the property. I'm going to show you the aerial in a in

111a moment, but the the eastern portion of the property has the lowest elevations and also has a lot of scour from the geo cubes that are located on the joining property to the east. And for that reason both the elevation and that um that scallop and that scour in the shoreline it's probably not the best long-term location for the house. I'll commend the applicant for taking the planning department's recommendations um sincerely and seriously and this is probably the best location on the property. You have a a survey from earlier in the year that had a much larger driveway. The applicants have [clears throat] reduced that. Looking at the sanitary plan part of the shape of where that driveway came in as far to the east was to accommodate the the sanitary system and that is

112something they probably still need to revise to have the driveway where it is now. I think a lot of the the the residential relocation components of the application are are satisfied satisfactory. I'll get to the aerial in in a moment. The planning department would like to see pardon [clears throat] me. As much of the eastern property undisturbed as possible. Right now in the revised construction protocol you do have most of the lot getting at least temporarily cleared. I'm sorry I don't have a I didn't bring that to the to the file information that I have here tonight, but if you take a look in your file the last page in the revised construction protocol is sheet CT1 and and you can see that there's a a small area of protection or non-disturbance in the eastern

113property. If that can be enlarged I'd encourage that. >> [clears throat] >> But to be clear the most the most important elements of this application are the residential relocation, the removal of the geo cubes and the restoration of the shoreline. And if that area of dune land gets temporarily disturbed unavoidably then that's kind of the price of making an omelet in in this case. I do want to switch to the aerial because I I think there are some there's some important information on there that I just want to reference. And I might stay at the the station here for a moment just because I can I can use the mouse as a pointer on the on the screen. So this is the 2025 aerial. This is the house as it as it exists right now,

114the current U-shaped driveway. This is the eastern portion of the property that has the lower elevations and you can see just the the western limit of the geo cubes on on the adjoining lot to the east and this significant scour on on this property and we had a very robust discussion about the impact of erosion control structures as part of this application. Um if this portion of the property, this eastern portion of the property can be conserved throughout um the project I I would encourage that. Um I I do want to switch over to some aerial photos because this speaks to a little bit about the the the complexity with the geo cube removal. And you can kind of see this is the apparent high water line now. This is about where high tide comes

115on a regular basis. You can see the stairs are basically seaward of apparent high water and I'll I'll go back to the removal plan in a moment, but the plan shows about 30 ft of beach between um the dune and mean high water and it's and it's much much narrower than that. So the the zoning board is going to have to decide how satisfied they are with the information that was submitted about the geo cube removal. Um We do have some additional information that was submitted by the adjoining property to the west with photos of the geo cubes under whoops that's not it. But with photos of the geo cubes under construction. Oh it's sorry it's on a it's on a a different file. I can get I'll I'll keep talking while I I get

116it. Um But there does appear to be um probably at least twice as many um geo cubes on site as indicated in the plan. If you remember the temporary permit that was issued showed three cubes stacked vertically a little bit off center from each other and um based on observation of similar structures in in town it seemed that that was uh that there was likely to be more. So these are some of the photos of the the geo cube under geo cubes under construction. There's going to be more excavation closer to the house, a larger volume of sand um and it may be challenging to keep that volume of sand landward of mean high water. Obviously [clears throat] the zoning board can't require sand to be placed on any of the adjoining properties, but if

117some of this sand ends up in the scallop on the especially on the western portion of the property, the planning department doesn't object to that because that would both that would increase the protection to both properties, both the Curtis property on on its western flank and the adjoining property to the west. So I think that's the extent of the information that I wanted to present to the board tonight. I'll answer any any questions that I can. I I do want to remind the board that as Andy had mentioned this was originally processed as a type two application. The technical analysis memorandum was revised to be an environmental assessment form to be consistent with the zoning board's finding that this is an unlisted to treat this application as an unlisted action under secret. So this is

