Zoning Board of Appeals - Regular Meeting

Ladies and gentlemen, I'd like to call to order the Zoning Board of Appeals for Thursday, September 10th, 2026. Our procedure here is our secretary will call for the application. And at that point, if you or whoever's representing you would come up to the podium here and introduce yourself. and present to us what it is you're doing this is a public hearing people will be on zoom potentially or in the audience may want to comment on it we will ask if they do if you want to comment on an application again please come up here and introduce yourself please direct your comments towards us the board and not to the individual applicant In our agenda, which has 11 items on it, our number 10, Peter Arena Kira Dostal of 227 Old Post Road in Bedford Corners, that has been taken off of tonight's agenda. So if you're here for that, that will not be heard. And with that, let us begin. Thank you.

Evelyn Chow is seeking a variance of Article 3, Section 125-27D and Article 5, Section 125-50 for 270 Cantito Street, Bedford Hills to permit the construction of an accessory structure for a pickleball court where the side yard setback results in 77 feet where 100 feet is required and where the ground floor of the structure is 2,765 square feet where the area for an accessory structure shall not exceed 0.5% of the area of the 174, 284 square foot lot or 871.4 square feet in the residence for acre zoning district, and where the building coverage results in 5.67%, where the existing building coverage is 4.06%, and where 3% is the maximum building coverage permitted, and where the impervious surface coverage results in 11.07%, where the existing impervious surface coverage is 8.58%, and where 8% is the maximum impervious coverage permitted in the residence four-acre zoning district.

It's not. It was his watch. Thanks.

Hello. Hello. Mr. Chairman and board members, my name is Bill Spade. I'm with my partner, Keiko. We're the architects for the project. Our clients, Evelyn Chow and Matt Asher, are here. We also have a senior board member. and um general contractor uh they're not here this evening but uh we're making good progress so we're before you uh tim red uh we're proposing to build a pickleball court building on uh evelyn matt's property It's their avid pickleball players and so we'd like to have that accommodation on their on their property. And with that, I'd like to have Evelyn say a couple of words.

Thank you, Bill. Good evening, everyone. My name is Evelyn. I'm here with my husband, Matt. Bill and Keiko asked us to just share a few words about kind of the impetus for this project and why we're hoping to realize this aspiration. I gather because it's not every day that people are building projects. indoor pickleball courts on their property. So, you know, maybe to give you some context, we've been residents of Bedford now for four years and it has been, you know, a very welcome respite from our lives in the city and truly a place where we've been fortunate to find a very loving community. How did that happen for us? Well, like any good 30-something couple, in order to make new adult friends and find a new hobby, we picked up this little thing called Pickleball, I guess four years ago at this point, and we've been fortunate to meet... I think maybe all of our friends, almost all of our friends in the area through playing this great sport. So we're looking forward to developing this project and having a place for friends and family to gather to continue building our roots in this community and hopefully eventually sharing it with our next generation as well.

thanks for hearing our project today and welcome any questions thank you very much thank you thank you so as we've been saying we're proposing and actually I would need the screen to now project I have some images I want to go through on to show you on the screen I don't know if that's Should that show up up there? I have it on the screen here.

Do we need to do something like, hey, Mike, do you need to do something?

Oh, that's great.

Thank you. So, um, Evelyn and Matt's property is see on the screen here. It's actually three lots altogether. Cantatow Street is off of Cantatow. Cantatow does not, I would say, technically extend up their road. It seems to be a glitch with Google Maps. So it's 270 Cantatow, and Cantatow keeps going north. But their long driveway goes up from Cantatow and left all the way up to the top parcel. There are three lots altogether. in the parcel that they purchased. Those three lots were subdivided in 1979. It was a vacant lot then. Initially a pool house was built all the way at the bottom at the top property in 1981. Then the house itself was built in 1983. The original site plan approval for the subdivision of the property showed a driveway. I'm sorry, I don't have a pointer that would point out, showed a driveway going up those strips of land for each lot from Cantatow. About halfway up that road, it becomes a 25% and greater slope. So there's no way that driveway was ever going to be done that way. The driveway circuits through, and to the degree you've been to the property, The driveway kind of crisscrosses through the lower two lots to get up to that top lot. And that's where the home is. And we're proposing, obviously, to build the pickleball building. The other two lots are wooded. There's some significant drainage, open drainage line, you know, stream. It's what they call intermittent stream for stormwater with some ponds. So that part of the property is just not developable in any way. There's no way to do house or driveway.

I'm sorry, did you say they own it?

Yes. So they own all three lots. The house portion.

Excuse me again. They've kept the lots with the subdivision lines in place.

Correct. Nobody's changed those lot lines.

So conceivably if the lot lines were changed then they wouldn't even be here because of the overages.

Potentially, right. There would be other complications to trying to execute that so we're proposing what we're proposing in terms of on this top parcel gotcha um and the plan disappeared so it's still on my screen i wanted to put my face on there there you go all right we we would have taken that off uh an important point to point out that this plant shows a picture even ariel um the distance from adjacent structures. Their house is about 650 feet from the house right along Cantito Street. There's a house just off the bottom of the edge of the screen. There's a house up the top above, beyond the edge of the screen. All of those are about 700 square feet, 700 square feet, 700 feet from the Asher's parcel where their house is and where this pickleball building The property, which is to the east, you see some farm or stable-related use there. It's a significantly large property. A well-known resident in the area lives there. So their house is about 1,500 feet from the Asher's parcel. So there aren't any immediately abutting houses that see this. The property cycle to a couple of other photographs here and get to the right place. This is an enlargement of that part of the property. This shows the grading for the topography. Another important point is. from Cantatoe up to where the house is, where the pickleball building is proposed, is about 150 foot grade change. And even the house down along Cantatoe is about 20 feet above street level, so still 130 feet of grade change between their house and that one along Cantatoe. Houses to the north and south are still about a 60 foot grade change between their property. last picture to show you here. And then their property is, of course, this thing is off to the side. Let me see if I can slide this to the middle. It's not going to want to do that for me. There we go. Maybe my little cursor will work here. This is a picture of the, you know, sort of the center of the Ashler's property. I don't want that thing there. Find escape, escape. The pickable building is about in this area where you can see my proposed building, would be about in the middle there. So significantly surrounded by mature trees. So between the grading, between the distance to other homes, between the mature trees, this site is not visible from any surrounding properties. And we think that's an important element of why we're proposing what we're doing. Just a quick couple pictures of the existing structures and get this to minimize a little more.

I had this set up before and it's not obeying.

So this is the main house, again, built in 1983. This is a three-car garage, detached, built in 2010. There's also, it skipped over, no, it's going, a pool house. This was actually the original structure, built in 1981. So these are all on that top lot, top parcel. This is a view then looking up the driveway. To the left is the portion of the property where we're proposing the pickleball building. And you see the driveway goes to the middle of a driveway that connects between the garage and the house. Here I've dashed in what is the bulk and height and location of the proposed pickleball building into that Uh, same view, so you see that it's under a significant canopy of trees. There's the fencing out in front is actually has the electrical. Panels behind it for electrical service that remains. So the building is back behind those elements. This is then the, uh, the view back towards that part of the site where we're proposing the football building back in here. The grade of the floor level of the pickleball building would be the same as this garage. You can tell the grade slightly slopes down. We're going to excavate to the back to dig in to some degree the first floor of the building and use that excess soil to grade out on the front. Now we come to our site plan. It likes to bounce past sheets. But again, here's that overall three lots. That's their parcel showing the house and the pool house and then the proposed pickleball building. Now, Keiko, my partner, will flip sheets there so you can see those as well. By the way, I forgot to mention I gave you sheets there that show the site plan. So hopefully that's easy to refer to as well. So we are locating the pickleball building in this sort of north east corner of the property where there is a significant amount of existing utilities in the ground that were done for the house. And so we're working behind basically building this before you build a building behind these underground utilities. up toward up against the setback line on the east, which is essentially the rear property line. The setbacks are 50 feet on the sides and the rear. So we're staying beyond those setback lines. And it kind of just works to get the building into that corner. Again, from a sighting perspective, we like this location It's discreet relative to the house, far away, well hidden from any adjacent property. Great.

Can I interrupt you for one second? Sure. Al, I know tennis courts are usually 7,200 square feet. Tennis courts, usually 7,200. Okay. And we take into account only half, 3,600 square feet. This is an enclosed building, though. I know. It's in a building, I know. But have we ever done anything with pickleball in terms of... Pickleball, we treat the same as tennis. And is it the same if it's open? Right. So it'd be half the size of whatever it is. Got you.

If it was open. Yeah, right. We're not doing that for construction.

Yeah, right.

Do you have a rendering of the pickleball? Yes.

And you've got that there in your little package. Sorry. There's the site plan, the rendering. Okay.

This is the pickleball building.

This is the pickleball building.

Correct. And you see here's the court right there.

Right.

I see. So it's an enclosed building.

Yeah, it's an almost building.

So on our site plan, the building itself is 78 feet long in terms of footprint on the ground. 78 feet long, might be 79, and 35 feet deep. That's the box that's represented on the site plan. A part of the building, as you see in the rendering on the second floor, we call a loft. is gonna overhang on the right side to create a patio space underneath that overhang. So that's another eight feet of an extension over that patio. But the building itself is a 2,765 square foot footprint on the ground. In total, we're proposing with some patio area. I've got the numbers here and I should get myself caught up to where my numbers are. 3671 additional square feet of impervious, what you would count as impervious area. Again, 3671. The pickleball court is 2765 of that. So the rest is counting And the other features we have here is a gravel walkway up to the building from the driveway, and then a patio on the right. And that patio is intended to be a permeable paver. I know you guys have discussions about permeable pavers and impervious surfaces. So everything other than the pickleball building, we would try to treat as a permeable surface. I know that likely the building inspector can't say that that's permeable and therefore not count as impervious. So we are counting it as impervious, even though the intention is to do it in what we would believe is a permeable material. So trying to reduce as much as possible other than the building footprint that impervious surface area. Chairman points out an important point. If this were an outdoor court, we could, of course, do that same footprint. This would be as a pickleball court. By the way, it's smaller than a tennis court, as you probably know. We would be able to do this footprint, and I think only half of that would count as impervious according to the way of calculating. Maybe I should have said related to that. And we'll go through the numbers. Maybe I'll hold on a second and now go through the numbers if you don't mind. Just finish what we're proposing to do. So again, that's a description of the building, the walkways, the patio. Again, everything but the building we're trying to do as a permeable material. one other thing to point out on the left side we're identifying some rain garden basins to do for storm water uh and um there are rock conditions on the on this part of the property on the whole property so we think the rain garden solution is the better solution for storm water that'll connect into some existing piping that goes down the hill and then into some open ponds that are there So maybe I'll just go to what we're proposing. I'm going to try to move this plan up.

If I could just talk to you for a moment. Just on the history of the property here when we're talking about it, the existing buildings and footprint, they're already over in terms of what's permitted by code.

Correct.

Can you please explain a little bit more how you got there? Because we had, if I understand it correctly, lots were subdivided to begin with.

Correct.

Were they compliant with zoning at the time the structures were built? Were variances granted for those? Because the existing structures are non-compliant with zoning as it exists today. So explain to me the background.

I believe the record is, and again, the pool house got built first with the pool. That would have been compliant. When the house got built. Sorry.

If it was built with the pool, it doesn't mean it was compliant. So just help me out here. Okay. We have, if you look at the pool house, the pool house is in the setback, required setback.

Correct.

So was the setback at a different distance? Is that what you're alleging?

They did get a variance for the setback. I'm sorry. I was thinking about impervious and building coverage. It did get a variance from what I've seen in the town's records. It did get a variance for that setback. As you note, right?

Okay, so that gives us the pool houses, why it's in the setback area and got us there. And then we added buildings. Correct. But our buildings are still putting us over. Was there a subsequent variance then granted for those buildings that allowed for the coverages to get to where they got to today?

