Zoning Board - Regular Meeting

Um, Town of Bedford Zoning Board of Appeals. The meeting for Thursday, November 6, 2025. Um the way we work here is that um our secretary will call your application or read an application. If it's you, if you could please come up to the microphone here and explain to us what it is you're doing. Um and um this is a public hearing. So I will ask if anybody's on the Zoom call or in the audience wants to speak on your application to give them an opinion or whatever. Um, if I hear no one, then we will probably cancel the public or uh close the public hearing and then move on to our own discussion questions we may have for you. And at that point, we hope we'll be able to reach a decision this evening. We are usually a five member board. We have we are missing one member tonight. Um, to prevail, you will need three votes in favor of your application. Um, and u we'll see how that goes. Um, Kim, can we start?

Certainly. Haleiwa LLC is seeking a variance of article 3 section 125-11 and article 5 section 125-50 of the zoning ordinance for 9 Milan Avenue Bever Hills designated as section blocking lot 60.15-2-6 on the town tax maps in the two family zoning district to permit an already constructed front door portico to a pre-existing legal non-conforming residence with combined sideyard Third setback resulted in 25.5 ft where 35 ft is required in the two family zoning district and where the non-conforming lot size consists of less than 10,000 square ft as required in the two family zoning district and where the front porticle result in a front yard setback of 20 ft where 35 ft is required in the two family zoning district. Ed, before you start speaking, I I neglected to mention that we've we've all had the opportunity over the today today, yesterday, whatever, to go out and look at all of your applications or all your address at the addresses that are on the application. So, most of us are all familiar with at least the where you sit in the neighborhood. Uh, good evening. Thank you for accepting to uh hear my application here. I mean, I have only to produce just two photos basically because I mean the plans are in your hand and I have basically just one evidence which would be like when my dad purchased this property back in 2009. This was the the original front porch with the roof and during the uh sandy uh storm. um that little aluminum roof was damaged and uh later on um I don't remember exactly but around 2015 or such

we have um builded this other roof over it without a permission to rebuild it but we just thought was okay to just put it back exactly the same exact size and um then you know nothing was done until the property was sold and Here it is. Um, is there anyone in the want to speak on this application in the audience? Do you like to point out that the public notice mailed to the neighbors was not sent 10 days prior? Okay. So, Oh, okay. So, we can, yeah, we'll have to keep the public hearing open

and we'll have to renotice it for the next meeting where you can then decide. Do you understand that? So it has to go out 10 days before correct meetings so that all the neighbors can have a chance. But that would be just if somebody opposes this, right? You know, opposes it or even in favor of it. It just they have they have to be notified 10 days in advance. Yeah. But as far as what I said to when I heard that um that it hadn't happened, I said, "Let's go ahead and we'll hear what your application is because then once you then go away and can send it out and get responses back next meeting, we can just bring it up and you know, we don't have to hear the whole application again." Okay. We'll just see if anybody had, you know, any in favor of Absolutely. Oh, thank you very much.

I mean, in general, I have no problem with the with what he's what what is there. So you're saying the facade was there before the hurricane. Correct. You replace it. It it was just clearly if I can approach I can actually I have multiple calls of this and here is the date 2009. And you see there was always something there. Yes. There was always something there.

It's just what happened was he uh he it came down and he took a demolition to take it down and then and the permit never got closed out and so he he put this up and now it needs it needs to be legalized. Uh, the property is very very neat. I like the gravel driveway very much and I think the portico is is very it's suited to to the house where it is. I'm not great. So, we'll put you off till December if you just get that if you get if you please get the notifications out. Certainly. Certainly. We won't be voting tonight. We're not voting tonight. Not a problem. Yeah. Exactly. Nobody had any Yes, we I I do have plenty of these. Yes. 100%.

Okay. Nobody had any problem on the board. This is a wonderful We can't vote on it tonight. Certainly. I understand for it. Thank you very much. Thank you. We'll see you next month. Okay. Our next meeting,

Patricia Milo is seeking a variance of article 5 section 125-50 of the zoning ordinance for 303 J Street, Katona designated section blocking and lot 50.17-2-13 on the town tap tax maps in the residential 4acre zoning district to permit the construction of a twocar garage in the sideyard. setback results in 35.75 ft where 50 ft is required and where the combined total sideyard setback results in 86.45 ft where 100 ft is required in the residential 4acre zoning district.

Cam, you got the password on this one? It's not typed on the thing there. It's all lowercase. Oh, that's the best map right here. What? That lot. So, he wants to put it right here. Oh, he wants to go around the back of the house. He wants it in the back of the house where Yeah, exactly. where you come around. Right. That was much better. I thought it was going to be here, but it goes Yeah, it's got to be here. So, you just drive straight into it.

They can't do it there because of the septic. Okay. Just just automot. There's one there, too. All right. Yeah. Two letters in the back. Corrosa and what's that?

Two would add support. Two that was this one a late one. Good evening. Um good evening.

I'm representing the Malos at 303 J Street for a variant. They're looking to install a twocar garage on the back of the property. Uh we are respectfully requesting a variance for the proposed garage setback at 303J Street. Uh the initial setback for the sideyard is 35.75 ft where 50 is required assessing a variance of 14.3 ft and where the combined total sideyard setback results in an 86.45 ft or 100 is required also necessitating a variance of 13.55 ft. While the sidear is approximately 28% variance and the combined that excuse me is approximately a 28% variance and the combined is at 13.55% may appear substantial. Uh it is reasonable and necessary given the unique characteristics of the property, the practical limitations of alternative placements and the long-term benefits to the property owner and community. The property has resided at this property since 1990 and the house itself dates back to the 1950s. The existing garage built during this earlier time is tucked underneath the house and is no longer suitable for modern vehicles and it has a head height of only 6.6 6 ft which is insufficient to accommodate trucks or any types of SUVs. Uh the proposed garage would remedy this issue proving a functional and necessary storage space preventing vehicles from being left outside in the weather which and it would also enhance the property's appearance by having it within the structure and protecting them from the elements. As you can see from the picture here I just provided this is a front shot of the house. Um, I'll show you the where where the proposed location is. Currently, this is the back of the house