118a telling [clears throat] photo for the questions I was asking Billy and that is that the material that if we empty these bags and drop it at the bottom you showed a photo that showed the high tide being within feet of the bags. All of us who have been down to the site have realized that at high tide you can't actually walk in front of the bags because the water's up there. So I'm wondering about during construction same questions I asked. We take the material we drop it at the base is a lot of that material wind up going to wind up westward of where we're at. That's going to be a protocol for them to have to work out what they do with the material if they're going to need more. But to me

119it seemed that this is a fair amount of sand that we're going to be releasing out of these bags and piling it up right down basically in the water. The removal plan estimated 200 cubic yards within the geo cubes. And the proposal to bring an additional 300 yards to the property. There may be an additional 300 yards just in the additional bags on the property and again this is this is a project that the planning department wants to see move forward. I think it's a benefit to the resource and the properties to get these structures off of the shoreline of Cranberry Hole Road. Those those board members that have been um associated with this application and has seen them I I I think it's pretty obvious the effect that they are are having on the

120shoreline there. So I'd encourage the applicant to address those concerns to the to the satisfaction of the board. And one of the question the scouring that we see to the east is not on this parcel. That's on the parcel to the east. I just looked at the property lines as you dropped them in over the aerial. >> Most of it. Yes, most of it is on I believe the adjoining property. Yeah, the the adjoining property. Beyond their revetment, beyond their bags there's scouring on their land. Their their geo cube revetment wraps around the house as opposed to Curtis which was extended installed more linear along the shoreline for the length of the property. Yeah. So in the best possible solution to the planning department the cubes are removed, the sand is left in place, additional

121sand comes in, and adequate angle of repose is established and it's planted out. Is that fair to say that's what you'd see as a protocol that would be That is. And if and if some of the sand ends up on top of where the existing dune is now planning doesn't have an objection to that. That's sand that's more likely to have a longer residence time on the property. If there are the bags are these cubes are 3 ft wide. So if there's a second or a third row behind them then that dune crest is going to move back by an additional either anywhere between 3 to 9 ft depending on what's exactly back there. So, as much of that sand as can be placed on on the beach here um and and not run a

122foul of a permitting agencies that wanted above mean high water, uh that that's what we would encourage. In the long term, it's in the interest of the applicant to see that that slope remains adequately vegetated. Well, beach grass is the is the right thing to plant. It's >> You know, I'm I'm saying if in in the advent of a particular storm and all, it's really in the advantage to maintain that bluff to the applicant so we don't have to put ourselves in a position of worrying about policing this because after all it's in their interest. It's not as if we're talking about sandbags of which we thought was a temporary solution. Their [snorts] solution now is to create an angle of repose, plant it, then hope it sustains itself for an extended period of time.

123Fair to say, right? Yes. Okay, I'm just saying that's for that's the position of the planning department that this is an adequate solution if it were to follow that protocol. Correct. Okay. Any other questions, Board? Um yes, Brian, um what one small thing, are you uh good with the configuration of the steps, like the path [clears throat] and the steps down to the beach now? Uh yeah, that's that's as good as it's going to get is to um turn parallel uh to the uh to the [clears throat] to the dune as quickly as possible. The less that extends seaward, the le- the less likely it is to be damaged and the better the foreshore uh public access is along the beach. And then I just want to go back to something we talked about at

124the last the first time the first part of the public hearing, um which is about this issue of, you know, the planning board would like to see the the the planning department would like to see these bags moved removed as as soon as possible, but ob- obviously we can't really necessarily control when it happens. So, how are we thinking about that now? I'm not thinking about the protocol so much, but how are we thinking about um you know, is there is there a time limit to which we would say these bags just can't exist anymore or I I'm not phrasing it correctly, but you know, if time is of the essence, how do we bring that in? Well, they have other permits to get. >> Right. Um the the town authorization for them is obviously