Correct. Although I'll say what I saw in the records was a lesser amount for particularly total impervious coverage. I don't know that they got a variance at the time for for everything that was done. We now, again, the house was built in 1983. There was a lot of, I could pull up the plan, There were a lot of stone walls, a lot of patios that are around that house. Don't know if they really accounted for all of those that you now count as impervious surface. So and even building coverage, there's overhangs and other elements to that house. So I wasn't able to find the exact accounting of the house and the other surfaces around it. So the belief that I've seen that it did get a variance, just not sure what the details of that were. It's compliant, the house is compliant to setbacks, just- But not to coverage. Presumably to coverage, because now we've done the survey, we've accounted for all of those surface areas that the town counts as impervious and the existing condition as we've noted in our data, the existing condition is 4.0% of building coverage and just get to the right number, 8.58% of lot coverage or impervious coverage, sorry.

If I may, I think what Ms. Black is getting to is there, it appears that there were variances that are related to the variances you're currently seeking. So shouldn't we be seeking a modification or amendment to those earlier variances? Is that what you're implying here?

No, I just, that history of variances wasn't included in the application or noted by the applicant. And when you're seeking additional expansion of essentially non-conformities, particularly where we have a budding lot that could obviate some of these variances, I have questions about how we're not trying to simplify this of doing a merger of a lot when there's a co-homeship or likewise. So I'm trying to understand how we got to a lot that has essentially non-conforming structures on it in the first instance before I look and say, okay, well, now they're adding and expanding those non-conformities so I can understand whether we're dealing with something that truly needs to be wholly rectified, partially rectified. We have had instances where buildings have been built or improvements made to property that weren't properly documented or secured appropriate approvals. And it just wasn't documented here in how we got to an existing condition that was already out of conformance with code. So thank you for sharing that additional detail.

Yeah.

Normally, we would have copies of previous variances. I think you referred to the fact that you had found something.

The records were very difficult in terms of when the house was built. The plans even were preliminary plans. So I was never able to see the full documentation of...

Do you know, was the house built before or after the subdivision?

After. Subdivision was 79, pool house 81, house 83.

I mean, Tim can correct me if I'm wrong, but someone should be able to search the zoning resolutions to see if there was a variance relating to this property.

We know that that's true. There were variances. What the details were, I wasn't able to find.

And I'm troubled by giving another variance when we don't know what those variances were.

Okay.

My concern is, as you mentioned about impervious surface, you are when you started the development of the project, you were already at almost 3.58%, almost 9%. Now you're moving to 11.7%. My question is about the asphalt driveway, as always, there's a large asphalt driveway there that I think I saw the photo with some gravel on the side. There are issues with that. And if you could address some of those issues and remove some of that impervious surface, it might benefit, you know, your application to reduce that impervious surface. Do you see a way of doing that?

In my opinion, no. A, because whatever surface was put down as a driveway, the town's not going to count that as in any way permeable. I've been through this before with your town. And there's no driveway surface, even those, even these grass crete and other kinds of alternatives for driveway other than asphalt still cannot be counted as permeable so other than removing driveway or removing paved surface completely and not turning it into lawn or landscaping or something like that wouldn't be able to get any benefit from making it some way permeable As you can see from the plan, what is driveway is kind of just the width you need to get up to the site. There's the three-car garage width, and that width is the paving amount between the house and the garage. Yeah, house and garage. So I would say there's very little paved area you could reduce in that zone between house and garage.

Yeah, it's a large portion of your previous 4,972. Correct. I, I'm not going to dispute the fact that you're saying that there aren't alternatives, but we have had other applicants before us who have made. You mentioned a small rain garden or, you know, there are other applicants have looked at it. I made some adjustments that improves the status of the attorneys. So I would encourage you to. Consider that.

Yeah. By the way, I didn't remember or get to the point of mentioning. The plan we submitted, we had a patio area in front of the pickleball building. We've gone through continuing to refine the plan. We've removed that. That was actually about 600 square feet of paved area. The plan you're seeing here now has that removed, and we've reduced actually our current plan again you're seeing it there and that 11 by 17 is a 10.6 percent impervious total as opposed as opposed to the 11.07 you're saying you reduced it yes so now what is the correct calculation 10.66 is our new proposed impervious total right that's for that accounts for house and pool house and all of the paved areas on the property

Oh, so it's not 11.7.

So it's not 11.07.

Well, that's positive development. Yeah. I would like to see professionals coming before the board to look for alternatives to this amount of impervious service. Yeah. You know, there are other alternatives that can be explored. Right.

All right. Yeah, we probably know we submitted this in August for getting on the zoning board's agenda. We've continued to work on the plan and felt we could definitely cut back on that patio area. So we've reduced that the building is still the same footprint. Just that that additional amount for impervious area patio walkway. Again, we're still my belief, we still have to count patio and the gravel walkway as impervious because there's no, from what I understand, the town doesn't let you consider even a gravel to be permeable because over time, I guess it's potential that it I don't think that's true. That was my experience on a prior project.

It depends on what the substrate is. Okay. If there's, go on. We talk gravel.

Gravel. Like a walkway. Yeah, as long as you don't have a blacktop under it. Right.

That's what we're getting at. What's happened in the past is that people have told us it's gravel. And when you go and check installation, they have, in fact, installed some type of concrete or asphalt underneath to service the foundation and really put the gravel on as a decorative element. That is clearly not an impervious surface. If it is purely gravel that water can filter through, that's considered an impervious surface. Which is why when you look at and you hear Rosemary talk about impervious surfaces... And what applicants have done, they've looked at driveway materials and looked at shifting a part of a driveway from an asphalt to a gravel. And they've done so as part of an agreement of saying the expectation isn't that you remove it today, but when you do go to replace the asphalt, you affirm that you'll replace it with a gravel And that way you can have that as part of the account. So that's the structure. It's not, we usually don't require an immediate removal and replacement situation because that's just tends to be overly burdensome. We think to applicants that are willing to do the concession where you have an installed and proven already.

Just to point out, as far as stormwater, in this case, they're at just under 9,000 square feet, so they will need a stormwater permit. Have you talked to the engineer?

Not yet. I should say, our engineer has been in communication with them. They're going to need that.

Also, height, I believe you appear to be over the 20, so you need a special use permit for that, and also you're at 2,700 square feet, which is... which is over 2500. So that's going to be your special use prep. So we will need to have Yeah, planning board sign off on this.

I was supposed to mention, I was supposed to mention, we've already been to the planning board. We know we need a special permit for the footprint of the building and the height that we're proposing. They've said, come to you to. Take care of the 3 variances we need and then come back to them once we've addressed that.

So, so there's no, thank you for explaining that. There's no, unless it's missing from my plan. I don't see an indication plans. What's on the 2nd floor of the building. The building is very attractive looking. Thank you. I don't see any.

Yeah, I didn't print the second floor plan. We have it here. Kate can flip through and say explain what it is. It's a loft open loft overlooking the court. It's got it's essentially for exercise equipment. It's like an exercise area. Not sorry, you see it and I can flip to it on the screen too. You see it on the board there. That's the first floor.

Oh, okay. Okay. Thank you.

Yeah. Yeah, that we've overhung it past the first floor, the slice of space on the first floor. That's a mechanical room and little play area. Those that's only nine feet wide, basically, and we need a little more space up above.

Yes, this is a very interesting area for water. courses. The Stonehill River is a major, major tributary in town.

Yes, right. So maybe I wanted to say a little more about the driveway and what we might be able to call the impermeable surface. So again, that gravel walkway is about 330 square feet. I've included that as impermeable in these calculations, impervious. As I've included that in the patio area. By the way, the patio area, we propose to use a unilock block material that they call a permeable paver. I'm not so sure that they actually let water go all the way through. It's like a brick. So, yes, those absorb water. But ultimately, it's you're leaving gaps between the pavers so that it gets to a gravel bed.

underneath that then has the ability to uh so those are not or they are in the calculation that you just gave us for impervious they're in the calculations as impervious They are in as an impervious, but after, if you revise, as we've talked about the gravel installation, you would be able to reduce the impervious because you're calculating it in to impervious.

Correct. At least that gravel walkway that we're showing, we could further reduce impervious by another 330 square feet. Right. And we're happy to do that. You know, we can talk about whether there's driveway area that we could consider converting. You know, there's the width of the driveway, I'm sorry, I can go back to the plan here photo with gravel on either side.

It's not gravel. It's a stone swale. A stone swale to allow water to run down.

There's significant water management that is done already on the site and still has to be maintained. So while the driveway is an asphalt driveway, there are stone swales to either side. Those go down and lead into these ponds that are there.

That's a very good feature. So you're not having that constant runoff. Correct.

Right, right. and still it still requires significant maintenance um i was just going to point out again that the other than the what i think is a 12 foot wide driveway coming up the, you know, the asphalt part is this paving area here. Again, there are three garage bays. This part, if you can see my cursor, this part's about 30 feet long. That's what you would need in front of garage bays to be able to accommodate somebody being able to get in and out of those bays. So this, you know, paved area up here is not really reducible in terms of quote unquote driveway, we can talk about the option of making that another surface. And that's what you're asking.

I guess the two things I have are what we're discussing, the adjustments you could make to improve the impervious calculation. And also if we could obtain any existing variances, which may exist on the property right now. That way we could do our work more carefully and have the right calculation.

Understood. Yeah.

So I apologize that I did not have an opportunity to do a site visit on this, but it appears the owner owns all three lots. It appears that if these lots were merged, you might not even be here for a variance.

That would be true.

Is there any reason that they wouldn't merge the lots? Because between the water issues and the ponds and everything, I don't see how you could build on the other lots anyhow.

Yeah. Potentially, the lowest lot might be. There would have to be research on that in terms of what that would mean. And there are just other complications legally in terms of creating that, you know, re-merging the lots.

They just want to leave their options open. Sorry, say again. They probably want to leave their options open. Yes.

Yeah. Although I you know, I'm pretty sure it's safe to say there's no intention of building houses on those other lots that I think they enjoy the privacy of their property. So yeah, that was why we therefore proceeded with proposing the variances.

We have had properties that have had this and we have required them to merge or use the development rights they have there and agree that they're confined. I mean, here what what I I don't appreciate is that we have a second structure that's going in that's larger than the main house. And it does result in additional access of building coverage on the property and it is impacting impervious surface and the applicant has it within their means in order to address this, get their project essentially the way that they want to have it built. without requiring the majority of the requested variances. They don't even have to merge all three lots. They could still reserve one of the lots and not touch it and be able to proceed. So I understand the applicant's desire. I'm just very reluctant to do it where there is a very reasonable alternative available to this applicant to address it. Not all applicants who come in and request variances have a way to address it in the same way. there is some give and take in terms of looking at the variances and saying, look, people want to develop their property, but there's also a baseline of zoning and building rules that abide. So if you want something, then you have to sometimes ask yourself, what is it that you're willing to compromise on also? So I appreciate the applicant. I think that it's a beautiful structure. Your property is very interesting and unique by far. That's one of the neat things about living in this community as you see a lot of really interesting properties. But to me, the variances that are requested can be addressed by the applicant in a reasonable means without really excessive harm here in any way. That's my opinion. You have a full board here that can opine otherwise too. It's not just what I say.

That's why there's a board. You're entitled to it.

A lot line change. Yeah. It just depends on how big is that 2nd line to. Just over 6. Yeah. And by the way, you guys don't have to decide this. There's a couple of things you could say. We want to talk about it. We want to come back and we'll return to this later in the evening. If you want to hold it over for another, like we don't, we're not pressuring you into, we share our feedback so that you know where our mindset is. Understood.

Thank you.

I guess to start off with, we certainly appreciate your feedback and consideration. I think we need to probably think about it a little bit. That's fine.