right where these vehicles are. They're parking vehicles outside because these vehicles can't fit inside the garage. So, they're proposing a garage right where these vehicles are. Here's another look. The the garage will be placed right again where those vehicles are and the driver goes directly inside right to the garage. I'll read you some factors. Um, looking at this, will there be an an undesirable ch uh will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or detriment to the nearby properties will be created by granting of this variance. The proposed garage is carefully cighted behind the house at the lowest point on the property which minimize minimizes its visual impact from the road. The majority of the garage will be obscured from the view by the existing house, ensuring that it does not dominate the landscape or alter the overall character of the property. An important consideration is the proposed location is in the proximity of to the BRL Bedford Riding Lanes Association paths and the Beaver Dam Sanctuary right behind the property. These paths are regularly used for the recreational purposes and placing the garage elsewhere on the property would induce a visual impact for the riders and the users of the path as for the homeowner. By keeping the garage in its proposed location behind the house, it is shielded from view and ensures that the recreational experience for those utilizing the path is not disturbed by the presence of the structure. Moreover, the surrounding neighborhood consists of properties that commonly feature multiple structures on a single lot, establishing a precedent for accessory structures like the proposed garage. And I'll show you in one of my exhibits. In this picture I have here, everything

that's highlighted in the purple color has an accessory structure associated with the house. The yellow is the property owner. I can try to blow that up for you here if you need. As you can see, each property has some type of accessory structure somewhere on it. Um, the garage will be designed to complement Oh, sorry. Given this context, the addition of the garage will not be an anonymity, but rather an extension of the existing pattern of the development in the area. The garage will be designed to complement the existing structure and maintain the visual harmony of the property. Its tucked position behind the house will pre prevent it from being prominently visible from the streets of the neighborhood neighboring properties future further limiting its visual impact on the surrounding area. Show you one other picture between the this homeowner and the neighbor. There's a line of trees, a very large line of trees that is shielding it from the neighbor that's going to have the most impact. As you can see here in this picture, there's a all these trees here are fully bloomed for the most part and you can't even see the neighbor's house at this time. See all the in this picture you can see the closeup of how thick the area is and it's not going to have any impact on the neighbor visually. Here the benefits. Number two, the benefits sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method feasible for the applicant to pursue other than an area variance. There is no alternative location on the property that would be less invasive or more suitable for the proposed garage. The existing garage has a head height of 66 as I said, which is insufficient. Uh the proposed location's most practical option as placing the

garage elsewhere on the property would create several significant issues. First, one potential location would interfere with the septic system on the back, right directly behind the house, which I can show you right directly behind house. You can see that's where the septic system is. So, we really can't put it in that area at all because it's going to affect the septic system. Additionally, moving the garage to another spot would increase the total lot coverage. The idea here was we were trying to keep it just to the footprint of the house and not adding any additional driveway or anything. So, we were trying to keep that mindful that we wouldn't have to do any storm water effect any more impervious create any more impervious services other than just the garage at this point. These are all existing impervious services that are there. um other locations to also place the garage closer to the property line which would create additional zoning conflicts or impact p the privacy of the neighboring properties on the other opposite side of the property that brings the garage. I'd probably have to ask for um another like 20% variance which it's just not feasible to have it up in front of the house where it is. We wanted to tuck it, keep it behind the property, behind the main house so that it just doesn't kill the visual impacts of the beauty of uh the sanctuary back there. Importantly, no trees will be removed as part of the construction of this garage. Further ensuring that the natural landscape is preserved. We tried to again make sure that we weren't removing any old trees on the property. There's a lot of hundred-y old trees on the property that we just didn't want to get into cutting them. We wanted to preserve

that natural appearance and again keep the uh the um trees not cut. The requested the requested area variance is not substantial in context. While the requested variance may appear significant, it is not substantial in context. The proposed setbacks still maintains a considerable distance from the property line ensuring that the garage does not encroach on the neighboring properties or create any sense of overcrowding. In fact, the remaining setback distance still pro provides ample space between the structures maintaining the open and spacious feel of the neighborhood. The requested variance is a practical adjustment that balances the physical constraints of the property with the zoning requirements. Due to the topographical and environmental limitations, including the presence of gullies, the BRLA plats, the wetland buffer, and the pie shape of the property, there is no viable alternative locations for the garage that would comply with the full 50 50 foot setback requirement. Any alternative replacement would introduce more significant challenges such as the disruption of the wetland buffer, interference with the septic system, visual impacts for the home, the homeowner to enjoy the view of the forest and and increased lot coverage. And I can show you here in this picture here. This is a topo map of the property. Um, the garage would be going over here. And as you can see, there's a huge gully that rolls down and it's just all downhill here. There's a swamp down in here. So, anything over, we're trying to stay out of the wetland area to to maintain the natural landscape. Um, by sticking it right here on the edge at the edge of the gully, that's the least impactful place we could possibly find on the property that would make sense to put put the garage. Uh furthermore, the variance is requested minimum relief necessary to allow for a functional and safe garage that meets modern vehicle sto I'm sorry

modern vehicle and storage needs. Does not introduce excessive bulk or height that would make the structure imposing or out of scale of the property. The garage is also designed to complement the existing home and will be positioned in a way that minimizes the its visual impact, ensuring it blends seamlessly with the property rather than standing out on an intrusive addition. And I can show you the plans for the property. Um, this is what the garage would look like. It's just a pretty simple garage. Nothing nothing uh nothing substantial here. It's we're trying to really limit the height of it because it is a ranch. So, we don't want it overpowering the ranch with it, you know, real high twotory. Plus, I understand there's a 20 foot height limit uh that we're staying within. We're right at that 20 foot height to try to get as much as we can. The homeowner does have large vehicles, a van, uh a big pickup truck, and we're trying to give them enough a large enough garage door and space to accommodate that with some storage above. By granting this variance, the town is allowing the homeowner to make reasonable use of their property while preserving the overall character of the neighborhood. The setback reductions does not introduce any negative externalities such as overcrowding. It reduced privacy or increased noise. Instead, it enables the modest and necessary improvement that respects the aesthetic and spatial qualities of the surrounding area. Given the totality of these factors, the continued significant setback alignment with the neighborhood development patterns, sight specific constraints, and the ne necessity of the variance for reasonable property use. It is clear that the request of relief is neither excessive nor detrimental. rather it is well justified and contextual appropriate modifications