125expired, um but they have other permits to get and um I think the you know, Andy had mentioned that the the plan is to move the residence first Right. and move this the geocubes second. So, um the timing of the implement implementation I think is largely up to the to the applicant. Okay. Thank you. Any decision we would make it particularly if there was approval follow with the land. Yes. The potential future owner or depending on his time frame, the question was made by member of the hearing. If we can give approvals, it doesn't mean the work's going to get done right away, but whoever else would be in a position to can be of concern but have to follow the decisions we made. That's fair to say. Correct. Okay. That's all for me. Thank

126you, Brian. Is there anyone else in the audience that would like to talk to this application? Good evening, Board members. Karen Hogue of Timothy Laytham on behalf of Lewis Saul, the adjacent property owner at 383 Cranberry Hole Road, which is the property to the west of the Curtis property. I just have a couple of comments on the recent submissions and the testimony that has been presented. At the last meeting, the applicant was asked by the town to provide detailed plans on shoreline restoration including sand replenishment. And we we believe what was as has been provided by the town raises some additional question and is lacking sufficient detail in order to make a proper assessment of environ- environmental impacts to neighbors, especially to Mr. Saul's property. Mr. Saul's engineer, Andrew Millspaugh of Sterling Environmental Engineering, submitted

127a letter to the board today outlining additional concerns and lack of information provided. In that letter, he notes that the underlying site survey remains severely out of date with critical information for the geocube revetment. The bluff crest and toe of bluff were last located March 11th, 2020 and exposed face of geocubes was last located March 23rd, 2021. The stat is over 5 years old and site conditions have changed dramatically since then. The geocubes cause continuous erosion and adverse impact to Mr. Saul's property and Mr. Millspaugh notes that it is not possible to fully assess the current impacts and design an adequate restoration plan without a current survey showing existing conditions. I have some photographs um to share to the with the board on the Saul property showing the the flank erosion. Thank you, Karen. Thank

128you. Can you see this? First time I'm seeing this. So, close. Submitted electronically so they can be in the public hearing file as well. Yes, I will. Sterling Environmental stated that the construction protocol um still lacks the detail on how the neighboring property is going to be protected from the removal and restoration of the dune. The schematic provided stops short of Mr. Saul's property and there's no information provided how the dune will transition to the surrounding grade on the westerly side of his property. What we see on the schematic provided is just a a straight vertical line with no information provided either in the construction protocol or on the design on how it's going to flow to the or I guess be um graded to the westerly property. And every storm exacerbates the erosion on

129his property and the restoration plan should include repair of the flank erosion that the geocubes caused on the west side of the property. This application should not be viewed as a standalone property due to the adverse environmental existing impacts. Under town code 255-540, no special permit shall be granted unless the board finds that the proposed use does not prevent the orderly and reasonable use of adjacent adjacent properties. Under town code section 255-5-51, geocubes arguably erosion control structures um say that 10 times fast shall not interfere with the lateral transport of sand so as to cause substantial damage to or immeasurable increase in erosion of the project site or downdrift beaches or shoreline. There was thought put into the permitting process when the permits were issued for the installation of the geocubes and the removal and

130restoration of the dune should also be carefully reviewed to ensure that there's no adverse impact to neighboring properties. What has been presented thus far raises some questions as to whether that can be achieved. As referenced in Mr. Frank Saul's environmental assessment form dated March 24th, 2026, the revetment has and continues to have adverse environmental impacts along the shoreline. And the planning board supports the landward relocation of the residence, the removal of the entire geocube revetment, and the restoration of the shoreline as soon as possible. We support the removal of the revetment with a well-thought-out and detailed plan for restoration of the shoreline including restoration of Mr. Saul's property as soon as possible. Obviously, the concern here is timing. The concern for my client is the timing of the restoration and ensuring that his property, which

131has suffered severe erosion, is immediately restored. Under the board's special use permit authority in town law 274-B, the board's authority to set reasonable conditions and restrictions is somewhat broader than variance conditions as long as the conditions imposed are directly related to and incidental to the proposed special use permit. Town law 274-B also requires compliance with SEQRA and SEQRA provides broad authority to the town, whereas here the ZBA is taking lead agency. And in regard to SEQRA, East Hampton Town Code section 128-2-30 requires that the lead agency must be satisfied with the environmental impact statement. Under 6 New York CRR section 617.11 concerns the decision-making and finding requirements that the lead agency must comply with. In particular, the language states that the agency certify that the action is one that avoids or minimizes adverse environmental impacts

