Zoning Board of Appeals - Regular Meeting

The procedure here is that um um the secretary will read the an application. If it's your application um once it's done, would you please come to the um podium here, introduce yourself and tell us what it is you would like to do, even though it's on writing. Also, you should know that most of us have been out to see we've all had the opportunity to go out and see your application and uh and what you want to do. Um but this is a public hearing both on Zoom and um here in the room. So at some point we will ask if there's anyone that wants to comment on your application and uh we'll just and let them discuss what it is they have concerns about and um if there is nobody to talk on it, we may probably close the public hearing. Um I this evening have to be here uh leave early. Um at which point um the this will be taken over uh chaired by Meredith Black who will take over as chair and we will also have a uh a an alternate uh come sit in so that we will have a five member board. Um one of our members is not here at the moment but he is on his way. Uh so with that said can we start with the first application? Timothy and Amanda Collier, 11 Plateau Lane, Bedford, section block and lot 74.19-1-2 residential 1acre zoning district. The applicants are seeking a variance to permit the construction of a pool house which results in a rear yard setback of 36 feet where 50 ft is required and where the ground floor area of the pool house results in 1,092 ft where an accessory structure shall not exceed.5% or 284.42 42 square ft of the area of the 49,683 ft lot in the residential 1acre zoning district and where the proposed total building coverage results in 10.22% where the existing building coverage is 7.66% and where 10% is the maximum

building coverage permitted and where the proposed total impervious coverage results in 20.32% where the existing imperous coverage is 17.07% 07% and where the maximum permitted impervious coverage is 20% in the residential 1acre zoning district. Article 3 section 125-27D2 and article 5 section 125-50. Good evening. Um if you are do you want to use the if that's the case and just you pull the mic out over there and hold the mic if you would. I'm sorry. If you want to point to your your um That's okay. It was just for reference. Okay, then we'll have you over there. Please introduce [Applause] yourself. Hello. Good evening. I am uh Fred Filipina, uh architect for Tim and Amanda Kier, two of the nicest people in Bedford. Um the uh the proposal here uh the genesis of this proposal is uh an existing pool that was built in 1990 and has a a co for its use that is located uh uh less than 50 ft to the rear property line. Uh that's the pool itself. the deck decking or terrace around it uh goes in a little further than that. So knowing that the pool uh in my thinking was to center the pool center the pool house on the pool which required it to be 36 feet from the rear

property line versus 50 ft. The other issues uh are topography. The pool is located in the current rear yard probably in the vicinity of 20 ft above the level of the house. So there's a there's a slope between the pool and the proposed pool house and the primary residence. the uh coverage issue uh was exacerbated by by something that I felt was important uh relative to uh relief from the elements. I have a 6ft roof overhang in the front facing the pool and a 4ft overhang on the left side and it's that I'm sorry and what is that square footage that we want? What is the calculation of that overhang square footage total? That that exacerbates the problem of coverage. I understand. And what what is that percentage? That's the o that constitutes the overhang on that building. That's 6 foot by by 38. 6 by 38. Do the math. Pete, where's my phone? Okay. Plus an additional 4ft overhang on the left side of the building. I was that on just the one side the for the depth is that same just one side has that additional 4 foot. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. That's the side that penetrates the rear yard set back. [Applause] And what is that depth? 300 ft. Yeah. 300. Approximately. Okay. Thank you. [Applause] just to be I have just quick to be I