that supports both the homeowner's needs and the integrity of the neighborhood. Number four, the proposed variance will have will have any adverse in fact impact or physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. The proposed garage will not cause any adverse aesthetic, environmental or ecological impacts on the property or the surrounding areas. The garage is carefully cited behind the house at the lowest point which minimizes visual impact. As I said, uh the majority of of the structure will be obscured from the uh neighboring properties and the front of the road. The homeowner has already planted uh if you were out there today, he's planted some trees on the side of the house to also try to break up the if you're looking from 22 to the left side of the house, he's already planted some trees to try to break up uh the view of that garage. I think they're 20 foot arboritinis that he has planted. Right now they're like 6 feet I think I believe. Um but as time grows they'll grow larger and they'll actually create a nice screen from the front of the property. Uh furthermore the location of the garage is mindful of the environmental constraints of the property as I said with the the wetland buffer the BRLA riding lanes the sanctuary. Um, placing the garage in this location avoids disturbing the swamp area. As I said, maintaining the additionally, the existing paths that run behind the property are preserved, ensuring that the recreational users of the BRLA pass will not experience again any visual impacts or disruption. The proposed development will have no significant ecological consequences as it keeps the development confined to the footprint of the garage itself, limiting disruption to the surrounding environment. Moreover, the garage is designed to complement the existing structure. Um, in summary, the requested variance proposed garage will not cause any adverse aesthetic environmental or eological impacts. Uh, hardship necessitating this variance is not self-created. Uh, the difficulty arises from the unique characteristics of the

property including the topography in the narrowest part of the lot where the house is situated and the presence of the BRLA paths as I stated. Um, I keep going. I don't want to keep reading the same thing over and over again. I guess you kind of get the hint at this point. It's kind of the same things. If you have any questions, I'll be more than willing to answer them. Would you state your name? I I didn't get uh Robert Milo. Well done.

I I uh I I visited the property. I I like the fact that you're almost doing like a a cluster type development. you're you're maximizing the open land and keeping the development to the to as you said the footprint and you're you're not even anywhere near impervious surface coverage or anything and uh the viewshed is amazing behind that house. Yeah.

Incredible. But I see it presented difficulties, you know, to to add more to it. But I I think your statement and uh site visit I did today I I would have no no issue with this. We were really trying to maintain the view of the from the house to the back of the property into the woods. They've really invested a lot of money into just kind of maintaining that area and having that view and we would hate to just have to stick a garage back there and you know you can't really enjoy that beautiful view of you know because they'll never be able to build back there and that's the greatest part about it. It's really nice back there. I just wouldn't want to lose that view. Is there anyone in the audience that want to speak on this iss on this application on Zoom? There are two letters supporting your application.

We have both neighbors uh left and right of us. The one that's getting most impact did write a letter uh and and and uh we have a letter from 315 J Street and from 299 J Street. Uh both in support of the application. Right. I also, if I, if I may, I also like the fact that there, as much as the neighbors appear to be supporting the application. Um, the I like the fact that there are no windows or openings facing the neighbors, which is I think very thoughtful aspect of the design.

Yeah. Well, that was one of the considerations that we wanted to do was to again, we didn't want those windows. We didn't want light shedding out into the woods in the winter time when the leaves are off. We're just trying to keep it again, it's for storage. There's really no reason to have windows on the back side of the house. So, we just kind of kept it to the front side of the house. Yep. No, it's as thoughtful a presentation as you could make for Thank you. for this. Can I have a motion to close the public hearing? So, move. Second. All those in favor? I. All right. Public hearing is closed. Want to make a motion? Res.

Sure. Um the uh zoning board of appeals uh at its November 6th meeting uh heard the application of four of uh I'm sorry, wrong location of um 303 J Street in Kona to permit the construction of a two-car garage. Uh all of the uh which is mainly around setbacks. The uh the board has uh voted to uh approve this application, noting that there are were extensive documents uh supplied to justify the location and the uh necessity of having uh this garage which also um established that that it was least least impact uh provided. So the board has uh made a determination that the benefit sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by another means feasible to the applicant and that there will be no undesirable change to the character of the neighborhood or detriment to the nearby properties as noted because we have two neighbor letters supporting the application. The variance is not substantial and has been mitigated by all of the uh design work. The variance requested will not result in any adverse physical or environmental effects on the neighborhood or community. The alleged difficulty is self-created by necessity, but it's only one of the factors that we consider as a board in making a decision, and it is not determinative. Approval of the proposed variance would be subject to the following conditions. The applicant shall use their best efforts to ensure a building permit is issued within one year of the board's approval of the variance and then diligently pursue the construction to completion. The applicant shall submit a certified asbuilt survey, including building and impervious coverage calculations to the building department prior to the issuance of a certificate

of occupancy. Therefore, this variance is granted in accordance with the plans submitted to the board which are dated July 22nd. Thank you, sir. 2025. July 22nd, 2025. Um, do you guys have to go up to wetlands for this? Um, I gave it to the and planning board. No, not Yeah. Well, maybe no only wetlands. Yeah. because of the uh stream in the back. Yeah, it's dry. Thank you. I second. We're going to vote. Mr. Maron, approve. Miss Lee, yes.

Mr. Van Loverren, yes. Mr. McCallis, yes. You got it. Thank you. Thank you for your Well done. I was thinking it might be nice to have a sort of a mini fire chief car instead of a Suburban. until you have a flat then you don't want to There you go. You must get that car out. Yes. Nobody wants that.

KBY Trust Timothy W. Crowley is seeking a variance of article 5 section 125-50 and article 8 section 125-79.1 of the zoning ordinance for 422 Mount Holly Road Kona section block and lot 39.16-2-2 on the town tax maps in the residential 4acre zoning district to permit an addition to a primary residence where the covered front porch results in a front yard setback of 50.5 feet where 75 feet is required in the 4acre zoning district and for the conversion of an accessory structure from a barn to a cottage where the total floor area to be occupied as the cottage should not exist prior to 1989 and the adoption of the code for cottages and where the accessory structure and additions have not existed for 5 years and where the front yard setback results in 40.40 40 ft where 75 ft is required in the zone 4acre zoning district and where the proposed cottage results in 2,377 square ft of gross floor area where a cottage shall not contain more than 800 square ft of gross floor area and where the existing principal residence is 5,76 square ft and will be increased to 6,264 square ft and where the cottage shall not exceed be 25% for 1,426.5 existing square ft or 1,566 proposed square ft of the total floor area of the prime principal residence and where the relocation of an existing generator and propane tanks result in a front yard setback of 25 ft where 75 ft is required in the residential 4acre zoning district.

It's a long tag.