132to the maximum extent practical by incorporating as conditions to the the decision those mitigative measures that were identified as practical. We respectfully request that the board ask the applicant for more detailed information on the methodology for the dune restoration as it pertains to the Saul property. And as you can see in the photographs, the erosion isn't going away and his property has been significantly impacted. Um and we believe also that the Saul property should be taken into account as part of the applica- applicant's shoreline restoration project. Um I have nothing further. Thank you the board for its time um and we will upload those photographs to um to the ZBA court. >> Was that whole narrative submitted today? A lot of it is comes from Sterling Environmental's report in terms of their review of the

133plans. Um and that and included in that were the photographs also that um Brian Frank had submitted and showed earlier. Yes. Thank you, Karen. Thank you. Um LTV, do we have any callers? We have no callers on the line. Angie, would you like to um address the concerns we just heard from Karen Hogben? I can briefly address them. You know, one is it appears Mr. Saul wants us to restore his property. This is a dynamic coastal environment. You can tell this is an erosive shoreline. This structure prevented erosion from occurring at least on the the Curtis property. However, just look to the east. You can see there's significant erosion concerns that are affecting this shoreline. I think we proposed the best solution for the best for the issue that we're facing right now is remove

134those geotextile bags, relocate the residents and allow this thing to reestablish some kind of a natural shoreline. Whether that's possible or not, I guess time will tell. Uh but that is what everybody is seeking here. Uh with respect to the concerns about the timing, there's no way to access these things until we get the house moved and out of the way so that we can actually uh you know, access that stretch of shoreline in front of the house to safely remove these bags. Uh you know, I think the original proposal was that we could remove these things and you don't even need a permit to do that. That was what came out of the the hearing that I was at I don't know, 5-6 weeks ago is removing these don't do not require a permit.

135What we're seeking is an NRSP to restore this and and to reintroduce the sand to try and create a natural angle of repose on the property. But this is not the the problems with this shoreline do not strictly relate to these geotextile cubes. I would say these are symptomatic of the problem that's affecting this entire stretch of shoreline is a highly dynamic and eroding coastal shoreline that I think if you look at our prior DEIS, part of that relates to the lack of sand that's being transported, you know, the littoral transport is being has been blocked by the the old fish factory property to the east. However, we're making an omelet here right now as Brian would say and this is the best omelet we can make, which is restoring these, removing them, bringing in

136enough sand to create a stable angle of repose and I do think that's going to be an ultimate benefit to the the properties all along this stretch. Thank you. Would you like to go ahead go ahead and ask counsel? So my question before you ever respond would my question for counsel would be is this board is have the jurisdiction to try to implement um any kind of cure, additional work on the adjacent property when it's not in front of us? Uh I understand what was mentioned by the the representative for the neighbor that we have a responsibility to keep the idea the the weight of secret to us. But I'm wondering if this isn't an issue between two neighbors and not so much an issue between this board and the adjacent property. That's a question

137I would have about what our authority where does our authority lie? Do we even have the jurisdiction to consider additional work on an adjacent property when it's not actually in front of us tonight? Yeah, that's going to have to be thought about. I can't give you an answer on off the cuff. I mean that's what I'm saying. The applicant had many weeks to submit something like this and they just waited till the hearing. So we can we can have a discussion, but it's not going to happen right now. Okay. So do we want to leave uh I I do want to add I believe there is existing litigation. Karen's probably better off than it between the two neighbors right now. So uh that's another fact that should be brought to the board that this is