We'll keep hearing the rest of the presentation, too, so you get the full gamut of feedback. I like to share my information with you. I don't like to have anyone unaware as things go forward. Thank you very much.

sorry i i didn't i that's all right i think we've gotten i think we've hit hit all the the highlights right the so the three variances were the the set the two side yard setbacks right my colleague had a question about this setbacks not not to want to redesign your whole project but you you could if you wanted to you could that makes the accessory size bigger could do something with the garage and the pickable or as an addition slide it over merge it have the upper level over the garage i mean if if you absolutely want to stick to this property that's one way to To get rid of the side yard. Yeah. Right. I don't want to tell you what to do. Right. It just means that there are alternative options. Okay. That's what the board, you know that. Yeah. That's what they always look for. Is there another way to do it? because we have to state ultimately in our five points that it can't be done in another way. Kind of makes it hard to say that if it can be.

Yeah.

Okay. Let me put you on pause for a moment and see if there was anybody who wanted to speak, was in here in the audience to speak on this application. Do you want to let me know if anybody's on Zoom?

If anybody's on Zoom, you would need to raise your hand.

Okay. No hands. And completely aside, our error possibly or definitely, is your last name Crow or Chow?

It's Chow.

Okay. So your plans are the ones that are wrong and our application is correct. Because, no, it says Asher Crow.

Oh, our plan says that?

Yep. I'm looking at it. It says grow.

Oh, one of our, oh, okay. Oh, just one sheet.

Oh, just one sheet? Okay. No, it's two sheets. Fire that assistant. Oh, there, it's the first two sheets.

Well, I think what we're saying is you can take the time to discuss it, either here, if you want to, or we can post it on Facebook.

presentation it's not going to go off the agenda it would stay on yeah do any of you have any other feedback well my feedback well i'm sorry no i already gave my feedback so i i love the project um i think it's a i mean it's so you're way up there there's nobody around you um it certainly fits in with what you've you know the style of the house everything is it's beautiful um I don't think I mean, right now, just even to get up there, you're going across the other lots because of the steep steepness of it anyway. So you're I think, you know, I think a lot line change would get rid of your side yard setback. And if you merged at least two of the properties, as Meredith suggested, it would help you tremendously with the numbers. And, you know, that that would be my suggestion as well. Otherwise, I think it's, you know, like I said, we haven't had any pickleball courts come before us. Certainly, my first thought when I saw that it was a pickleball court is I hope this certainly isn't any near any neighbors because my understanding of pickleball is it gets quite loud and rowdy. And you're certainly in a place where you can play it and no one will hear you. So, you know, it's pretty nice.

Actually, one of the benefits of building the building around it is the noise stays inside, right?

There's also the possibility, like, is to do a, you know, what people have done is do phantom subdivisions where the development rights get split off from the title. Okay, and there's tax benefits, but they have absolutely no intention. I think the board probably hasn't instead of merging lots would be receptive to that. Also.

Okay. Yeah.

Okay.

No, no, it's not what I'm saying, you know, you're not you're just it's just an incorrect reference as well. Okay. Yeah. He's he's just suggesting if you put put 1 of the lots under conservation easement and the light that would restrict development. Then you could ask the board to consider that as to balance out essentially saying, look. We're not conveying the property, but it's under conservationism. It can't be developed, considered essentially as one lot in a way. There's other ways of dealing with it is what's being suggested here. The concern here is that you're over, from my perspective, is you're overburdening one lot in order to preserve rights on other lots. And I don't think that that's really... fair when you have control of all the lots. You're simply choosing to say, I want to reserve all my rights here, but give me extra rights here. And there are situations where people just don't have any other options. So anyways, you've heard me on that. Go on.

Anyone else? Just quickly, I agree. I think it's a wonderful building. I've only played pickleball outside. in the heat. But again, I'm concerned about what any prior approvals might have been. That may all go away if the lots are merged or otherwise expanded. And I think you should probably explore it. Merger may be very easy. I think the assessor may be able to merge lots when a property owner owns adjoining properties. You may not have to go through the whole planning process. It's easy, but I'm not going to tell you what to do.

Thank you very much. I think we probably will consider that as an option and plan to come back for the next meeting. And I appreciate everyone's everyone's suggestions, including Yeah, and, you know, Rosemary, your suggestion on the driveway, I think. Yeah, I'm not Sure, with the grade of the driveway, how challenging that may or may not be, and everyone's suggestions and help here. But yeah, sorry.

I would also relate to the conservation easement.

Rosemary, can you bring your mic down towards you?

The town is very supportive of protecting property, and I don't know what the full story would be with you, but there are certain tax benefits to doing that. as well as what was mentioned. So you could explore that as well. They're very receptive under the open space regulation that we have to work with residents who want to preserve their properties. Okay.

I would agree with you. unlike the picture that was shown to us of that beautiful driveway up when I went there today there were four huge landscaping trucks and I couldn't even get you know I literally got inside your property but then I had to turn around and that's not an easy feat because you're right the driveway is pretty narrow and I end up in the swales and finally turned around and thank god i have a four by you know an suv but because you know i would i would definitely i didn't hit the you didn't hit the grass but if you're going to do the kind of thing that um rosemary's talking about it would be more or less in front of your driveway and on a flat area because you definitely have a very steep driveway going down that in the wintertime you would want to plow to be able to actually plow significantly and not just push gravel from side to side. So I think she's talking about more up at the top of your property as a consideration. Yeah.

Thank you. Is that the burnished siding? Is that the horizontal or the vertical? Well, both.

The horizontal is the hardy plank, the vertical potentially that, yes. We've used the Shosugi-man siding in other situations.

So can we put you down for next month as a consideration? Yes, thank you. So you two can talk and, yeah, that would be great.

Okay. Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Kevin Fang is seeking a variance of Article 3, Section 125-11 and 12 and Article 5, Section 125-50 for 508 Byram Lake Road, Mount Kisco to permit the construction of a two-story addition on a legal pre-existing non-conforming lot where four acres is the minimum lot size requirement and where the lot is 2.7 acres in the resident's four-acre zoning district and where the side yard setback results in 48.9 feet where 50 feet is required. and where the impervious surface coverage results in 8.7%, where the existing impervious coverage is 8.7%, and where 8% is the maximum impervious surface coverage permitted in the residence for Icozona District.

Good evening, Chairman and Board. I'm the owner of the property, Kevin Fang. I purchased this property in 2002 for the residents of Westchester since 1992. property was an expanded Cape apparently it was redone in 1985 according to the plans that I have that were filed with the town so the existing variance of the setback actually occurred that this is not something that we're doing we're actually just building within the existing footprint we're pushing out maybe 10 feet or 15 feet on one side which doesn't affect any setbacks at all i guess it does affect the impervious coverage a little bit uh really what the whole reason for the project um has been remodeled since 85 needs to be updated um the expansions that have been done over the years um really left uh what i would consider pretty ugly architectural um uh exterior so um really what we're just trying to do in the remodel is clean up the roof lines and make it look a little bit uh like it intended to be built as opposed to just adding a room here and adding a room here and adding a room here that's essentially the problem is there anyone in the audience that wanted to speak on this application or on zoom

existing foot-fronted building for a second story?

So in one area, there is a workshop with a patio on it. So that would be going up two stories. And in another area, we're pushing out about 10 feet and going up two stories. So it already is two stories on the front part of the house. The back part of the house is mostly a flat roof in the center with some peaks that don't match so it just really looks very disjointed so really we're just trying to clean up the roof lines is really the reason why we're going up two stories so we can tie into the existing roof that goes horizontally across the whole structure

Any worries here? It's right here. That's the phone. Oh, I see. Okay. Yeah, I was trying to find it. Okay. Basically, we've got two areas. We've got the second story. We've got two windows.

Right. So if you look at it, there's two stories. That's the infill area. It's sort of one of the half stories and the roof lines are different heights. Yeah.

So in essence, you have existing coverage, pervious coverage that gets netted out and flipped to building coverage, two stories. That's how you have net, net,

I'm not an architect, so you're not speaking my language.

So where you're putting in the new footprints, it already has a patio there.

Right. One expansion already has a patio with a structure underneath with a foundation already. And the other bump out is maybe a 10 by 10 area that's new.

Okay.

So that's the only new expansion of footage. In terms of going up, we already have two stories in the front and one and a quarter, one and a half stories in the back with a flat roof. We're really just trying to even out the roof lines and make it look more presentable. And unfortunately, that's the part of the house that faces the road.

So the house is built backwards. You're keeping the same coverage based on how you're building out and what you have there. Oh, yeah, yeah. So that's very good. You're not increasing. No.

What's the age of the house? It's a good question. I think it goes back to the 40s. The 40s? Yeah, I think so.

It's probably been adjusted over time.

It looks like it's been expanded two or three times. Just the way it's done, you just sort of see a room here, a room here, a roof here, a roof here. Yeah. be good actually i have a picture of it if you want to see what it looks like from uh this is what the roof line looks like now in the back of the house yeah yeah just really trying to clean that up and tie it into this structure here because bringing that up break that up

I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE VARIANCES FOR 508 BYRAM LAKE ROAD AS PROPOSED.

In particular, the Board found that the benefit to the applicant by granting the variance outweighs any alleged detriment to the community and determined the following. The benefits sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by another means feasible to the applicant. He's working within the existing structure and footprint and not beyond. There will be no undesirable change to the character of the neighborhood and detriment to nearby properties. and the variance requested is not substantial for this size of house. The variance REQUESTED WILL NOT RESULT IN ANY ADVERSE PHYSICAL OR ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR COMMUNITY THAT IS WELL WITHIN THE TYPICAL TYPE OF RESIDENTIAL SETTING. THE ALLEGED DIFFICULTY IS ALTHOUGH SELF-CREATIVE, BUT THAT IS ONLY ONE OF THE FACTORS TO BE CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD IN MAKING ITS DECISION AND IS NOT DETERMINATIVE. APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED VARIANCE WOULD BE SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS. Applicants will use their best efforts to ensure that a building permit is issued within one year of Board's approval and of this variance, and then diligently pursue such construction to completion. The applicant shall submit a certified as-built survey, including building and impervious coverage calculations to the building department prior to the issuance of certificate of occupancy, and the variance is granted in accordance with the plan submitted to the Board dated Good question.

I have May 4th, 2026. Yep.

Yep. Thank you. Any conditions? No.

Very usual, just the certified coverage.

Yep. That's in there. Okay.

Do you have a second?

I'll second.

Mr. Marin?

In favor?

Ms. Lee? Yes. Mr. Van Loveren? Yes. Ms. Black? Yes. Mr. McAllister?

Yes. You got it. Thank you. If you want some...

Paul and Nina Levine are seeking a variance of Article 3, Section 125-27D and Article 5, Section 125-50 at 4 Hickory Lane, Bedford to permit the construction of a two-car garage with a second-story

storage room where the front yard setback results in 25 feet where 35 feet is required and where the ground floor area results in 900 square feet where an accessory structure shall not exceed 0.5% of the lot area or 200.95 square feet of a 40,790.84 square foot lot in the residence one acre zoning district.

Good evening. If you're going to stand there, let me give you this.

I am Fred Filipina, the architect for Mr. and Mrs. Paul and Nina, Dinah, sorry, Dinah Levine. We're located at 4 Hickory Lane, Cornelot on the corner of Hickory Lane and Pound Ridge Road. And we're just a hair over 40,000 square feet, one acre zone. existing residence with a shed building that fronts on Hickory Lane and we are asking for a 10-foot variance front yard variance between a proposed two-car garage to the property line on Hickory Lane and in between there are several very mature trees that we intend to remain the existing house has uh Very little storage. It has a very small laundry room basement and no basement to speak of, crawl space primarily. So virtually no storage. So the plan is to create a two-car garage with a storage room above it. We are well within building coverage requirements, and we are well within impervious surfaces requirements. There is one paved driveway that goes out to a closed gate, which will be abandoned and removed and ceded. create more green space and the proposed parking to support the the garage would be pea gravel probably curbed and that is our proposal looking for relief for setback and for the 0.05 percent coverage

Is there anyone that wanted to speak on this application audience or. Soon, I'll wait before closing the public hearing any questions from the board.