Thank you. U Madam Secretary Pete Daniel Hollis on behalf of uh the applicant along with Sarah O'Shea from my office Ker Waldinger Montgomean Hollis 118 North Bedford Road Mount Kisto New York. Um the variances that we're seeking are as a result of the existing conditions. My letter of September 9th uh 2025 goes through the balancing test and the criteria but I think I without sticking to the formula so much if I can just explain the uh application a little bit. The the residents main residence and the barn were both built 1932 nearly 100 years ago. It's a beautiful uh two buildings that are there and and their respective size and their ratio of their respective size are what cause us to have to get a variance for the ratio between the proposed accessory cottage and the main dwelling because the barn is already there in the size that it is. We're not adding to anything there. We're not expanding any footprints of either the uh the uh the cottage at all. The six bedrooms in the main house will be reduced to four bedrooms and the two bedrooms that are being reduced in the main house will be the two bedrooms in the cottage. Um, we've been to the uh Department of Health and Mr. Bibbo has been able to obtain a uh letter of no objection to the uh sixbedroom septic uh plan that we have in front of in front of them. In like fashion, we received an administrative permit from the uh town's wetlands consultant with regard to that septic and its location. The um the front yard setbacks are as a result of where both the barn and the house are. You know that they're very close to Mount Holly Road 422. It's a 13 acre parcel and uh to place the cottage somewhere else would mean an additional amount of coverage on the property. uh

and it's really not feasible when you have a building now that's there and that these owners do not wish to have it be a barn for the purpose that a barn is usually used. So there's plenty of parking there spaces at least on the outside along the front and there are two spaces inside the garage so there's adequate parking as the uh um code requires. We were in front of the uh planning board on October 20th and at that meeting um there was no negative comment and the there was an administrative waiver or administrative permit granted by the planning board with regard to the house the height because it's 20 feet 2 and 5/8 in. So they waved the 2 and 5/8 in. they would not be uh vote because they didn't feel it would be appropriate to in any way influence whatever you might decide about this application tonight. So when you take all of those facts and if you put them together and you go through the um the benefit to the applicant as a way against any detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the community. There is none. This residence and this barn has been there since 1932. their location has caused no adverse impact environmentally or in any other fashion on the neighborhood or the community. There no environmental uh issues because the board of health with the septic and the WCC with the admin administrative permit have already looked at that. the ratio of the house uh to the uh the accessory cottage is uh I need a variance there because of the fact the size of the barn were a smaller barn uh it would be uh we'd be closer uh to the 25% and the 800 square foot it's again the same answer the um the barn is there already we wish to use it uh for the

cottage um it's a familyowned uh operation the owner ers are a trust, but it's it's a family. It's not uh any commercial or public rental purposes. I have a question. Yes, ma'am. On your occupation, it it's too uh on the nose. The conversion of the accessory structure, which is a barn, into a cottage where the total floor area to be occupied as the cottage did not exist prior to 1989.

Well, the floor area existed, but it didn't exist as a residential unit. I think that's the the point. The floor the floor area, there's been no change in the floor area. The fact that it hasn't been used for residential purposes, that part didn't exist. There's no residential use prior to 1989. But the building itself is a building itself as is since 1932. Okay. That's what I want. You mean the barn that was the accessory structure was there? The accessory structure has existed in the same in the same uh ratio to the main residence and it it it did exist prior uh it's existed you know 96 years 1932

yeah or 94 years pardon me. Okay. I I see that the cluster the the land was a farm property, right? I mean, there were horses, chickens, and the whole So, and not unlike farm properties, the the barn and the house were clustered together or closer together, you know, for convenience. It was a conservation area towards the back that, you know, it's a beautiful piece of property and the clients is is that area conserved? Is that is that a a conservation easement over there? Pardon me. Is there a conservation easement over there on the property? There is. Yeah. And is that with the land trust? Yes. Okay. You were here a year ago. Pardon me.

You were here or this was application was before us a year ago, right? Um for the location of the generator, correct? Which I guess has changed. It's just moving a little further to the north. I believe it is because of the the parking and the fact that the accessory cottage uh is going to be we want the generator closer to the accessory cottage. Gotcha. Um I guess what I'm saying is what we should probably then I mean we would be giving you a new variance that would incorporate where the current generator is. So we could get rid of this the our our our um the earlier resolution from last year. Yeah.

Yeah. Perhaps you could say that the if you were I were lucky enough to have the whole thing passed that this uh amendment would supersede the prior uh res resolution of approval granted in 2024. Could you go into a little bit of detail on what's happening in the main house where you said two bedrooms are being removed of the six and they'll be transferred to the making the house was built in 1932. closet space wasn't what it was right now then as it is now. Pardon me. They're just expanding the livable space per bedroom that will be in there. Four will be in the main house, two will be in the cottage. So everything in both prop buildings will be interior.

Yes. Okay. Except for the the front porch, the the covering of the front porch. So there there's an addition in the back, but that's that's outside of Yeah. It's like a big courtyard. Setbacks. Yeah. Is there anyone in the audience or on the Zoom call that want Mr. Geronda is here if you we have any questions on any aspect of the site plan? Oh, okay. Is there anybody that wanted to speak on this application in particular? No. Seeing no one, can I have a motion to close the public hearing? So moved. All those in favor?

I public hearing is closed. Um I mean I don't have a problem with the application. The building needs to get finished. I said this place needs to get finished. Is this a two-year project? It's been it's been at least that the project will have to take two more years to finish. I believe I think it'll take a while. I'm not sure exactly how long. I think the contractor is hoping it'll take less than two years, but it it's not from what I saw today inside.

It's not going to take six months. That's fair. I don't want to make a commitment as to how long, but I think, you know, it should take be complete within two years, but I don't think anyone hopes it will take two years. It's a beautiful property, obviously with some great history. Yeah. I I made the contractor and owner's representative promise that I could see it when it's finished. Yes. Anybody else have any other questions or I'm just trying to understand that various variances. That's that the 40 ft I understand proposed cottage results in 2377 but then there's another

what's this down well there's a it's either 25% of the floor ratio of the main house we have a we have one go's laws and it just in this particular case it just doesn't seem appropriate because the existing building is far larger

the the barn's bigger than the house. Yeah. So, it's, you know, that's where they run into problem, but it's I mean, given where it's located and it's by itself out there, it's really not a I don't think it's a big shift. If nobody has any um I I'll make the motion to um to grant a variance grant several variances based on the notice that that we is before us. Um, we do so believing that um, the applicant cannot achieve what he wants to do by any other means feasible, that there'll be no undesirable change to the character of the neighborhood or detriment to nearby properties. Seems like they're the only character or the neighborhood out there in the nearby properties. Um, the variance requested, I don't believe, is substantial. The variance requested will not result in any adverse physical or environmental effects on the community. Um, did you go before wetlands? No. Well, we have we have an administrative permit.

Permit. Okay.