138being handled in a venue outside of this zoning board hearing and this is the desire of the applicant to resolve their issues with the town. Thank you. I I just have a quick question. If the removal of the geo cubes does not require any type of permit, then and according to the methodology that's been um discussed, it's just a matter of slicing the bags open and leaving sand there. So what why can't that happen sooner rather than later? I mean I I guess that's a just a rhetorical question, but I mean I'm just wondering, you know, if if the timing is concerned because of the um erosion that continues to happen, if the bags are sliced open now and the sand is is left on the beach, um that would help, I would think, if

139they're all open um based upon the cubic yardage that is contained with them that that that can be done now as opposed to getting a decision, having 3 years to get a building permit, which is usually what the ZBA approvals will say, and then they can be extended for a period of time. Um so while I understand that there's other permitting through the DEC that has to happen, but if the town doesn't require any permits, I just question why why the bags can't be removed cuz that would leave a lot of sand to shore up both properties. But in this case, an application came in front of us that requires an NRSP and an NRSP we it requires us to look at the entirety of the property and we would look at what's going to

140be the best environmental solution. What's been proposed over a series of hearings is a lot of discussion that's led to tonight where a protocol is presented with a possible solution for how to terminate that that bluff face. We go back to the emergency emergency permit which allowed for these these bags to be placed. That would cause a certain amount of disturbance. That was allowed by the town. We're taking the responsibility now of saying under the NRSP, what is the best possible solution for this property? Why were we considering it? Why were we listening to the the the you know, the the testimony of the applicant and and yourself. Everybody's got a concern. That's what we'll take into account here and what is the best thing to do to provide protection for the whole coastline, but

141we got to start with what's in front of us and that's the house. That's what I'd answer. That's what I think. Thank you. I agree with that. Um Madam Chair, may I ask Andy a question just to address something that Brian brought up? Andy, there's another question. >> Thank you. Keep hopping up. Thank you. Um Brian did talk about um you know, the desire to protect the eastern eastern side dune land as much as possible. Obviously, it's challenged because of things, but given that he spoke about it tonight, can you how can that be addressed? Um what do you think is realistic relative >> Our protocol protocol addresses as best we can on our property. >> no up that that's your Yeah, we can't go over our property line at the end of the day.

142I'm sure any any owner has it within their authority to reintroduce clean beach compatible material and to revegetate. That's what we're proposing to do on our property. Is there opportunity to that some of this I I don't know how exact this is going to be, but getting these geo cubes out of there is the first priority and and sort of reestablishing a you know, a consistent angle of repose along that side is that's what we're proposing to do. But I can't propose anything other than that under the town code. Mhm. Thank you, Andy. Okay, thank you. So I guess my first question to the board is before we say yes or no to leaving open or closing, are we satisfied with the geo cube removal methodology that's been presented to us? Do we have to

143make a decision now? Well, we need to make a decision as to whether or not we're going to close this or leave it open. Well, I'm happy to close the hearing to hear from the other board. >> I'm actually of that same mindset. I'm happy to but the one thing I want to talk to counsel about are we going to look into whether or not we can see if uh another neighboring property uh I I agree with Ed that what's before us on this property is what we're looking at. Yeah, I would I would just stick with we don't usually in my experience require applicants to start doing work on other people's properties. I I agree. I mean we just talked about it recently with bamboo. We don't go on other people's property to remove

144bamboo. This is it's obviously different, but it's the same Mhm. thought process like the the applicant the the bounds of the property and the on the waterfront on front of this property is what we're looking at. Mhm. I understand and there's a potential for obviously things happen and they have effects on outside of the property, but it seems like they want they want to have their cake and eat it, too, possibly. They want to they want to remove it, but also fix it and you know, they're trying to do what they can do. That's I I don't know how else to really process this application aside from just going with what's in front of the board and making that call. Well, I'm in agreement with Vice Chair that we close the hearing tonight. I just

145think we close the hearing and move forward with its decision-making process, which is our usual routine. >> Is the board members going to decide individually if they're satisfied with the protocol? Member Burger? Member Marin? To close it. I mean, if Something unusual came up, obviously Well, at this point we're closing it, but I mean I know. You could you could obviously you could make you can it's possible to reopen the record if you have If you close it and if you close the record and you have to reopen it, it is there's a process to reopen the record. >> the public hearing, but leave the record open. >> No, no, I'm saying if you close the if you close everything, there's always a process to reopen the public hearing if you have to. Yeah, yeah,