want to make sure I'm in the right place here. Uh this is a a a gray house. It is a sort of a dark gray bluish bluish house. Yeah. And and and there is a right now there's something at the end of the pool. There's a shed. That's a shed. Existing shed. Yes. And beyond. And then from that shed there's a white fence that continues back. Okay. And so, okay, then I did see the right place. Okay. All right. As a footnote, I don't know if it's good or bad, but I was the also the architect and the builder for seven plateau lane. Well, I do remember being there for that. Yeah. Are there any questions in the audience on on this application? Does anybody building or on the zone or on the um zoom call? No. Okay. So, this is a variance and just questions here among the board and then this is the variance since your impervious surfaces over the um maximum can have you considered the I did not look at the driveway carefully but that's the macadam surface macadam driveway. There is a an existing Macadam drive. So that's not being touched. Well, it's just that your uh coverage is over. Yeah, it's primarily because of the roof overhang. Uhhuh. Great. And I guess that would bring down and when the pool went in that was permitting and that was the setback at the time. Al the pool itself because it's within the setback of the year, right? I don't I know we checked it and and it either they got a variance or it had a C definitely had a C. So

okay that was 1990. Yeah. So there should have been a but I don't know why you would have that would have been a different set of variance. Right. Right. I was saying if they remove something but okay. All right. What else? Who are those questions? He's saying that the the overage is due to the overhang. Yeah, that's what he's saying. So we have clear. So five seven the building 7.600 equals 40. Yeah. That's right. So it does come out to that. See so if you took that was the 10% that's the over. [Applause] Is there a rationale behind why it's so large? The 10 thou the 1,092 ft? Again a large portion of that is overhangs. Overhangs. Yeah. Yeah. And that is it's intended to just be a place to for relieving yourself from sunshine or rain or whatever. Okay. All right. Anybody else questions? I'm just looking at it for a minute more. Okay. Anyone else? Roger. Anyway, just me and myself. Anyway, what about you, Peter? Any questions? No, I'm good. I I I mean, with what was there, at least visually, I mean, I went into the driveway and you look up and the shed, you know, I didn't know that it was a shed. Um, and then the white fence that extends it back makes it look

bigger than it is anyway. And everything in the neighborhood seems to have a pool with a pool house. Yeah. And the one that's next door that we already saw here is a very big pool house, right? Um, so I didn't I did not particularly have have any problem with this application. I mean, it's a significant structure for the lot size, but this is also that conservation um street in two acres zoning. We in the past we've been in favor of pools and the structures that kind of exceed the uh the limits under uh because because of the leniency because it's one even though it's one acre it's in two acres zone. So here the here when you look at the what's being represented we've really got the pool house is just under a thousand. and it's like 960 some square feet itself and then the overhang adds that extra 300 square ft. So usually when we deal with it we look a lot as to the bulk also. So while you'll have the bulk on top you don't have that coming all the way down. No as a straight line obviousate some some of that anyway that appearance and whatnot. Um I might add we've had no negative feedback from any of the neighbors. Yeah that's good. My my only comment is you're slightly over the impervious surface. I realize it's a small one. Slightly. Yeah. But in future, just for future, it would be useful to remove some macadam and make that more pvious surface. If you know, as you move as you move forward, it's it's a slight overage, but the the way to resolve that if in the future if you need it is to remove some of the macadam. Sure. Yeah. I think it's just being cognizant of that with the client going forward of realizing that you're over on impervious and there are lots of things that can

contribute to it. So I know around here a lot of people will add more they'll enlarge their deck or they'll add more stone walls or they'll add another paved area, right? And that that would prove problematic for this client. It does happen from time to time. I it does happen from time to time, but it's best noted before it's before it's a problem so conversations can be had and decisions can be made before it's a problem. That's that's more of the point than anything else. So, um I mean I don't I don't have any objections to the idea of the full house. I don't have any objection. We don't we don't look at design. It's a lovely design. We don't look at design, but it is a lovely design um on there. I wish we had a little more information just on the pool in case we had needed to clear it as a variance because of that setback. And I understand you said that Ally noted it has a CO which is helpful for us to know which is why we're not requesting the variance. Um but I suggest the homeowner maybe look a little bit more more into that to make sure that that's all documented because it was only 1990. This wouldn't have been that far back where we would expect there to be setback significant setback differences that would have allowed that without a variance. The Kers bought the house 10 years ago. Yeah. So, yeah, they bought it with it in place. I I I acknowledge that. But a lot of times when we come and there's other variances, we try to clean up if there's a historic variance for some type of structure that uh wasn't granted, but it was permitted or allowed, we try to just get it all cleaned up so that the record then is clear. But this this had a CO clearly has a CO and uh and whatnot. I would just suggest that that you double check because I find it unusual that in 1990 we would have it within the setback and there wouldn't have been a variance or some type of other permitting that would have gotten us there beyond just seal. [Applause] Yes. Okay. Yep. That would be sure of course it'll show. Yep. I don't know if you've