Um and the alleged difficulty while self-created is only one factor to be considered in making its decision and that's um not very deter it's not determinative. Um if a uh this this if granted this um new variance would supersede uh the previous resolution and variance that was granted uh resolution number 11-243 which was specifically just for the generator but the generator is incorporated now in a new location and is being incorporated in this uh current uh variance that we're that we would be granting tonight. Um if um granted, the applicant shall use their best efforts to ensure the building permit is issued within one year of the board's approval of this variance and then diligently pursue such construction to completion. The applicant shall submit a certified asbuilt survey, including building and impervious coverage calculations to the building department prior to the issuance of a CFO and the variance is granted in accordance with plans submitted to the board dated what are we dated? August 6, 2024 or at least that's the existing condition stuff.

925 25. What is it? 925. 92525. September 92525. Yeah, we'll be we'll do that. 8624 and last revised 92525. Exactly. Need a second on that. Second. Mr. Marin. Hi. Ms. Lee. Yes. Mr. Van Loverin. Yes. Mr. Mall. Yes. You got it.

Thank you. Have a good evening. Bailey Eisen is seeking a variance of article 3 section 125-11D and article 5 section 125-50 of the zoning ordinance for 7 Indian Hill Road Bedford designated as section block of lot 84.8-1-31.1 C-1-31.1 on the town tax maps in the residential 2acre zoning district

to permit the installation of a generator and an above ground propane tank on a legal non-conforming lot where the lot size is 28,314 square ft or 65 acres where a lot size of 2 acres is required in the residential 2acre zoning district and where the front yard setback results in 15 ft. And where the above ground propane tank results in a front yard setback of 10 ft. Where current zoning requirements for a corner lot require a sideyard on a side street to be equal in depth to the required front yard setback of 50 ft in the residential 2acre zoning district. And where the building coverage results in 7.12% where a maximum of 6% is permitted in the residential 2acre zoning district and where the impervious surface coverage results in 16.66% where a maximum of 14% is permitted in the residential 2acre zoning district.

Good evening. Good evening. Hi, I'm Bailey Eisen. Um, this is my first time doing this, so it's going to be a lot less impressive than the other ones we've heard tonight. Um,

but just a couple of thoughts on from me on this. I really appreciate you taking a look at all of this, taking the time. Um, very excited to put a generator in at the house. The house is entirely wired for electric, so that we lose power relatively frequently in that area, and in the winter it gets a little scary when the entire heat goes out. So, the generator has been something I've been really wanting to do since I moved in. Um, if looking at the property, we're trying to put the generator generator in the least obstructive place possible. And so, if you follow all the setback guidelines, that kind of puts you it visually in the middle of the property and closer to the neighbors. So, the area we're proposing on Poundbridgeidge Road right behind the house is the least visually disturbing, should be the least disturbing in general to everyone around. and I think just kind of makes sense for how the property is currently set up and functioning. Um, I think that's basically on it.

Any thought about was was there any thought given to getting a propane tank that's buried rather than above ground? We had considered it, but I actually was advised that the propane tank above was a little bit better in terms of like you if you have any lawnmowers or gardeners on the property, it's visually easier and it's set back in that area behind the house. um where it shouldn't it shouldn't be visually obstructive and I'm planning on painting it green so it bring it goes in with all the greenery back there um but that was our main consideration and the of course the cost was just a lot more prohibitive um you can get them green you can get them green yeah oh yeah oh perfect great yeah I don't even need to say it requested requested you can make it greener but excellent

just don't make just don't make it into a cow Um I'm sorry. Questions. Go ahead. Sure. So um it would be propane only for the generator or for your heat also. It's only for the generator and your installer recommended 500 gallons. It's pretty large. Yes, I think Anony's it's a um a it's a 20KW generator and it burns at 2 to 2 and 12 gallons per hour. Um okay,

the 500 gallon makes more sense than 23 of the 12 gallon tanks on the property. They're more more constructive. They don't stand out. So many companies that we're working with is okay. The um I know you can't um you won't be able to see it from your neighbors the the access along Indian Hill but it it may be quite visible along Poundidge Road even if it's green. Uh could you give some consideration to doing either an attractive natural fence or some vegetative screening there?

Sure. I mean, it pretty much is vegetative screening over there on that side of Poundbridgeidge Road. It's very dense in my opinion. Yeah, there was there was too much traffic for me to stop and look from there. So, if you're standing on the yard looking from where that tank's going to be, that's essentially what you're looking at. Okay. Yeah. No, there's quite a lot cuz I went off there. I just didn't want to stop. Yeah, that's a dangerous road to be. It is. Now, how many gallons did you say was burning? It's 500. But how much does it burn per one? It's from one and a half, depending on the load of what she's running. It's from one and a half to two and a half gallons per hour. Per hour.

Okay. Well, I see there's a there's probably it looks like there's an an elevation difference from the fence down to pound. There is. There's stairways up. So, it's not going to be visible. Most likely not visible. And if it is, you're not looking at the road. Okay. You know, I I was there. That's it seemed like the logical place to me. I mean I I haven't seen a picture of the tank or how big it is. Is Is there a need for any like ballards or any protection around? No. Okay. Yeah. That gives you if you run that thing 24 hours a day which you're guy will tell you don't do that. Really hope turn it off at night. Right.

Well, you get so it's you're right. It's a colar generator. So the colars are designed to be more commercial and styl. So, it just has to be inspected every 24 hours to make sure the oil level hasn't dropped. But it can run for 24 hours and then stop it for a moment, check it, put it back on again. Yeah. But that gets you two weeks if you run if you have all your lights on and your guy will recommend again. You won't.

Uh is there anybody that wanted to speak on this application? We did get a letter from um your neighbor Johnny Cornoyer at um 98 Pound Ridge Road. He was just curious how it was going to fit and I told him he should come over and talk to you, but he obviously didn't. Um what is the decel level of of this generator uh running if it does run for So it's below the standard level. It runs at an exercise d 56. I'm going to need you to come up if you're going to keep this up. Okay, sorry. He's not keeping it. 66 by 56 at exercise 100 is

and under under 100% load it's between 64 and 65 and it's padded. I mean it's a it's got attenuation. It has one of the it has one of the quietest enclosure in ter in terms of all brands that are out there. Yeah. Um it's also been designed by Coler to have a lower tone frequency. The human ear is more sensitive to high frequencies. So their exhaust system has been made to make it a lower tone. So it's not as disruptive. It's not that high pitch. Not that high pitch now. Yeah. I have some scale about decibel levels. You know, 100 is equal to, you know, a mower or something like that, you know. But it's it's it's good to know that it's it's it's attenuated, you know, that you you're buffering it. Yeah. Okay.