146just close it and then yeah. We can always reopen it. Okay, so do we have a motion to close the public hearing and record? Borrow this. Thank you. Okay, in the matter of Nigel Curtis, 393 Cranberry Hole Road, Amagansett, Suffolk County, tax map 300-128-1-28.2, make a motion to close the public hearing and the record. Second. Concur. Concur. Thank you, everyone. Thank you. Okay, we're now going to move on to our work session. Let's say We did. We're going to move on to the work session. Um other decisions, Brennan, 48 Agnew in Montauk, Suffolk County, tax map number 300-31-2-37, request to reopen the public hearing record. Brian. Hi, Brian. I have some information about the You have no information? Um I'm sorry. There is a there is a letter here from uh Uh the oh, the

147request uh was from the applicant. >> Mhm. I apologize. to reopen the public hearing for the application for the limited purpose of discussion the location of the gas tank and the air conditioning unit. And for the board to reconsider its denial of the variance for the gas tank and AC unit. So would this require us having it another public hearing? Uh I mean, if we're reopening the public hearing Well, it's you're already Or >> reopening it and Just to accept this letter? Yeah, and then you can make accept a letter and then you can make a call on the the new location of the You could you could we could yeah, we could rehave if you if the board would like, I'm sure the applicant would be happy to come back and just we could

148just schedule it on a new hearing night and have them come and explain >> we'd need a little more information than this. Yeah. Well, we applicant attorney I mean, if we I don't have a problem if he speaks. All right. Go ahead, what are you saying? Well, I mean, we we made a decision on the gas tank and AC unit. Was stated by the planner that there are more conforming locations. And you know, both of these needed a small rear yard setback variance as well as um the the wetlands. And I mean, we don't typically say we you can put it. We know there are better places that you can put it on that property as you know, the Tyler said also. So I don't know why we have to make the decision as to

149where that's going to go. I mean, there was a denial on the patio, right? And the where that patio was today is a location in the back of the house that would easily get rid of the dimensional variances from the the rear yard. And those things could be placed in other locations. Actually, you have to give this to the vice chair because I actually approved this application. The only thing I denied was the stone patio, I believe. But everything else I approved. Well, it was a mixed it was a mixed decision. It was a mixed decision on the numbers. Well, I I approved everything except the But the um stone patio. But what we have in front of us now, I'm I'm guessing we're talking to the board here, not necessarily you, is what we

150have is a a proposal to move from the original proposal a new location. We want to open up the hearing and up to to take this information and and consider this is enough >> you just ask him us to make the decision as to where it should go? I propose a a different location. Um Hold on a minute. Daisy, you have to be you have to be sworn in and that's one of the record. But we're not on the record at work. Do you have record sign open? I If I can add something, attorney, but He's the attorney. If I'm not mistaken, the this determination hasn't been filed yet. No, no, that's why he's coming to us. >> is the applicant is aware of the board's discussion for denial. They're offering in this letter an

151alternative location that increases the setback by 15 ft from 38.3 ft to 53.2 ft from from the wetlands. Okay, so where would that be on the survey? Could you tell? >> Right. I don't know. Is it Is it shown on the survey? I I submitted a survey. >> Oh, you submitted a survey? With this, yeah. Does the survey show So what is just said proposed? I didn't see proposed to go where. Right here. Um Can you zoom in on that? This is where they currently are. >> I'm sorry, Brian, can you zoom in on that so we can all see? >> Oh, I'm sorry, yes, absolutely. I'm showing you how to work this thing. A lot of lines. >> currently right here. Gas tanks, AC condenser. And now and the wetlands are here. So now