Well, done well done on the removal of asphalt and coverage. Yep.

That's actually bigger than you know what it is because from – I'm sorry? I said that's actually a real change because now you have to go up to, I guess, Groves, the other street to get out to the Pound Ridge. Yeah, that's – Since Hickory is one way coming in.

Yeah, I can imagine.

You do it anyway. Okay. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. Gotcha. Well, that's still nice of you to do. How long have you been there? 12 years. 12 years.

Gotcha. And I think that by the 900, you know, for the two-car garage, 900 square feet is a very reasonable.

Yeah.

And it's consistent with other houses in the area, too, where we've got our two-car or more garage spaces, too. I DON'T HAVE ANY ISSUE.

I DON'T HAVE ANY ISSUE. NOTHING.

ANYTHING YOU WANT TO MAKE THE MOVE?

I WOULD MOVE TO APPROVE.

EXCUSE ME. CAN I HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING?

I MAKE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE HEARING.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE. PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED.

I WOULD MOVE TO APPROVE THE VARIANCE AS NOTICED. BENEFITS OFFERED BY THE APPLICANT SHOULD NOT BE BY ANOTHER MEANS FUSIBLE TO THE APPLICANT. When you look at where the barrages in relation to the driveway, that orientation itself makes sense. Also, given the existing kind of stone curve, then flex on patio and home here, we could shift this slightly, but not significantly without coming into other issues with regard to service lines and the like that could compete. It's also going over where there's already an existing shed. So, while it is larger than that, it's an area that's already has a structure and some sorts there. It is larger than the point 5% of lot area, but given that it's a 2 car garage, and that's consistent with our community at large in terms of what we're seeing for garages. Like, I don't think that that's an unreasonable ask with regard to the accessory structure. For that specific purpose that there is no undesirable change to the character, the neighborhood by properties. In fact, it could be argued that they're removing a significant amount of payment on this property will help with drainage and the like. And I think that that's a benefit to the community at large. Requested variance here. I would say it's not substantial when it comes to the setback. We've seen that type of setback before. And again, given the fact that it's in proximity to an existing structure and is being framed in relationship to an existing driveway area and existing home. And it's for a garage purpose. I think that the location makes sense. Well, the 0.5% is significant. Again, the accessory structure we're talking about here is a two car garage with home doesn't otherwise have one. It does garage space. And in that sense, it makes sense for the vehicles to fit. So it could be really any smaller. So in that sense, that variance might be substantial, but it's not significant. The variance requested will not result in any adverse physical or environmental effects in the neighborhood or community. Again, here, we already have a community that has, in many places, two car garages or more. The structure itself is not oversized, meaning height-wise. In the neighborhood, and it's designed in a way also normally don't comment on design, but here it's tasteful respect to the community at large that it sits within and it's scaled appropriately. It is replacing an existing shed. So, some of that footprint was already enough, but they were moving that general place in the garage. The alleged difficulty is self-created. They don't need a garage, but that's only one of the factors to be considered by the board in making this decision. It is not determinative. The approval of the proposed variance is subject to the following conditions. The applicants will 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 such construction to completion. The applicant shall submit a certified as-built survey, including building and approved coverage calculations to the building department. prior to the issuance of the certificate of occupancy, and the variance is granted in accordance with the plans dated.

There are no dates on any of this other than what?

We receive them on 7-6. Oh, well, that's one plan has 720-26. 720-26? 720-26. 720-26.

And the other plans are received on July 6th. Yeah.

I'll use the data plan out reference along with the submission date.

Any other conditions?

No, no, I'll 2nd.

Oh, never mind. He had the wrong information. So it was a submission date of 7, 626, not 720. 7, 6 is when we got it. Yeah.

Mr. Marin.

Yes. Ms. Lee. Yes. Mr. Van Loveren. Yes. Ms. Black. Yes. Mr. McAllis.

Yes. You got it.

Thank you very much.

Santiago Balciero is seeking a variance of Article 3, Section 125-11.

and Article 5, Section 125-50 at 4 Cole Drive in Bedford to permit the replacement of a two-car garage with a second-floor addition for a bedroom and bathroom to a pre-existing legal nonconforming residence where the addition creates an increase in the height of a dimensional nonconforming structure and where the side yard setback resulted in 47.63 feet where 50 feet is required. And where the side yard setback to a pre-existing legal non-conforming swimming pool resulted in 46.04 feet, where 50 feet is required. And where the side yard setback to the pool deck resulted in 41.77 feet, where 50 feet is required. And where the impervious surface coverage results in 9.02%, where the existing impervious surface coverage is 9.03%. And where 8% is the maximum permitted impervious surface coverage in the residence for acre zoning district.

Good evening.

Good evening members of the committee chairman and my name is. I'm the owner of drive and I'm also the. George, you are a professor of business at Columbia University and a long time. Uh, resident here, but for I'm joined here by my family, as you can see. And also, we assume he's the architect from Amanda Marcocchio. Amanda, our architect, unfortunately couldn't join because of some health issues, but the principal architect is joining, we assume, in case you have any questions for him. So let me give you some context of why we're here and what we are asking in particular.

Excuse me, is your architect Lauren Yu? Yes.

Lauren, sorry.

Never mind, somebody already made her a panelist, okay. Yeah, Lauren.

Thank you. Hi, Lauren. Good. So we're seeking a variance for an addition that we're making on top of our garage. So we have kind of a family here that has grown in the last few years, and we have a two-bedroom for our kids. And two kids are sharing a bedroom, and we're hoping to add one bedroom and one bathroom on top of our garage. Now, our house was built in 82, and then our house is legal but not conforming. We have an issue with the setback, as you have seen, in the deck, swimming pool, and living room. And also, the impervious surface is at 9.02 when the regulation came. is 8%. So all these issues, and I think that the regulation changed after our house was built, and our addition, what we're trying to do is we're not changing the footprint of the house at all. We're building on top, and we are actually reducing slightly the impervious surface because we're going to cut some part of our driveway. And the design of this project, we're very happy to work with Amanda Martogio, she's an award-winning architect, and she designed a new structure which we believe preserved the character of our neighborhood. It's a design that also embraces nature with a lot of sunlight, a lot of spaces, and also is in perfect harmony with our current home. So again, as I mentioned, we're not changing the footprint. What we're seeking is a variance for the living room and our decks being put on an impervious surface that, again, based on regulations that changed, our house was built in 1982. So I have also a call. It's Lauren Yu. It's an architect from the firm. In case you have any technical questions, again, he can help me out because again, this is outside of my domain of expertise. And that's all I have for you. Thank you.

Yeah, if I could also make a few statements to the board. Sure. Yeah. So yeah, thank you for your time today. And also thank you to Zoning Enforcement Officer Kowalski for organizing all this. So as Santiago mentioned, I'm the architect working with Amanda Martocchio Architecture on the proposed addition to this 1982 house. So the proposal really involves a one bedroom and one bathroom addition over the existing two car garage, which you'll see is on the north side of the property. So I think the easiest thing to look at is the drawing A001, where that would be shown in the sort of bottom left corner. That's the garage shown in sort of white. As Santiago covered, the existing house was built with three bedrooms. The three-bedroom count includes the primary bedroom, and the owners have three children, so there are not enough bedrooms for children in the house. They would be looking to add a bedroom so that their daughters don't have to share a room as they get older. The septic system was approved for four bedrooms in the 1980s for the Westchester Board of Health. And regarding the variances that we're seeking today, it's four non-conforming existing conditions. So these are existing and not a result of our proposed addition. So the non-conforming areas, you can also see them all together on the same A001 drawing. And I'm happy to go through those one by one. So on the... The south side of the residence, we've identified that the living room volume, which is that sort of semicircular profile that you see in plan, it's encroaching about two and a half feet over the 50 foot setback. The second item is the swimming pool, the existing swimming pool, which basically traces the planned form of this semicircular profile in the back of the house. It also encroaches over the setback by four feet, as does the associated pull deck by eight feet. And the fourth condition which we are seeking a variance for is the impervious coverage of 9.02%, which is documented in the table on this same A001 drawing in the top left corner. So the maximum permitted in this R4A zone is 8%, which is an overage of roughly 1,800 square feet. So you'll see that the house is set back very far back on the site, which is farthest from coal drive. And the driveway is actually the biggest contributor to the impervious coverage calculation. And you'll note that if anybody has been to the site, it's partly because of the topography of the site that the existing driveway takes a sort of meandering path that follows the natural contours of the site rather than a more direct path, which we also view as another contributor to some of these overages. And as Santiago noted importantly, our proposal is not impacting the impervious coverage. The addition will be built directly in the footprint of the existing garage, and we're not altering any of the landscape or hardscape, and the property is very heavily wooded as is, and it will be maintained that way. And so that's all, and I think we'd like to hear from the members of the board and anybody else.

Thank you. Is there anyone in the audience that wanted to speak on this application? On this side of the room?

Anybody on the Zoom call?

No. Can I have a motion to close the public hearing?

I'll make a motion to close the public hearing.

All those in favor? Aye. Public hearing is closed.

I have a question. Part of your lot is in Armonk and part is in Bedford. The address lists Armonk as the address.

Our mailbox is in Armonk, but the property is entirely in Bedford.

Yes, we have another situation like that. Chestnut Ridge Road. And your lot is 4.61 acres, correct? Oh, yes, a lot area.

Yeah. In total, combined with the area.

Okay, so he's still over four acres of bed.

Yeah. 1.03.

Yeah. I have no issue. If a lot of pre exist non conforming conditions, we run across properties like that. Great. this isn't really expanding them to vertical, vertical addition to the property. So I don't have any concerns here.

I frankly don't need to take a report as a variance, but I'm not going to talk to the building inspector about it.

Same same here.

Thanks.

want ice cream? Ready to go get it. Usually a cookie.

The town Bedford zoning Board of Appeals who has held a public hearing related to the application of Santiago Balcio on for cold drive Bedford to complete a renovation on their existing property. And so the hearing has been held and discussions have been presented. And our board finds that this project is acceptable in terms of our criteria, which include that we found that the benefits of the applicant by granting the variance outweighs any alleged detrimental community. And we determined the following, that the benefits sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by another means feasible To the applicant, obviously, this house was a little bit undersized and a family. Typical house is 3 bedrooms and also a family size home needs to be undergo some renovation here. There's no undesirable change to the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to the nearby properties. We have not heard from any concerns. The variance is somewhat substantial, but that is not the only category that we use to make a determination. The variance requested will not result in any adverse physical or environmental effects on the neighborhood or community. The alleged difficulty is self created. That's only 1 of the factors that we consider by the board and making a decision. And that is not determinative. There are many homes in our community that have been built in prior areas that require some level of renovation to make them compatible with today's limit. Pickleball approval of this proposed variance would be subject to the following conditions. The applicant should use their best efforts to ensure the building permit is issued within 1 year of the board's approval of the variance. And then diligently pursue such construction to completion. The applicants shall submit a certified as built survey, including 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 the plan submitted to this board dated 7, 2026, 7, 2026.

2nd. The sorry, no, I just want to make sure we because of our condition of having the you have a survey.

Yes, yes. Sorry, was part of the application. If I'm not there, I apologize for that. It's been up to date. Yes. Yes.

So you'll just update the survey. Yeah. And put the new calculations on there. Yeah. Thank you. I second it.

Okay. Roger.

Roger's getting credit for it.

Mr. Baron.

Yes.

Ms. Lee? Yes. Mr. Van Laberen? Yes. Ms. Black? Yes. Mr. McAllis?

Yes. You got it.

Thank you so much. Looking forward to many more years. If you need to.