covered this. I did ask question but the variance was 36 and this drawing is 36 [Applause] I think because of the angle. So on your on your uh survey here right just confirming that setback that we're talking about for the overhang is to that 36 ft. Is that right? Because it looks like there's two there's a light line and a dark heavier line. Right. Well, the the the drawing Yeah. the Okay, I see what it is now. Never mind. The the setback to the building proper is 40 ft, right? Okay. To the roof. The 36 is to the overhang. Okay. And I think that that's also just relevant to note for the record in terms of the the approval for this that there's two different aspects. the build the uh foundation of the building is actually set back further uh more but you have to go to the most uh closest point which would be the 36. Okay. Uh if there's no one else in the audience who wanted to speak on this or on the zone on the zoom call can I have a motion to close the public hearing. All those in favor I I public hearing is closed. Um you want to make a motion on it? Sure. I would move to approve the application for a variance benefit uh by the applicant cannot be achieved by another means feasible to the applicant. In this instance, there's an existing pool that was um properly permitted in place within the setback. The pool house shouldn't be proximate to that. And in order to orient that the pool house so that it um makes sense with regard to the pool, it fall it also similarly falls within the setback. Uh to be noted here, the overhang for the roof is actually closer than the building itself with the overhang uh being the closest point to the property line at 36 feet,

but with the actual setback to the foundation of the building being approximately is it 40 40 ft. Thank you. In addition uh in making note of that, the building itself uh the interior of the structure is only about 969 square ft. The additional square footage for the pool house though is created by the large overhangs that are included as part of the overall design. So there's actually a little bit less building coverage than what is being uh required by way of code. There will be no undesirable change to the character the neighborhood or detriment to the nearby properties. Many of the properties in the area also have pools and pool houses. In fact, there's a another home in close proximity with an even larger pool house. the variance um is could be argued in some respects to be substantial. Um but that's not the only factor that we look at and in fact in this case when you look at it the percentage that you go above with regard to total um [Applause] impervious the overages we have with regard to coverage are about uh 22% over what's permitted by way of the code and um point uh sorry uh about 3.2 23. With regard to the impervious surface itself, the variance will not result in any adverse physical or environmental effects on the neighborhood or community. The alleged difficulty is self-created, but that's only one of the factors to be considered by the board in making this decision is not determinative. Approval of the proposed variance will be subject to the following conditions. The applicant will seek use their best efforts to ensure that a building permit is issued within one year of the board's approval of this variance and then diligently pursue uh such construction to completion. The applicant shall submit a certified asbuilt survey including building and purpose calculate coverage calculations to the building department. Um the survey should also make note of the approvals for the location of the pool itself because that's a little unusual. Um but that those that information will

be submitted to the building department prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. The variance is granted in accordance with the plan submitted to the board dated January uh 9th, 2025. Uh and include plans A1, A2, A3 as well. Is I think there's Was there one more? That's it. Right. Those three. Oh, there we go. That's what I was looking for. And the actual uh is this for this one? No, this this is this. No, this is this one. Yeah, in accordance with those plans. This is a different one. Okay. All right. I'll second. Thank you. Thank you very much. Mr. Stern, yes. Miss Lee, yes. Mr. Van Loverren, yes. Miss Black, yes. Mr. McCallis, yes. Now you have it. Thank you, [Applause] sir. Take the You might need the plans. If you take them, you won't need them. That's what I say every time. Some other people, too. [Music] We're good. Thank you. Ah, [Applause] to John Gambos 20 to Street, Katona section block and lot 61.10-2-1 residential 4acre zoning district. The applicant is seeking a variance to permit the conversion of a legal pre-existing one-bedroom cottage into a pool house and the conversion with additions and renovations to a legal non-conforming pre-existing barn constructed in 1983 to a two-bedroom cottage, twocar garage, and pergola, where the total floor area to be occupied as the cottage did not exist prior to 1989. and the adoption of the town code for cottages and where the