Um if there's no one that wanted to speak on this application, can I have a motion to close public hearing? Second. All those in favor? I public hearing's closed. Um I don't have any problem with this. Anybody else have any issues or want to make a motion? Yeah. What was the reason for not doing this administratively? There is no administration. Oh, not anymore. No, no, we don't have that. That's a that's a planning board thing. Oh. He has been with us for a while. There's just a lot going on between plenty of spending too much time down at the south in the Caribbean. That's right.

What? It's getting colder. It does look cold.

Um I make a motion to approve the variance for 17 road installation of generator and and sporting um propane tank. Um, in particular, the board found that the benefit to the applicant by granting the variance outweighs any alleged detriment to the community and determine the following. The benefit saw by the applicant uh cannot be achieved by other means feasible to the applicant and there will be no undesirable change to the character of the neighborhood or detriment to the nearby properties and the variance requested is not substantial. And the variance requested will not result in any adverse physical or environmental effects to the neighborhood or community. And the alleged difficulty uh although is self-created by by way of making the application, but that is not the only one of the factors to be considered by the board making its decision and is not determinative. Approval of the proposed variance will be subject to the following conditions. The applicants will use their best efforts to ensure that a building permit is issued within one year of the board's approval of these variants and then diligently pursue such construction to completion. The applicants will submit a do we do this?

What's that? Do we still do this for the the survey as survey on this? Yes, they need coverages. any coverages. So we can do the just the the location of the of the tank over coverages. So you have to do the coverage. Okay. Yes. An applicant shall submit a certified asbuilt survey including building and interpreters coverage calculations to the building department prior to the issuance of certificate of occupancy and that variances granted in accordance with the plan sketch submitted to the board dated just use the received September 25 submitted on September 2nd 2025.

Okay, we'll use that date. I'll second. Mr. Maron, yes. Miss Lee, yes. Mr. Van Lren, yes. Mr. McCallis, yes. You've got it. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much. Stay warm. Thank you. I appreciate that. I have an all electric house. It's a little scary. It is scary. It's getting scary every month.

Okay. You either leave me your c Great. Gwendalyn Goule is seeking a variance of article 3 section 125-11D and article 5 section 12550 of the zoning ordinance for 820 South Bedford Road Bedford designated as section block and lot 83.14-1-10 on the town tax maps in the residential 4acre zoning district to permit the construction of a deck on a legal non-conforming lot where the lot size is 63 3,691 square ft or 1.462 acres where 4 acre lot size is required in the residential 4acre zoning district and where the existing shed resulted in a sideyard setback of 16 ft 7 in where 50 ft is required and where the building coverage results in 4.49% where the existing building coverage is 3.88% 88% and where 3% is the maximum building coverage permitted in the residential 4acre zoning district and where the I guess I'm repeating it will that's that's the residential 4acre zoning district

good evening uh board members my name is Doug Houston of Heitler Houston Architects 11 Fenomore Road, New Relle, New York 10804. Uh I am here representing the owner of this property, Glen Goule. Uh we are seeking two area variances. One for building coverage and one for sideyard setbacks. Um the building coverage is a result of the size of the undersized existing non-conforming lot in an R4 district. and the sideyard set back as a result of an existing shed uh that we are looking to legalize. I've pulled up here vicinity map of the zoning district. Uh the yellow outlined property is the parcel uh which this work is residing. It is in an R4A district. Um the minimum lot size in an R4 district is 4 acres and this property is 1.4 462 acres about 36% of the minimum required size. The undersized lot is located on the fringe of the R4A district and nearly adjacent to the R14 our quarter district uh as South Bedford Road intersects Old Coast Road and also very closely R1A district. two lots to our south are just over a half acre in size, 0.56 acres or about 24,000 square feet. Um while this Westchester GIS zoning boundary map indicates this the line uh on Locust Drive, um there was a 2016 variance that you guys had approved for three Locust Drive, which is the corner

property. They claimed it was in an R quarter district. So, um I know sometimes GIS maps don't get updated uh frequently, but be that as it may, we are very close to that R quarter district. Uh the lot to our north is just over an acre, about 1.2 acres, uh or about 52,000 square ft. So, another nonconforming uh existing non-conforming zoning lot. Bear with me. I'm going just pull up one of the plans. See if I can. Okay. Um, so there are two structures related to this area area variance. Uh, the first is the existing shed located on the north side of the property. we're requesting to legalize and which would require an area variance for relief on the minimum sideyard setback due to its location. Um this shed also contributes to the total building coverage uh of which is currently existing non-conforming for a 3% um maximum building coverage in an R4 lot. The second structure is a newly proposed deck. Um, uh, the scope of work involves removing this shaded area here, which is the existing deck, which is deteriorating and is insufficient in size for the merged family that now live here, uh, who entertain international guests, their family, uh, as well as have a social life and like to entertain guests. So, they're looking for a two-tier deck. One to provide for food

uh barbecue uh tables and the other to provide a social sitting area set. Uh just note that this deck uh has to navigate an existing septic tank, an existing leech field. Uh, and based on all of those parameters around us, the newly proposed deck on the driveway side of the house was really the only place that we could expand. It wasn't actually what they desired in the first place, but that's where we ended up. Uh, and we do try to hug the house as much as possible.

Yes. Yes. Yeah, there's two. We are We are We have a can of lever. Oh, yeah. My contractor calls me the canal lever king. So, we are far enough away of that. Um,

okay. With respect to the building coverage in an R4 district, which uh large property minimum 4 acres has a very low percentage, 3%. Um this is disproportionately and significantly reduces the amount of building coverage that we are allowed on this piece of property. Um the 1.462 acres times 3% only yields about 1,900 ft of building coverage. Uh if we compare that to a true 4 acre lot, uh we would have about 5,200 ft of allowable building uh average. So we're three times less than that. Um, I'd like you I'd like you to ask you to contextually consider in comparison uh an R1A district whose minimum lot is 40,000 square ft, just under an acre, and would be the closest zoning district aligned with this size lot. The R1A has a max building coverage of 10% which would allow a building coverage of up to 4,000 square ft at its minimum lot size, more as you approach the R2. Uh, and we're proposing a building coverage of less than half of that. The R2 district, which would be the zoning district in between the R1A and the R4, has a max building coverage of 6% and at the minimum lot size would allow 5,227 ft. So, we are significantly lower than either of those contextual um districts. Um, the 4.49 49 building coverage that we are proposing is marginally above 3% max building coverage customarily used for a minimum 4 acre lot. It's less than the 6% of the R2A district and more than 50% less than the 10% allowed in the R1A district, which in my opinion would be the most fitting bulk regulations for this size lot and contextual where it sits on the