Now the children are happy. They'll be getting another baby. And they get to go home now.

Yeah, these are extra if you want.

Did you say you were a professor at Pace?

Yeah, at Columbia University. Oh, Columbia. What are you taking? Good night, guys.

Benjamin and Catherine Branch are seeking a variance of Article 5, Section 125-50 at 412 Succubone Road, Mount Kisco, to permit an already constructed garage barn that was granted a variance on July 13, 2006, for a side yard setback of 27 feet 6 inches and front side setback, yard setback, front yard setback, okay, of 48 feet 8 inches, where the side yard resulted in 27 feet 5 inches, where 50 feet is required. And where I see a little typo there. But anyway, and with front yard setback resulted in 48 feet, five inches, where the zoning yard requirements for a corner lot requires a side yard on a side street to be equal to the front yard setback of 75 feet in the residence four acre zoning district.

Good evening, Mr. Chairman, members of the board, P. Daniel Hollis, Gettinger, Waldinger, Monteleone, Gushue, and Hollis, 118 North Bedford Road, Mount Kisco, New York.

You just keep adding names.

I have to get my voice warmed up. I've been sitting there. I said nothing for hours. I'm here tonight with Kate and Ben Branch, who are in the audience over there, known to you, I'm sure. And as Ms. Kowalski mentioned, a code enforcement officer, I understand. I know, I like that. Congratulations on that promotion. The variance was granted July 13, 2006, and all was well until Ben and Kate decided that they needed to relocate and got an as-built survey and figured out that Rob Johnson did, that we were a few inches short of where we should be. So we're really here tonight. It's not really an amendment per se of the 2006 variance, but it's a de facto new application. But as you know from the law, to deny this variance for There have to be really substantial reasons to do it. And we'd respectfully request that this is literally perhaps the smallest variance that you will grant in 2026 inches.

So you're saying not an amendment? This replaces it?

Yeah, it replaces it.

Okay. Yeah.

so that this variance would replace and supersede, sort of incorporate by reference, to use the legal phrase, the earlier amendment. But it's for these shortfalls, as Kim Kowalski just mentioned.

Well, it's Kim that you can blame for that two inches.

And the Asbill survey is already here. And the building's been there for 20 years without incident. So, and Iguala as well.

So, what documentation other than from us do you need to update? Everything else is in order. This is it. This is it.

In order to get the certificate of occupancy, we have to have the variances in place. The application for the CO is in place and the branches have a closing in just a couple weeks. So,

Is there anyone that want to speak on this application in the audience? Zoom? Somewhere? Nope. Can I have a motion to close the public hearing? So moved. All those in favor? Aye.

My only negative is we don't want the branches to leave.

I've known them both for a very long time. It's sad to see that people that you grew up with actually leave the area, but time marches on.

I'll make the motion to grant the variance as noticed. Doing so will not create an undesirable change in the character of neighborhood or detriment. We're talking literally inches. The benefits sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by any other means. It was an innocent, I guess, building mistake when it was done at the time and was brought out as a result of our request also of a new site plan and the certified survey. The variance request is not substantial. The variance request will not result in an adverse physical or environmental effect on the community. The alleged difficulty is not self-created, and they need to do this in order to be able to go forward with the sale of their property, unfortunately. There's no building permit that needs to be issued. Nope. Everything's done. Don't need a new Asbill survey.

No, the date of the survey is July 11, 2026.

God forbid that shows an extra another foot, inch, or something like that. I certainly hope not. Anyway, so that's all we have.

Second.

I have the surveys prepared on June 11th, 2026. June 11th. Did I say that? You said July.

Oh, sorry. I think you did. I stand corrected. It might say July.

Mr. Marin? Yes.

I don't know. You're giving me the emotions. Ms. Lee. Yes. Mr. Van Loveren. Yes. Ms. Black. Yes. Mr. McAllis.

Yes, you got it. Sorry to see you go. I'll talk to you later.

Brian and Lily Egan are seeking a variance of Article 5, Section 125-50 from 41 Linden Lane, Bedford Corners, to permit an already constructed sport court where the front yard setback resulted in 57 feet, 13 inches, where 75 feet is required, and where an already installed propane tank resulted in a front yard setback of 25 feet, where 75 feet is required in the residence for acre zoning district. and to permit the construction of a swimming pool, which results in 4.5% building coverage, where the existing building coverage is 3.02%, and where 3% is the maximum permitted building coverage, and where the impervious surface coverage results in 9.96%, where 8.17% is the existing impervious surface coverage, and where 8% is the maximum impervious surface coverage permitted in the residence four-acre zoning district.

Good evening again. I won't belabor the name of the firm. Thank you. I don't think I was relieved of my duties in the last few minutes or anything.

No new partner since then.

I'm here tonight with Brian and Lily Egan, the owners of the property at 81 Lindell Road. And my letter of August 5th, 2026 sets forth how we feel we match up favorably with the balancing test and with the criteria. And I won't go through all of that on infinite item, but I'll just make some references to certain, I think, important points. I'm joined here tonight as well with Joshua Wolfbridge of Glengate Landscaping, along with his colleague, Krista Otto, who are right over here. I have a thumb drive that Joshua will put in when he comes up. I dare not try that, otherwise it may not be operable. I think that my letter contains, as Exhibit A, Google Earth, a photograph of the neighborhood. And you can see from that photograph that this proposed swimming pool, which is really the reason we're coming in for the variances because it's new. The propane tank set up and the pickleball court were pre-existing before our clients bought it. And that's how we have the front yard variance needed and pervious surface coverages are for things that we inherited. I think when Mr. Woolbridge is speaking to you, he's going to go through the plan and show you how both topographically this is the only place the swimming pool can go and the septic field also limits where anything can be constructed. So that'll happen in just a minute. But the property is 4.15 acres in a four-acre zone. And as Kim said when she read the notice, the front yard setbacks are as a result of those two items that I talked about. And there's been no adverse impact on the neighborhood or the budding property owners by virtue of the existence of those two things. And in addition to the mitigation that we have with stormwater management. There's gonna be a planting plan, which Joshua will speak to, that will screen the only neighbor that would have any visual impact by the swimming pool's construction. Interestingly, especially it's a pickleball night, pickleball courts are not treated the same as tennis courts and paddle tennis courts, right, Mr. Sirocco? Because they are included at 100%. It's not a 50-building and 50-building.

No, no. No, no. Pickleball courts, we look at it.

You do look at it? All right. So I stand corrected. It's the same as paddle.

It's the same as paddle. It doesn't have a roof, right, like we just talked about?

Yeah, this is an outdoor. It's been there. There's no... And the impervious surface, the existing is 8.17. So we're over on it, and we're already over on impervious surface before this happens. I mentioned the screening and the planting earlier. And there's nothing in the record that can be shown to in any way negate our entitlement to a variance based upon the criteria and the balancing test. So to have you understand that I'm sure you've all been there, I'll have Joshua come up and walk you through the plan itself. Josh?

Hello, ladies and gentlemen. Let me plug this in and get some...

If you need any help, it's the man right behind you.

Yeah, there's a... It's asking for a password.

Oh. It's a long one.

It's a long one.

So, what we have here are the are the site plans that were prepared by the stormwater management engineer that we were working with for this project. And to navigate here, zoom in for you a little bit. So this is the site that is existing. You'll see the existing outline of the. of the driveway, the home's footprint, the sport court that's within the front yard setback that was noted, and then the topography of the site along the back area here. So what's highlighted along the way here is you'll see in red lines are the setback lines that are created both for the building on the front, the side, and the rear. And then as well, you'll see the areas on the right side around where the cursor's being shown here of the septic area. So once we really start to overlay all of these elements, it does start to form an area that starts to present itself for location of the pool, the pool environment, and all of these different elements. So what Dan was starting to speak about were Kind of these, these converging areas, both created by the setbacks from the utility, as well as the setbacks that are required from the property line start to create the area for the space and. Both because of the septic, the setbacks and then also the, the, the. the site itself with the ledge out proppings, they're very noticeable within certain areas. It really does start to form the area of the siting, which is essentially within this space. Of course, the whole program for the project involves creation of a little bit more space and enhancing the driveway as well. Make sure I'm on the right page as it stands right now that the driveway is very constricted along the area where the guest parking is included on the front of the driveway. So what we're also proposing is enhancing that slightly to allow for better flow of traffic. Using a gravel parking courtyard for guests to arrive at, and then enter in through the front of the home there. We're also suggesting a gravel courtyard that does align with the front patio of the home that also is along the living room side. And then as we go around to the back of the property, you'll see existing masonry steps that go up and then join where there was or there is currently an existing wooden deck. We'd like to recover that space and actually turn it into a screen porch.

Do you have a pointer? It's so dense that I'm having a hard time.

I do not.

Unfortunately, that arrow is fine. Okay.

Yeah. I mean, I can reach up here point to if it helps. I'll do a little bit of that too. So this is our existing wooden deck structure. So if you visited the site, you probably would have walked into that area. It leads out of the kitchen. So what we're proposing for that space is it becomes a dining area. A covered dining space with screens that makes it usable for multiple seasons within the year. And then gives them the ability to grill outside of the space, come back in and then dine with the family or any guests that are visiting the property.

The pool site is behind the house, correct? Yeah. I just didn't see any stakes. Did you stake it out?

Yeah, we painted it out. It was probably about a week and a half or 2 weeks ago. So it's possible got moan over. So, unfortunately, I apologize for that. But if you would have left your deck here and taken about 30 paces towards the alleged area, that's that's roughly where the bull site is. It's in the flat part of the yard. You know, there are some natural convergence topography along the site here, which really do allow for spectacular views from top to bottom. So, what we're trying to do is align. Full space and the seating along this natural valley that kind of goes along the property itself. Stays clear of our septic area. Using existing retaining walls, just bumping them out slightly to elevate the space where right now there's an existing above ground hot tub that sits. So reclaiming that for a fire pit patio. So just a place where you can sit outside and enjoy the space. um and then connecting to the spaces using natural pathways to you know impact the area as least as little as possible you know we're already over coverage so we don't want to add to those imperfect services we can so where we're able to um you know utilize gravel we're suggesting it gravel along the walkways gravel as i noted in the front in the parking area as well And then these surfaces at Jason to the pool, those would be impervious services. And we've worked with various towns and suggesting where there's been suggestions of using some of the. Herbie's papers that were spoken about before, but the reality is that to do that, you have to have wide open joints with gravel in between and they often get in the pool, scratch the pool surface. And it's just uncomfortable to walk over in general. So, if we're, if we're looking at spaces that really are necessary for for seating or for people in high traffic areas that are adjacent to the pool, they do need to be impervious services. Unfortunately.

Now, is that a pond on on the left?

So when you're parking down here, or you're walking through the driveway, this is the sport court. And then you'll look up past the stone wall, this is currently grass, and then this is all ledge. So really the conversions of the setbacks here, plus the 50 foot setback off the back, and then trying to stay away from having to come in with large chipping hammers and things like that, really pushes our pool site forward in space. And then lastly, the pool house along the back side there. You know, we're, we're looking at everything staying. Well, outside the setbacks and the closest neighbor. Is along the excuse me along the backside of the property here. So, you know, they're a few 1000 feet away and what our suggestion is to heavily plant and screen that back fence line with ever large evergreen trees. to make it feel like it's a very private secluded space. The homeowners have already started to put in some larger evergreens along Linden Lane, along the bottom area here, and we further intend to put even more screening in this area above the driveway just to really kind of block the views both from the street and then also from inside back towards the street itself. Um, you know, we're taking great measures to. You know, what we feel is issues only what is necessary in terms of services to make this as a comfortable living space. You don't feel as though we're going over over indulging. And creating too many patios certainly feels in character of of the neighborhood is as Dan recognize. And in terms of storm water management, trying to collect as much water as possible, and then reintroducing as many gardens as what you're seeing in the spaces here, which the homeowners are very excited about re-beautifying the property, bringing more landscape into it, green flowers, bringing in some of the pollinators and things back into the property. Um, it's, you know, we're obviously excited about it as designers, but I know that, um, I think from an ecological standpoint, it's, it's certainly going to benefit the, the, uh, the neighborhood and the property like.