152they're going to move them right? Right, yeah. That's the proposal. I mean, I Basically just trying to give these people a clear path to get a CO to not have to file a new application for gas tanks and an AC unit. Like that's that's the point. Um Because they got to go somewhere and the property's basically fully within the wetlands setback. So wherever you put them, it's going to need >> Okay, then I have a question for you, Thomas. You submitted this thing. Okay, now you have a proposal with a different location that would get rid of the rear setbacks. Those locations take care of the eastern side yard setback? The eastern side I mean, it's 6.3 ft, so it would still need a a side yard setback variance, but this would just be a

153different >> So we're going from one variance to another. Well, [snorts] it it increases the wetlands setback, which seemed to be Yeah, but it's still but it's still a dimensional issue. I mean, if that's if that's your proposal, then we would if we if we reopen the record, then we would have to make a decision on just exactly what you put forward and then that would be it, right? I mean, I I I'm happy to consider other locations. >> we just get into So let's hear. I I honestly this is this is let's just the what we need to do is you guys have to vote if you're willing to even reopen the record. You don't It has to be unanimous. So all five of you have to vote to reopen the record to accept

154this letter. Then once you accept it, we can schedule a new public hearing. Thomas can come, you guys can hash it out, we can figure out a spot. But what probably should have been done at the original public hearing is if you're going to deny it, you need to ask say where it's going to go. Because these are it's a it's AC condenser and propane tanks. They're not like they're things that have to go somewhere. They can't not be on the property. Well, no, we can talk about them not being on the property. Well, I understand that, but when you deny something that's as built that means they can't be on the property. Like where are you going to put them? On a property that's completely encumbered by wetlands. There is no conforming place they

155would go without There is a more conforming place than where they are today and they were two dimensional variances, too. Which could easily they were small variances dimensionally, but there are other locations. So the So the question right now is are we going to open the record to take this in? That is the only question. Yeah, we're not making any calls. >> know. I don't know that we need a hearing. Do we need a hearing? I'm sorry. Well, Well, right now let's vote on whether or not we want to reopen the hearing. I think we'd have to reopen the hearing just because otherwise we're going to have to do a whole new application. >> to do anything cuz we already did make a decision. I want the board's opinion on whether or not they want

156to reopen the public hearing. I don't have a problem with reopening the hearing. >> it. I don't have a problem with it. It's a small bit of information. It is an improvement. It may not be enough of an improvement, but it's worthy of a discussion. >> a minute. If we're going to reopen the hearing, we don't have to go with that suggestion from the applicant, either. I think if we Well, first of all, do So I can tell you my other for more. I don't Who agrees Does everybody agree on reopening the hearing? I do. Yes. Okay, so member Burger? I mean, that's really a yes or no and then we'll have another discussion. You want to give a hearing, we'll have a hearing, but it's not going to be to judge that particular suggested

157location. >> No, I don't So I'm assuming you would be okay with reopening the record. >> I guess so. Member Marin? I will agree to reopen the record to consider this what is put in front of us now and then we would make a decision on it. >> Without a hearing. I I don't know if we need a hearing cuz it's a different variance if it has to be re-noticed or if it's I don't know, but whatever right now, I'm willing to reopen the record, take in this particular new proposal. And then we would have to make a decision on that. Whether that requires a hearing, I don't know. That's for counsel to let us know. What what we need to do is figure out a way to get this application finished in a practical

158manner. Because if we just take this in, I'm just spitballing on how this is going to play. And you deny this new one, then we're back at the exact same place that we are now. So, we need to My opinion in terms of just a rational and practical matter is we need to reopen the public hearing, have him come in, have a full public hearing again, and you can re-notice everybody. And if you hate this, you hate the other one, let's have a discussion and come up with a plan that the board likes that works with the applicant. And then we can go from there. And if you don't want any AC units or any propane tanks on the property, then tell them that. But I don't I I This is conversation is taking too