fringe of the R4A district adjacent to the R4 with respect to the distance from the side shed to the sideyard property line. Just going to go back to my images here. Um, the existing shed resides 16'7 from the side property line. Whereas 50 foot is required on one side and 100 foot is required in total of both side yards. In total, we are approximately 120 ft with two sides combined. So, we comply with the combined distance, but not the single district. From the pictometry view that's on the screen, you'll see that several of the adjacent houses in this area have accessory structures that fall within the permitted yards. So, this is not an uncommon occurrence in this area. In fact, in 2016, a variance uh on five lo three Locus Drive, which is this corner lot here, was granted for a 16x 12 accessory shed that was within 5 ft of the front yard where 35 ft was required and within 20 ft of the rear yard where 40 ft was required. I'll note in those meeting minutes that the owners of 820 South Bedford Avenue wrote a letter in support of that accessory structure variance. The 16T 7 dimension is greater than the minimum required sideyard setback of the adjacent R quarter district and we believe this is contextual to all three adjacent side. So, we believe that we've demonstrated this proposal will not create an undesirable change to the neighborhood,

nor will it be detrimental to the adjacent properties. All adjacent parcels have similar nonconforming conditions.

We believe that we have demonstrated the benefits sought cannot be achieved by any other means than the area of variance. uh the existing condition is already non-conforming to the low building coverage percentage found in R4A district. Any expansion or reduction will be considered non-conforming no matter what we do. Uh if this 1.4 acre lot resided in an R1 district, it would be more than conforming. Uh specifically, the shed the structure is existing um and no work is proposed. an area variance is the only recourse to allow the existing structure to main remain. Therefore, um I think we've demonstrated that the benefit saw cannot be achieved by any other means other than of area variance. Um we believe this is not a substantial uh proposal again citing the context of appropriate size law in our 1A district. Um there is wetlands on the property. It's sort of not necessarily relevant to this variance application, but all of the proposed work is beyond the 100 foot wetlands buffer. Um, and uh we do not believe that it will cause an adverse effect uh in the neighborhood. We are very far away from our neighbors and contextual with our neighbors. Uh while the difficulty may have been self-created by subdividing this lot in the context of an R4A, uh it was it predated the ownership uh of the particular AC applicant and is only necessary because of the undersized existing non-conforming lot. Please let me know if you have any questions.

Thank you. Is there any excuse me is there anyone in the audience who want to speak on the application? Any questions? Same call. No hearing. No one. Can I have a motion to close the public hearing? So move. All those in favor? I I public hearing is closed discussion. Yeah. That's the biggest factor that there should really should be a different zoning. So if it all fits the fine the deck in the back, you know, I walked around. Thank you for marking it, for staking it out. Um, sorry. So, that that was uh helpful. The the depression in in the front of the property, which is called a wetland. Yeah.

Was curious to me because it's got a PVC pipe draining into it. And I've never seen a wetland with that kind of an artificial uh, you know, dra drainage situation. Are you Is that just draining your property? Is it a vernal pool? Is it something that shows up in a spring? I I know uh I think the owners have told me that they had never seen water in that depression. Um the uh environment soil scientists had come out um to take a look. Um we had thought the boundary was much further out from where it was. Um he laughed. He said, "No, let me come take a look." And it became a really small area there. I don't really know. possible exist

that area might have been a wetland but but this is this was very different so uh sometimes vernal pools will dry up and then they'll fill but you know there is a pipe in it which I you know I've never seen before I thought maybe the drainage was coming from the area rather than just the property but as long as the consultant to point out I think we're on the very limit of a flood uh wetlands kind of region it's like the tip of the wetlands iceberg I mean, in all the all the 35 years I've lived in Veter, I've maybe seen it a couple of times where Yeah, when you get couple of days of rain, it's natural. It's it just naturally fills up. It's a natural depression. Yeah,

I I would just uh note I I realize the circumstance you're in with the size of the lot and it's within you know it's it's an odd smalls size lot to uh in comparison to what's around you but um I do I do note that you you know you're requesting um relief from the coverage and I would I would ask that should that relief be granted that you look to maintaining being realizing that the gravel drive is contributing to uh less coverage So to you know to try to maintain that gravel drive in the future would be very positive rather than adding additional impervious surface.

So we are we are more than compliant on imperous surface. Um building coverage is the variance we're seeking. Um so I think your your comment is related to the imperous surface that we are currently compliant for. If we add the driveway, I think we would be in non-compliant uh impervious driveway. It just works for you at at this time not to have that issue of That's right. That's right. We didn't have to seek that variance because of that. Yes. Any questions, Les? No. Good. No, it's

not. I knew you said something with the shed, but I didn't know.

Uh, we did have a letter from um Chris Stafford, 8:16 South Bedford Road. Yeah, he's the property owner on this image just to the north of us who would be the closest to the existing shed citing that the shed's neither obtrusive nor visible from my property in so much that it cons is concealed by a change in elevation along the property line. So I yeah has he raises no objection over its pre-existence. Um okay so we'll put that in the record. Um I will make a motion then that we um granted variances as noticed um tonight. Um doing so um we believe the applicant um what the applicant wants to do is wait against the health safety and detriment of the community and the you know the benefit falls on the to to the applicant um as he cannot do what he wants to do in any other feasible means. Um there'll be no undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or detriment to nearby properties. As pointed out that other similar structures exist um in that neighborhood um which is a generally u has numerous um properties that don't u conform to the 4acre zoning. The variance requested we don't believe is substantial. The variance requested will not result in any adverse physical or environmental effects on the neighborhood or community. and the alleged difficulty while self-created is only one factor to be considered by the board in making its decision and it's not determinative. If granted, the var uh the applicant shall use their best efforts to ensure that a building permit is issued within one year of the board's approval of the variance and then diligently pursue such construction to completion. The applicant shall submit a certified asbuilt survey including a building and impervious coverage calculations to the

building department prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy and the variance is granted in accordance with plans submitted to the board dated we received an updated plan that include the um what's that we received which I gave the board tonight an updated plan um this is one October second with the height of the shed on it and it was paid we just wanted to show you how tall the shed was next next to the building buy some tickets. So, that plan is dated November 6, 2025. 116. Okay. Very minimal. What did I say? We We'll take that one. I said 116. 116. Okay. Wait a minute. That's today. Yes.

It's not tomorrow yet. Okay. I need a second. Second. That's right. Mr. Marin. Yes. Miss Lee. Yes. Mr. Van Loverren. Yes. Mr. McCallis. Yes, you got it. Thank you very much. Okay. Lastly, Pond Lake. I'm not sure how to pronounce the last name of the next application.