Well, I see by that rocky ledge that that's not something you want to tamper with and I was there today. They were doing a perk test.

Yeah, they were. Yeah. So that was the, the same stormwater engineer. They were out there with our excavator.

They were doing a shot of the landscaping plan this.

So we don't at this point, we're still a little preliminary in the phase. I mean, this is certainly a big ask coming before you for a variance. We didn't wanna tread too far into design and implementation of things without seeing how these different layouts are gonna land with the board. We do have some artist impressions of the spaces that we created. So, this would be from the front of the home, looking out towards the driveway. This is that gravel courtyard along here.

What you can see are 3 sets of French doors that look at the living room out into this space.

So it's going to be something that both beautifies the entry coming in off the street. But then also, it's something that's quite calming and serene as you're sitting within the property and looking out into the space. This would be the entryway coming in towards the property. The largest consideration here is the parking area where I think if any of you parked along the front edge, you'll know it stacks up very quickly with cars and then it makes it difficult for guests to get through the driveway itself. This would be looking back towards the main home. This is the covered porch that we were suggesting, the idea of texture and landscape, and then using lawn steps to go through the existing topography there and down to the lawn space that's below. This section is where the children's playroom is. So we really want to be cognizant of creating a space where both adults can sit and watch the kids, but then also, you know, making sure there's good connection to get back up to join the rest of the parties. And then this is a. You know, just a very simple. Um, representation of what this space is going to look like, or isn't anything within this that we feel is over indulgent again. You know, it's really just. Full space where if there are visiting families, they have a place to change and hang out and allow everyone to feel comfortable while they're there.

What's your pool surface?

Um, can you explain that?

Sorry interior the pool surface.

It's a gunite pool. So it would be a quartz plaster most likely. I haven't gotten there quite yet either. But as you can see in this artist's rendering, there's a lot of evergreens that kind of start to take shape in this background. So there's some smaller flowering trees in the foreground and in the background, a lot of evergreens that are starting to pop up. And that's really what the intention of the space is. It's just to make it feel a little bit more private and secluded, whereas right now there's a lot of deciduous trees, which allow you to see off property. We want to redirect all of those views more interior.

The impression I got when I went in is that there is a good deal of land around the home from The front and the size, and then where the protest was happening, there's a kind of an old walkway or roadway that goes down to some sort of a gate.

Is that like an earlier, you know, I think so next to where the park test isn't there's a horse riding trail at the end of the property.

Oh, that's what it is. Yeah. There's a trail down there.

yeah that's what kind of what it looked like yeah i mean the character the site is a beautiful wooded site and we're certainly trying to uh hold on to that character while introducing some new elements for the for the new family

Have there been any letters from any neighbor that we don't have anything?

I know that they've spoken with some of their neighbors and they do have positive things to say about the project and.

Great. Is there anybody else in the audience that wanted to speak on this application or on the Zoom call?

No.

No. Can I have a motion to close the public hearing?

So moved.

All those in favor? Aye. Aye. Public hearing is closed. Discussion? Concerns?

Yeah, we're just at a lot. There's just a lot of impervious here on the site.

There's a lot of area on the property.

Were there previous variances on the property here?

I'm aware of because when we. Determined that the front yard variances were needed, we realized that there weren't.

I have a question about the sports court. I was under the impression it was going to be newer, but it's been there a while.

It's been there a while.

Is there any plan to replace that?

No, it's there. I mean, it's in a low area. Right. And I think that to have it available, pardon me, is a pickleball court. It's undersized. It's not big enough to be a regulation.

So the plan is to keep that?

Kids can use it. The plan is to keep that. That's what really if those 2 things weren't there, we would probably not be here for variance, but they're there. We really don't want to lose them because they've been there without incident. There's nothing's happened detrimental to the community or the neighborhood by there.

No, not speaking of that. I just wondered, you know, in the future as. Since it did appear somewhat afraid of areas that for children, it's great, but, you know, ultimately it might not. Need to be there in the future.

So, I don't know. I mean, people different age group play pickleball. I mean. So, you're saying it could be converted to pickleball and I think it uses pickleball right now.

Yeah, this is the night of the pickleball and the 1st. Surge of pickleball that we've seen.

Okay, here's the bit there wasn't a variance granted for it for the sports court. Right? They want a pool, but there's no, like, the property is overdeveloped as far as the impervious and building coverage already. So, I mean, I hear what Rosemary is saying, which is really the pickleball court isn't, now you got me saying it's a sports court. Sports court didn't get a permit to begin with. If we got rid of the sports court or had that, that takes care of a lot of the problem here. I mean, It goes back to, I said earlier, sometimes you can't have everything you want. And I understand that's part of the board to give direction to this applicant's role, bring everything that they want to have. And it's the board's decision to figure out if there's a line.

I could see if we were applying for both of those things, to construct them and take away green space. But the fact that this was there, I think it would be unfair because it doesn't create a detriment. The stormwater management plan manages the environmental aspect. The collection of the water, in the way that Josh mentioned, and the ecological impacts that the clients have impressed upon this project, will preserve it in a very high-quality fashion. So I think that the variances of this nature have been granted. And my exhibit A, the Google Earth, indicates that there are other pool complexes where our property is, and you can see...

I'm not objecting to the idea of a pool. What I'm saying is, you know, when you look at what you're starting with and what you're proposing, we're adding a lot of impervious service. I mean, and we're adding another structure. We're adding a pool plus the pool house structure here. So, you know, like, I just... We have a bocce court going in. We have a pool house going in. We have fire pits going in. We have walkways going in. We have an additional parking area going in. There's a lot of impervious surface being added.

But we're also using gravel to build impervious areas. We're not mindful to try to minimize the impact.

Understood.

The rest of the board can share their thoughts. The public can also. I mean,

How long has the applicant been at this property? How long has this applicant been at the property?

No, no. How long have they been there?

How long have they been there?

It should have been flagged when they purchased the home that there wasn't.

Look at this, right?

That's 23. That's 21. It was painted on the driveway. Yeah.

So somebody snuck this in.

Yeah, I know. Well, that's why I'm saying what I'm saying.

Three years ago.

That's what I'm saying. I'm not saying that they did something wrong, but I'm saying the property has an issue on it. They're seeking to take the benefit of a condition that wasn't permitted to begin with and then ask for a variance. And it's only the same family of impervious that's going over here. So that's where my... that's where my comments come from. The rest of the board can do on applying differently. And I understand the applicant's point of view on it. But, you know, what was just Roger just pulled up also was the GIS that shows, you know, this was essentially an extended driveway area. Someone first painted in an area, a play area, and then went and converted it and didn't get permits. Right. So I understand your applicants didn't do that, but a prior owner did. And it doesn't mean that they automatically inured the benefit of that either. If the board believes that that's what the applicant really wants is a swimming pool here. And the impervious question at hand is the board.

The board can make a decision, but I think it would be, I think it would be a little onerous to in order to lessen the service to rip up the, we can't rip up. We shouldn't rip up the propane tank set up. But that would be not helpful to the operation of the house. And the fact that the support support is there, you know, variances of this percentage of impervious have been granted. It is not outside the character of the neighbor. If you take the criteria in the balancing test, the substantiality is not mathematical. We all know that, right? So it's not just the math. What is the impact of the substantiality?

It's also a question of what's the minimum variance necessary in order to achieve the objectives asked by the applicant. And we might have diverging views on that, but that's okay. I will let the rest of the board speak to their points.

Yes, the pool and features, pool house, pool, spa water feature, steps, barbecue retaining walls, fire pit. You know, it adds a substantial amount when you compare it to the sports court. I think there's, you know, some room because this is built out. You know, this property now is, you know, pretty well built out.

But you won't, it won't appear built out that the, they've maintained the bucolic aspect of the property by virtue of the plan. That's why they've been so sensitive. That's why the rock ledge is not going to be tampered with. You know, there are other ways we could have done that to have it not seem as built an area. Some of the property is not buildable because of the rock ledge and because of the septic area. So, I think that this is the best we can do to achieve something that's not out of character with the rest of the neighborhood. And certainly isn't detrimental in any way shape or form.

I don't have a problem with this. This is where this house is and everything is a neighborhood that has lots of the stuff. I mean, it's all, you know, we put in, you know, sport courts and everything else. And, you know, I think it's been nicely done. And I think the pool, everything looks like it'll be in back of the house and it'll be a nice addition for them. But I don't really in general have a problem with it.

So, in the front with the driveway, that whole gravel area. Like, I have here the stone driveway and curves 62, 40, 54 feet. Square feet your was there a wall built around where the cars are going to be pulling in and park was that like a low wall there stone wall.

Oh, sorry to look up there. Um, you know, there, there is some elevation rise that goes back towards linden lane there. And I think that that, um. It may be something that that might be necessary. We could certainly avoid it if at all possible. But there is a little bit elevation rise between, I would say, between the closest quarter and here. If it were absolutely necessary, we could keep it within the footprint of what's already being demonstrated as a parking space. I don't think it would have to be anything more substantial than maybe just that corner.

And the gravel in front of the house, the gravel, the entire front of the house is gravel. But is that gravel permeable or no?

We would work with the town to make sure it meets a spec requirement. You know, there's this permeable, it's a large space that could be.

Converted to make less impervious surface. It was the right. Yeah.

And I think to some of the comments from the board earlier, you know, snow plowing is certainly a reality and we kind of have to make sure that they can make maintain the majority of the aspects of their. Property might not be the guest parking and, you know, in the worst parts of the winter, but certainly the main parts of the asphalt and getting down to the garage should still be able to be maintained and plowed. Um, I think that there, there could be a conversation certainly, and we've already started it about parts of the driveway that can be gravel. We can continue to chisel away at that and have those conversations. I think that that's something I'm sure that they're open to having conversation about, but I don't, you know, we're not going to see her with and unfortunately tonight and figure that part out.

No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no.

You have a sweat plan with the plan.

Stormwater pollution project. Yeah. Yeah.

Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. That can help you manage because you're going to go through the town engineer. Right? Right.

Yeah. No, that's what it's that's what I was trying to.

Yeah. I didn't understand it over.

Is the sports court being counted as a whole court?

Yeah, well, that's what's being used, but the sport board is 100% in. So that if that were called a tennis sport, then it would be 1550, right? 50 building.

So we're penalized, but definitionally, but a tennis court would be much, much larger. Yeah, but I'm just saying.

We can change the name of it to a pickleball for, but I don't want, you know.

Yes, I am looking at this sheet and this is what it's not matching the plan. It's not matching the plan. The survey numbers.

So this one, all of the proposed and previous areas, 8.98. A positive point.

9.96. I can't keep up with that. I have it down here. 9.96.

And in here, though, when they count it, they only have it as a 969. Okay.

So you want to see it mapped out on the ground?

There's some requests to maybe map it out on the ground so we can actually go out and see it.

to see the pool yeah and well there's so many other parts of it too the fire pit area and all those other things yeah and it's a lot of there's a lot of spaces i mean we can ask them to make a question what's that if everyone thinks it's helpful yeah and you should make your request there's no reason not to you know i just think we're dealing with a lot yeah no we are dealing with a lot of different moving parts there So I guess that's the case. We're in a direction that's going to be a carryover. Yeah. Because we'll need them to mark it. Since we all, we either could schedule it as a group tour so that it's all done, you know, and we don't worry about mowing or like, but if so, that she has to notice it as a meeting.

Yeah.

Because we're all together.

Oh, yeah.

Do they get 50 or 100? I can't tell.

My sticky fingers made a problem here.