159long already, so let's just make a call. I definitely agree that if we reopen the hearing, I'm I'm in favor of going forward with a public hearing. I've already said I'm I'm I'm fine with it. And you're fine with it? >> Yeah. And are you guys okay with it? I'm opening it. We're going to reopen it, but we are going to have a public hearing. I'm I'm okay with that. Okay. We're going to have a public hearing. So, before that, you might want to We'll take the board's comments into consideration. Thank you, Tom. Thank you. Yes, we have five. So, that's >> Unanimously, we have approval of three. Unanimously, we're going to reopen, and we're going to have a public hearing. >> All right. So, I'll put a motion and then yeah. Okay. So, who

160wants to make this motion? You want Ed to do Montauk. >> You want Ed to do Montauk? >> Then in the matter of Brennan, 48 Agnew Avenue, Montauk, Suffolk County Tax Map 300-31-2-37. I I'd like to make a motion to reopen the public hearing and record. Second. Concur. Concur. Okay. Building permit certificates of occupancy, extensions of time, Trippy, 7 Brisbane Road, Montauk, Suffolk County Tax Map number 300-30-3-3. Additional material was requested prior to deciding on the extension. Uh yes, uh Madam Chair. Um the Trippy decision is fairly old, and the lot is relatively small, and there was some concern with the extension of time. Uh would they be Would they be able to um uh accommodate an IA system on the property, which would be required both by the town and Suffolk County's uh regulations,

161uh as opposed to the septic the conventional septic upgrade that was shown in the past. So, they have submitted a survey showing that they can get an IA system on the property, and that was the board's concern. [clears throat] Uh That was the information the board wanted before they considered the extension request. Okay. And I'm okay with it. I am, too. >> Yeah. Yeah. Who wants to make a I'll make it. Okay. For Trippy at 7 Brisbane Road in Montauk, Tax Map 300-30-3-3, I make a motion to approve the extension of time. Second. >> Second. Concur. Sokolow, 91 [clears throat] Surfside Avenue in Montauk, Suffolk County Tax Map number 300-51-3-6. Extension of a 2019 determination. So, this is at 91 Surfside Avenue. Uh the board had granted an approval for a swimming pool with decking

162and a spiral staircase, excuse me, in 2019. No building permit has been issued yet, and uh the conditions on the property are um the same as when the board granted the approval. Okay, I'm good with that, too. >> Yeah. I don't have a problem with it. Okay. Somebody want to make a motion? I will. Um then in the matter of Sokolow, 91 Surfside Avenue, Montauk, excuse [clears throat] me, Suffolk County Tax Map 300-51-3-6, I'd like to make a motion to approve the extension um of time. of extension of time, sorry, of the 219 [laughter] of the 2019 determination. Second. Concur. It's been a long day, isn't I should stop looking at it. Okay. Minutes approval, draft minutes of Tuesday, April 21st, 2026. Member Berger. >> a motion to approve the draft minutes from Tuesday, April

16321st, 2026 for the East Hampton Zoning Board of Appeals. Second. Concur. [laughter] Concur. Resolutions, Bonack Rooster LLC, 97 and 99 Accabonac Road, East Hampton, Suffolk County Tax Map number 300-163, there are 7-8.4 and 10. This was a four board approval, one abstaining, to approve a a lot line modification between two properties. Um I'm going to make a motion that we approve the determination for Bonack Rooster, Suffolk County Tax Map number 300-163-7-8.4 and 10 as written. Second. Concur. Concur. Brian Brian Crawford, 40 Agnew Avenue, Montauk, Suffolk County Tax Map number 300-31-2-33. This was a constrained lot. There were several issues there. This was a split decision. We didn't all agree, but >> [clears throat] >> we moved forward with a portion of it being approved. So, I would like to make a motion in the uh

164case of Brian Crawford, 40 Agnew Avenue, Montauk, Suffolk County Tax Map 300-31-2-33, to accept the determination as written. Second. Concur. Concur. Vice Chair, do we have an adjournment, please? >> Who? Uh I'd like to make a motion to close the Town of East Hampton Zoning Board of Appeals uh public hearing for April 28th, 2026 at 8:44 p.m. Second. >> Second. I just said thank you. Concur. All right. Good night, everybody.