Fious. Fruis Scott Frugess is seeking a variance of article 3 section 125-11 and article 5 section 125-50 of the zoning ordinance for 64 Lily Pond Lane Kona designated section blocking lot 60.6-3-6 6-3-6 town tax maps in the residential halfacre zoning district to permit the construction of a second story addition over a legal pre-existing twocar garage where the sideyard setback results excuse me I'm sorry can I can you you want this oh yes any plans

where the sideyard setback results in 18 ft 11 in where 20 ft is required and where the combined total Sideyard setback results in 40t9 in where 45 ft is required in the residential halfacre zoning district and where the addition creates an increase in the height of a dimensional non-conforming structure in the residential halfacre zoning district. All right.

Good evening. Uh thank you guys for meeting with us. I know that we're the last ones on the list here. Uh my name is Jared Fiscus and this is Franco Falconee. Uh we're from FSI Architecture. We're based out of New York uh city. Uh we're representing Scott Fujis, the owner of 64 Lily Pond Lane uh in Katona. Uh we're requesting relief to create an addition above an existing garage, 13 in of which is considered non-conforming as per the uh setback requirements as set forth by Bedford. Um we are requesting this variance to continue the 13 in of the non-conforming space vertically uh in order to allow for an addition which is to include one bedroom for a new member of Scott's family. Can you go back to the previous picture? Of course. Sorry. So, I'm taking I'm assuming you're just taking from there and just building over the garage.

Precisely. Yes. And where's the extra 13 feet you're talking about? The extra 13 inches. Sorry. 13 in. Yeah, it's 13 in. It's here. You can see it clearly here. This is the uh the hatched area. There is the portion of the garage that is uh existing non-conforming.

Ah, okay. So we are just seeking to increase the vertical dimension of that 13 in uh to allow for uh the addition uh for uh on top of the residence. Uh again here I have some elevations here as well of the existing compared to the proposed. Uh here you can see comparative to uh the outline where the proposed variance is required. Um this uh along those lines uh this proposed work does not uh increase the impervious areas or the uh the lot coverage uh on this lot. And uh oh, additionally, this configuration has been seen uh in a couple instances across uh Lily Pond Lane. Uh there's actually four that I could find that have the addition uh on top of the garage already. So by granting this variance, we're able to uh kind of comply with the typologies which exist on the street and it would blend in just like any other and obviously I'm able to answer any questions you may have.

What is this variance? I love this but what we have here is 59 years ago it's the variance for the that allowed for the garage to be built. Really? Yeah. What's interesting is is that the the setbacks were different then. Yeah. Right. Where the sideyard set back would be 20 ft. Yeah. It's actually 20T 20T. Yeah. Instead of where 25 ft is required. Yeah. Oh yes. And then the building didn't put September 1st 196

and they found this. They found this in their papers. Unbelievable. Somebody would ask for a verified service then. I mean, normally I might argue that if they were just extending a non-conforming garage up, they might not need a variance. I know the building inspector would differ from that. However, in this case, they're really asking, they already have a variance. They're asking to change that variance. So, we I think we need to uh supersede this one or okay, say this one has no force in effect anymore. We did this with it earlier one. It's a whole new variant. Yeah. So, it's a whole new variant. Yeah. Is there anyone that want to comment? No. Can I have a motion to close the public hearing? Wolf. All those in favor?

I I public hearing closed. Um I have no problem less. Do you want to make a motion and supersede that one too? Sure. Thank you. All right. Uh, I'd like to make a motion to approve the application relating to Oh, yeah. Turn the microphone on. I'm sorry. No, you just got to push the button on it. Button over there. Yeah, there you go.

Make a motion to approve the application relating to 64 Lily Pond Lane um se uh 60.636 as shown in the tax maps. Um this they're they've applied for a second floor on a existing garage which garage had been granted a variance number that was weird.

Number two dated September 7th, 1966 to allow the construction of this garage. Um my I requested that that variance now be superseded by this variance which would allow the construction of a second floor which with a sideyard sack back now 16' 7 in where 50t is required and the lot coverage being uh existing building coverage is 3.88 which will increase it uh 3% to 4.49 49 I think I'm reading that correctly and the existing building coverage is 3.7 where it uh the cover where three is the normal maximum. Um I uh resolved that the particular the board has found that the benefit to the applicant for granting the variance outweighs any alleged detriment to the community and determined to the following. The benefit sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by another means feasible to the applicant and there will be no undesirable change to the character of the neighborhood and detriment to the nearby properties. It appears that several other properties are similarly situated with garages over their uh with rooms over their garages. The variance is not substantial. The variance requested will not result in any adverse physical or environmental effects on the neighborhood or community. It still appears to be in character with the neighborhood. The alleged difficulty is self-created, but that's only one of the factors that would be considered here, and we're making no decision in making our decision, and it's not to their detriment. Um, the approval is of the proposed variance would be subject to the following conditions. The applicant will use their best efforts to ensure that a building permit is issued within one year of the board's approval of this variance and then diligently pursue such construction to completion. The applicant shall submit a certified asbuild survey including building and impervious coverage calculations to the building department prior to the issue of certificate of occupancy. The

variance is granted in accordance with the plan submitted to the board dated 9:30 2025 of September 30th 2025. Second Mr. Marin. Yes. Miss Lee. Yes. Mr. Van Lren. Yes. Mr. the careless. Yes, you got it. Thank you. Good luck. Good luck, Scott. With that beautiful baby. Here you go. Here's some By the time he gets bigger, they'll have the room. Came over the baby. I sit down. Yes. I said bring the baby. I guarantee sensitive meeting schedule. I don't know if you looked at it. I haven't looked at it.

Yeah. Read your emails. What did you say? Apparently, we need to um I'm going to forward it to everybody and have everybody look at it because I'd like to on top of that. So, ne next meeting, we'll discuss next year's um meeting dates. Okay. Um and then at the same time, we will also get out to everybody the changes that they want to make to the zoning code and we can have that discussion next meeting as well. They haven't made them yet. No, I don't believe No. Any more papers? Did we write? Al you you participated in that discussion about updating the zoning zoning the discussion of what the town board want the town board and the planning board have looked at the zoning code and make making some changes so they're still in progress with

okay we want to you know hear what changes are they minor have some yeah just give some input into it I mean we we gave some feedback to the town uh about information that we thought was of importance but I don't know if that's in the I don't know that's in the in the hopper. You know, the next meeting is December 4th. Can I have a motion to close the meeting tonight? And we we will readjourn on December 4th at 6:30. I will make a motion to close this meeting on record time of 10. All those in favor? I I closed. We can stop the recording and