The feeling that I'm hearing from the members of the board is that there's a lot of moving parts here, a lot of different parcels, and we would like to carry it over. But if needing you to stake it out on the property, all the various aspects of the pool, where the pool house goes, the fire pit, and all the other areas that we're talking about.

It can be, you know, like staked or spray painted. It's denoting where these areas are. are that are are changing essentially on the property okay the board to go um

yeah but yeah either that sprayed or you know actual orange tape you know orange tape with stakes exactly yeah that probably might be better would be helpful yeah uh i'm hoping we can find the lines we spray painted a couple weeks ago and maybe just go right over top of them okay we did put most of this on the ground can you let our building department know when you've done that so that we can then go out there

Yeah, yeah, sure is the intention that this is done prior to the next hearing to give you a chance. Yeah. So, yeah, absolutely. That's October 1st.

Yeah. Yeah. It would just be carried over into that meeting. Yes. And you want all the different areas? Yeah. Yeah. Not just the pool. Yeah, exactly. Right? Yeah. Okay. That'd be helpful. No problem. Yep. Appreciate it. Yeah. Any other questions before we leave tonight?

Well, I understand you don't want to do the landscaping plan, so you get more solid where the structures are. So I'm not going to answer that.

Yeah, there's a fair amount already on that backside, but we want to fill in the gaps with Joshua mentioned. But we can perhaps add some definition to that by October 1st as to what we would do if. You know, success. Okay.

Okay. That's good.

That would be great. Thank you.

Thank you. Yeah.

Thank you. Thanks.

26 North Street LLC, Juan Serrano, is seeking a variance of Article 5, Section 125-50 for 26 North Street, Bedford Hills, to permit the construction of front steps and landing to a single-family residence currently being rebuilt on an existing foundation where the side yard setback is 8.8 feet, where 15 feet is required, and where the front yard setback is 30.5 feet, where 35 feet is required in the two-family zoning district. and where the front steps and landing results in a front yard setback of 21 feet, where 35 feet is required in the two-family zoning district.

Good evening. My name is Carlos Sosa-Striever. So your name is? Carlos Sosa-Striever.

Can you spell your last name?

S-O-S-A-S-T-R-E-V-E-R.

S-O-S-A-S-D. S-T-R-E-B-E-R.

Okay. Thank you.

This is an existing one-family house in two-family zone. We have an existing side yard 8 feet. This is not conforming in 15 feet where it's required. We have a 35 inch, where is 35 required on existing front jar. We propose 21 feet front jar on step and landing. We request 14 feet variance for step and landing. I don't know if you have any more questions.

30 and a half. 30 and a half. I don't have any questions on this. I don't know if other people do.

IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WANTED TO SPEAK ON THIS APPLICATION? NO? NOBODY ON ZOOM? NO ONE ON ZOOM. NO HANDS? CAN I HAVE A MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING THEN? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED. So the setbacks aren't setting, it's just the steps are going up. This is not roof, it's open, it's not living area. It's something. It's open stairs. Yeah, open stairs. Open stairs, okay.

There's two pieces of it. There's a front staircase, which is very clear. But then we also have the proposed terrace.

Okay, the terrace, yeah.

And that's new, and that's what we're approaching.

The terrace is over the garage.

The terrace is over the garage.

This is existing. The only way is the step on the landing. It's already there.

The roof is already there. Yeah, the roof is already there, exactly. They're turning... They're turning the roof into a terrace.

Okay.

So it's already there.

So the garage, the structure, the lower structure is already there. Yeah, exactly. They're not increasing it.

Yeah, I guess I don't have any problem with that either.

Any other board members have any questions?

No, it's not.

You guys have any questions down there? Okay, I would move to approve. The application is notice. The benefits up at the applicant cannot be achieved by another means feasible to the, to the applicant. In this case, there's an elevation change from where the landing in the house is. To the front door, it needs to be addressed by way of steps. Those are going to come out into the front yard set back. We also have a side yard set back with an existing structure. Again, both of those conditions are existing benefits up by the applicant by where the variances cannot be achieved by another means feasible to the applicant. There'll be no undesirable change the character, the neighborhood to detriment to nearby properties. The garage is already existing within the side yard set back. The front yard steps are being rebuilt in the same location. The variance requested is it could be deemed substantial with regards to the side yard setback, but we have an existing footprint already in that location and we're not increasing that. Uh, the variance request will not result in any adverse physical or environmental effects in the neighborhood and or community. The alleged difficulty is not is not self created, but that's the only and it's only 1 of the factors to be considered by the board to make its decision. And it's not determinative approval of the proposed variance would be subject to the following conditions. The applicant will use their best efforts to ensure their building permit is issued within 1 year of the board's approval of the variance and then diligently pursue such construction to have a. They have it already? Okay. The applicant shall submit a certified as-built survey, including building and appropriate coverage calculations to the building department prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, and the variance is dated in accordance with plans dated November 10, 2021. No, 6426. 6426. 624. 62426. 62426.

Oh, my gosh. That's where I was looking at.

Also, could I just make a note here that on the application for the permit, the Bedford Village Historic District has been checked off. It's not in the Bedford Village Historic District. We don't think you're in the Historic District. Yeah, it's just not a big thing.

I didn't fill out the application.

They're not in it.

I need a second.

Yeah.

There we go. Peter, second? No, Roger, Peter. Roger did. Roger.

Okay.

Mr. Marin? Yes. Ms. Lee? Yes. Ms. Van Loveren? Yes. Ms. Black? Yes. Mr. McAuliffe?

Yes. You got it. Thank you, sir. Thank you.

Thank you.

That was easy.

I can give you back some. Yeah, let me give you back. Let me give you back a plan.

Thank you. Here you go.

Here you go. Here you go. Take them all.

Thank you. We're going to go to number 9.

Kevin Warren is seeking a variance of Article 3, Section 125-15 for a 60 Blackbrook Grove-bound ridge to permit the installation of a fence at a height of 8 feet where 4 feet is the maximum permitted height if located less than 20 feet from the front property line and where a maximum of 4 feet in height is permitted for the first 20 feet on a side property line and then a maximum of 6 feet in height is permitted on a side property line. and rear property line in the residence four-acre zoning district.

Good evening. Good evening, everyone.

And happy birthday. Thank you.

Would you like me to speak? Yes, please. Thank you very much. Good to see everyone. reason that we're requesting this fence variance is simply a result of what's been going on at the property. I know that Miss Lee was out today and I showed her around. We've had vandalism taking place. I believe there's a couple of photos in the material that I provided initially for the variance. And when I showed Miss Lee around today, we're actually not Our goal isn't to actually install an 8-foot fence. It's just given the calculations of where ground is accounted for on either side of the property line, there's some different locations where the ground is. It's lower or higher on either side of the property line. And I just put in 8 feet because that's That 2 feet allows for that variance in where the soil level is on either side of the stone walls that go around the property. Our intent is to use the same 6 foot fence that we have. Around over 50% of the property now. The. reasons that i demonstrated to miss lee today for placement is simply because of not only the existing large scale oaks maples cedars and things that are there but this property as miss lee saw today this is an extensive many seven figures garden experience that's a Japanese garden. We've put in a lot of ornamental trees. A lot of it is, it's called borrowed space in Japanese garden where you block off like our neighbor George Bianco and his barn and his old historic house. And we let those evergreen trees play a backdrop to all the bigger established oaks and hills and sight lines that are beyond the property line. We've spoken with George Bianco, set up a sample fence, let him have a look. He said he's okay with the six-foot fence height. He has no problem with it. The only area that really is seen by anyone is a small area on the front of the lot that goes from the driveway entrance gate to the corner with Mr. Bianco's property. What you'll see is about three feet of the fence above the stone wall that's existing there. The section of the lot, which borders old post road, and we'll have a 6 foot fence. Majority of the fence there is within the trees that we've put in and established. There's a small section. That's not. Um. 1 of the things that we've done on this property is this 3 acre half of the lot, which it. Was a lot of just meadows and rolling hills. I would say. 40% of that is now wallflowers the entire length of the property along old coast road. The entire length of the property along Old Post Road is now wildflowers from what will be the fence line to the road. There's an easement there with NYSAG. NYSAG's been informed of all this. They're fine with it. So we're just trying to create We never intended to put a fence up here. Now that we have people coming on and disturbing the property and damaging it, my wife's so insecure. So we're not only putting in the fence, we're putting up commercial-grade live cameras that are monitored to ensure that when I'm traveling, my wife doesn't have to worry about, oh, is someone breaking into tonight? So that's our variance application. Thank you for your time this evening.

What type of fence are you proposing to put in?

It's going to be like a two by three square wire fence, like a type of deer fence. That's what Mr. Bianco said he'd like to see on his side. There's other areas where it will just be a standard deer fence. It kind of looks like chicken wire.

There are some photos in there that depict the existing fence that's running by the garden to protect it.

Right.

Yeah, I mean, we see a six-foot deer fence there. We've been to you before, I think, because it was, you could only have four feet on the 20-foot setback, and we're a 20-foot setback with a six-foot. So we've been looking at a six-foot fence, you know, since we did it. We're not trying to create a scenario that's not, that's a disturbance to the neighborhood. When you step back from the fence, it disappears. You can't see it.

I understand the application didn't detail what type of fence.

Okay, yeah, just the regular kind of deer fence. And the fence that we have in now is a mix of the little two-by-three squares and the small chicken fence. And that has to do with undulating grades. You can't put in the two-by-three squares. which create less visibility when you have undulating surface, you need to use that chicken wire like stuff because it's flexible. So that's what we're trying to use.

The only thing we have been asking, um, when we've granted these in the past, in the past is that, um, uh, anything that would be along the front of your property would be not the black poles, but cedar posts so that it would be a tad, the netting. I can change out on the, on the front side, on the road side, on the side yards. We're not worried. It's the front so that it looks like a natural.

The only reason we didn't use that was because you end up having to replace them every so often because eventually they'll rot and the other ones don't. We thought about painting the metal poles like a, like a gray, tan colored kind of camo on.

This is just along the front. If there's a little section you're talking about in the front of the property.

If that's what you want, that's what we'll do. No problem.

You can see an example of that on, I remember the last one we did was, I think it was Hook Road.

Yep, I know.

I've seen... The new house that, or not the new house, it's an older, but it was done and they set it back and it's cedar posting on the front.

Yeah, I've been here a few years and I know where all these kind of fences are. And even my, one of my landscapers, because we have a team of people who help us take care of this place, it's extensive. And he told us, hey, what about cedar posts? And I said, you know... under consideration. So I'm happy to do it. No problem.

So I would just know to for the application we have allowed for deer fencing. So there's a big difference in our community between our stockade fencing and between even posted rail fencing and then deer fencing. And so when we've dealt with deer fencing, which is what you're largely proposing here, it's much less offensive to the board because it's visually it doesn't create the obstruction that historically we have a concern with.

Yeah, and I mean, we've been lucky. We haven't had deers get in the fence.

Stop talking about it. No problem. I'm ready to go. If you're ready to go, let's go. No, no, no. Don't curse yourself here. We have deer everywhere. Don't curse yourself by talking about your luck. So, from that point of view, since it's a deer deer fencing that we're talking about, and the applicant is willing to use the cedar posts or or would post along the front of the property line there. I'm okay with that. We have allowed for deer fencing of this magnitude of up to that 8 foot with the understanding that largely the intention is here. The deer fencing largely be at the 6 foot. height but we understand that there's changes in grade at different points along this property line where there may be instances where it exceeds that but it will in no instance with the difference exceed in this instance the eight foot um the metal fence will always be six foot it's that grade on either side of it that varies and there's rules about measuring it so yeah we're good

Well, what I saw was there was a previous approval for deer fencing, black, which has trees in front of it and the wall on the other side, and it's completely obscured. I didn't see it. So this is kind of a continuation on the other side of this gate entryway, which matches also the other fencing that he's shown in the photographs. When I saw the density of the trees, I didn't have as much a problem. The other thing, which is so unusual is. Because of the value of the plantings that he's put in. You would expect that he was going to go for it for here, but he's really doing it for security purposes. So I don't I don't have a problem with it because. There has been these occasions where at least in the real lot that there have been security problems and this would enclose. Access to his property, because somebody could get get right over the wall.

Right? But we have these on many, many, many properties again. I think the distinguishing factor here for me becomes the dear fans as opposed to again, the stockade or even a posting my offense.

Gotcha. Do you want to make a motion resume?

Public hearing?

Yeah.

Anybody want to speak out of this application?

There was a letter.

Yeah, we had a letter from...

Which said he would like six-foot fencing.

That's from George Bianco.

And I think we made clear, too, in the record length, the intention isn't that it be an eight-foot deer fence around the totality of the property here. It's intended to cover the areas where there's discrepancy in grade. It's the calculation of height based on grade. So that's really what's intended here.

How's the stickler about calculation of grade? So...

So will you make the motion, and then we'll get Meredith to make sure we get that party about being eight foot all the way around.

You want to close the public hearing? Oh, yeah.

Can I have a motion to close the public hearing? So moved. All those in favor? Aye. Public hearing is closed.

I'd like to make a motion that the applicant, Kevin Warren, for his property at 321 Bedford Road seeking placement of a deer fencing be approved. motion.

Well, well, the deer fencing needs to have cedar posts along the public right away that we have here. It's for a limited area that he has that and then to the extent where again, the intention isn't that the property was pulling close in an eight foot deer fence to let allow for the grade change adjustments to the calculation at no instance shall exceed eight feet, but the expectation is largely be at the six foot height and that the fencing itself will be the deer fencing type, whether it be the plastic or the metals type of traditional screening that's used, but it's also not to be influenced by plastic strips or replaced by a stockade fence or something that other creates a much heavier visual impact on the property and neighborhood.

I would just also throw in the degree to which along the Bianca line, you can keep it as much as the 6 foot is probably the best.

Yeah, I have no problem with that. That's why I went to George 1st and honestly, it's going to be, you know, 60 of everywhere. Got you.

Okay. So you want me to read that?

Yeah.

Okay. The town of Bedford zoning board of appeals has reviewed the applications as noted. And in this case, in particular, the board found that the benefit to the applicant by granting the variance outweighs any alleged detriment to the community and has determined the following that 1, the benefits sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by another means feasible to the applicant. There will be no undesirable change to the character of the neighborhood or detriment to the nearby properties. Just properties in the process of being substantially enhanced in terms of gardens and protection. For for the plantings and the property itself in terms of security, the various requested is not substantial. And the various requests, it will not result in any adverse physical or environmental effects on the neighborhood community. The alleged difficulty is self created, but that is only 1 of the factors to be considered by this board and making its decision. And it's not determinative. Um, approval of this proposed variance would be subject to the following conditions. Now, what is, uh, what is we going ahead with the permit?

Well, the, the conditions are by.

Yeah. Okay.

And do you have that Kim? Right?

That it can probably what I said, Cedar post along Blackbrook road, 6 feet in height with 8 feet at areas where great change adjustments. Deer fencing with black mesh and six feet along the neighbor's property.

Perfect.

Thank you.

So I'll read the rest of this. Approval of the proposed variance would be subject to the following conditions. The applicant, does he need a building permit?

He needs to obtain a fence permit. And I guess he doesn't need an as-built because he's got a survey. And it's the survey that he submitted with the plans is dated last revised, I see, June 1st.

20th 2022. okay the applicant um the ver i'm just going to go to the variances granted because you specified what paperwork was needed so the variance is granted in accordance with the plan submitted to the board dated it's a survey which is a server right which was last revised on june 20th 2022.

Kim, do you want me to come by and pay for the defense permit that I took out? Second.

Pay you now? Okay.

Kim, I second. Cash the king. Mr. Marins?

Yes. Ms. Lee? Yes.

Mr. Van Loveren? Yes. Ms. Black? Yes.

Mr. McAllister?

Yes. Okay. You got it.

Thank you, everyone. Thank you. You're going to have an open house, right?

To say this property. Looking forward to seeing you.

Thank you. Good night. Enjoy the rest of your evening. Julian Fox is seeking a variance of Article 5, Section 125-50 for 64 Meadow Lane and Katona. to permit the construction of a 14-by-24 one-car garage, which results in a side yard setback of 18 feet, where 20 feet is required in the residence half-acre zoning district.

Good evening. Thank you for hanging in there with me and staying awake. My name is Jillian Fox. I moved here with my family a year and a half ago to take on the responsibility and privilege of being the president and CEO over at Caramore. We've been here in the town of Bedford for a year and a half, but only moved into our beautiful new home three weeks ago. You may know it is quite hard to get a home here. We moved here from Newport, Rhode Island. And it was really important to us to live in the town of Bedford and really be a part of the community that we're serving at Caramore. The property, the variance that we're looking for is just two feet. And I did bring a, I know you have it all in front of you, but, and now I'm seeing all the big architect stuff and it's so much bigger, but you can see it's really, if I, if I can approach just this back corner circled in red, that's the two feet. It's not the full length. It's just that back corner.

Is there a reason you can't move it over?

because of the location of the generator and the HVAC, which are there. So this was the required distance. I know that our architect actually called Al a while ago to just ask about what distance from the house they would be comfortable with. The property currently does not have any outdoor storage. It also does not have a basement or an attic. So there is really no storage on the property. But we are very much outdoorsy people. We have been really caring for this home and being able to have a place both for just one car, but also for our lawnmower, for our daughter's bicycles, those kinds of things, to keep things organized would really... be incredibly, incredibly helpful. We went with the 14 by 24 as this was really the smallest footprint that we could go in order to accommodate that level of storage. So we were really thinking about how can we do this as small as possible, being as inconvenient as possible. And the design is really simple and matches the current house. So it feels very cohesive and matching with the neighborhood. And it connects to the current driveway. Due to the location of the septic fields, a curtain drain on the property, as well as the town's drainage that does cut through the side of our property, we did explore putting the garage on the other side of the home where setbacks wouldn't be an issue. But unfortunately, the engineering wasn't there. It was going to cause major water issues. So that was not deemed possible. So this really is the only place on the property to put it. And we also just really noticed if you know this neighborhood at all. And we did stake out the area if you were able to come by and see it. I think only one other house in the neighborhood doesn't have a garage. Everybody has one or two-car garage. It's very much a family-friendly neighborhood, lots of bicycles and things like that. So we felt this was a reasonable and appropriate ask. We really thought about the two feet. I know it's really tiny, and I hope it's not too, too much of an inconvenience.

We, I don't think it's too much of an inconvenience. I was curious as to where it was going when I was out there. We do have a letter objecting to it from your neighbor. And they put in here, because the house originally had a garage.

Yes, that was prior to us.

It was converted by the previous owner.

That's correct. So that was their decision. I wouldn't have done that. Also, I know she mentioned that there was also a mature tree removed. I believe that was removed in 2022 prior to all of that. We have since already put some landscaping back into the property. We're very committed to that.

Good. I'm curious. They're at 72 Meadow Lane, and they were talking about it somehow, them seeing it from their home and their home patio and privacy?

Yes, so 72 is next to 64. The numbering is very odd.

But wouldn't they also see your four propane tanks and your generator?

That is correct. Also, I did want to point out that this is a single-story garage, so the height is 10 feet 4 inches. The house is currently 19.5 inches, and that home is on a higher grade, so they would be able to see over it if that was also a concern.

I think the only thing that I might ask, because I do know the neighborhood well, is that you look at putting some shrubs or something along that line of the shed or whatnot, particularly where we have the encroachment area. Look at that back edge and back corner of it. I think that screening would help. I understand it's changed. To the neighbor, it changes. It is a small amount into the setback admittedly, but that particular area in the neighborhood does get very open. I'm not sure what has happened over the year with landscaping the light, but I think that might help mitigate some of the neighbors concerns about. It's going to change. I mean, you would have a right to put a structure in that area. You could reduce the structure a little bit and keep it in the thing, but you do need a certain scale in order to fit vehicles or whatnot. So I don't have any objection to it other than making the recommendation that landscaping be put in along that side of the shed and maybe just wrap. And you don't have to put it right against it, but think about it so that it screens in some way a little bit. Yeah, I think that's what I said. The long edge of the shed.

Yes, I think we're very committed to continuing to add landscaping over time. We're a little strapped on that, but yes, absolutely. We're continuing to put in more on the property. Okay.

This may not be possible, but I see you have a generator back here, but, you know, so many of the garages that are coming up are being attached to the house now and there's some inhibition here, I guess, to be able to do that. It looks like it's offset from the house. That's correct.

As Roger was just pointing out to me, she could avoid the two feet intrusion into the side yard by coming forward. Into the driveway? No, coming forward and then moving it over. But the problem is you then have a... You're in the front yard setback. Yes, that's correct.

Quite frankly, an attached garage would have been even more ideal, but... both because of the location. It's not just the generator. It is also the HVAC is outside there and all of the electrical hookup. It was going to be quite cost prohibitive to relocate all of that to the other side of the house. And we are planning to do a prefab garage to be able to keep some of our costs down with the site prep done by a local contractor. I have all that insurances as well.

I just was with the building inspector just marking some the landscaping idea. Literally, it's like six or seven inches along that edge there. In this case, I'm not going to dictate that it be arborvitae. I actually think arborvitae would be the least desirable in the long run because they get too big and not actually provide an aesthetic. But appropriate screening. You'll see the rough idea of the location there where we'd like some screening to be planned.

I believe we have someone that wants to speak on the application. Could you come to the microphone please? Introduce yourself.

Oh, it's probably neighbor.

Yes. Yeah. My presumption.

Mr. Chair and distinguished members of the town, can you hear me? Yes. Yes. So my name is Lidia Vubanja. I am the owner of 72 Meadow Lane, and I'm directly facing the property. So... My husband recently passed away, and I just came back.

Let me just understand. You're across the street? Yes. Just next to that. She's a budding. She's a budding.

I am the property next to the 64 Meadow Lane. Yeah. As I said, my husband recently passed away and I came back from Europe where I was shocked to receive such a notice of this proposal. I strongly object to this variance and to the proposed garage in the location. So, first of all, the property originally, as you know, had a two-car garage. that was converted into the living space. My major concern is the precedent this sets. If a garage can be converted into the living space and then a variance granted to build another garage closer to a neighbor, what prevents the same thing from happening throughout our neighborhood. So this site has already been significantly changed by the removal of the mature tree without anybody letting us know and putting propane tanks and the large white fence where everything before was a greenery. So another garage would directly affect the view from my home and patio, or it already affects us. And putting another garage, it will affect not only my privacy, but potentially also the value of the property. And for these reasons, I strongly urge the board to deny these variants. Thank you.

Do you understand the need for the variants? Yes. Is that she has gone over in just the corner, not with the whole garage, just the corner of the...

I am aware. I am absolutely aware that before that was a mature tree and a landscape, not any... garage and propane tanks. And my propane tanks are covered by greenery. And This is the view of entire neighborhood of the street. Thank you.

Thank you. Did you know, so with the building inspector, I just showed on the plans too, where we would suggest some landscaping to go in to provide some screening.

I know, I strongly object.

You can still, that's fine.

Yes, I know, I know. I am aware of that. I spoke with the lawyer, yes. Okay, thank you.

And I understand your concern, and it's a change in the, in the neighborhood, because there wasn't a structure there before. I think, you know, for me, this is not a particularly big ask the coverage on the property allows for the impervious surface allows for it. Structurally is slightly within the setback, but the screening can be can help mitigate that. That's what screens and supposed to do. And it's a 1 story edition, not a 2 story. And if if she shifted it all the way in the corner, she could do this as a right.

Well, that's the thing. Yeah.