accessory structure and additions have not existed for five years and where the proposed cottage was granted a variance on June 1st, 1983 resolution 6-835 for sideyard setback of 35 ft where 50 ft is required and where the proposed second floor dormer addition creates an increase in the height of a dimensional non-conforming structure results in a sideyard setback of 42 feet 7 in to the dormer where 50 ft is required in the residential 4acre zoning district and where the total building coverage results in 4.18% where the existing building coverage is 3.7% and where 3% is the maximum permitted building coverage in the residential 4acre zoning district. The proposed cottage results in 1,720 square feet of gross floor area where a cottage shall not contain more than 800 square ft of gross floor area and where the principal residence is 4600 square ft and the cottage shall not exceed 25% or 1,150 square ft of the total floor area of the principal residence in the residential 4acre zoning district. [Applause] Good evening. Good evening, Mr. Chairman, members of the board, Pete Daniel Hollis, Gettinger, Waldinger, Montalone, Gashu, and Hollis, 118 North Bedford Road in Mount Kisco, New York, representing John Scambos and Donna Burbank Scamos, who are here in row three or four, whichever that is. I'm also here tonight with Sarah O'Shea, my one of our associates who helped with the presentation and Teao Sequenza, our project architect, is remote tonight and will share uh the screen if necessary to look at the site plan and any overhead photographs if you have any questions about the site plan itself or the uh appearance of it. And um I think it's really important to note that all of the buildings that were on this property are

going to remain. We're not adding anything to the property other than the twocar garage. And why are we doing that? We're doing that and that's the one variance on the building coverage. That's the one that kicks us over uh where we are at 3.7. The reason is the planning board requirement for the cottage requires two parking spaces. And rather than have the two parking spaces be outside and have the uh property look like uh a car dealership, we thought to have the cars parked inside the garage would be more aesthetically pleasing and more functional for the clients. Also, I think the side dormer variances uh required because of the fact that the dormer just bumps out a little bit. We're not adding to the nonconformity, making the building itself that much larger. It's just the dormers. I think that while it's not statutoily relevant, I think what's relevant here is what the scamboses have in mind is a very good plan and a model for all those who might be able to do it on their property, which is an intergenerational use of the property. and Jack and Donna are going to be moving into, as my letter of January 23rd sets forth, they'll be moving into the cottage, if this is approved by your board and the planning board, where their adult son and their daughter and son-in-law and their infant children will live in the main house so that the compound, so to speak, will be uh familial. Uh, and it's a a really great way to retire in place for the Mr. and Mrs. Gambos and a great way for them to have aid in the raising of their grandchildren and and their whole family being present there. The variances for the cottage and the relationship to the square footage are uh again the building is there, the garage is there and Teao's plans are just repurposing the interior of that garage to provide for the two bedrooms and the living space and and the ratio

of that to the main dwelling is a function of the size of the garage. Um the the um benefit to the applicant is clear. uh there's no impact in the neighborhood at all that's negative. We haven't been contacted by anyone who's opposed to this and I feel that the um application should be granted based upon our compliance with the uh terms of the balancing test and also we meet all the criteria other than perhaps the size but as uh Ms. Black said a moment ago that that issue alone is not determinative of denial. I'm here to answer any questions. Teao is will answer any questions about the site plan. U if you would like. Do you have does Teao have a presentation or pardon? Does he have a a presentation on the side? Yes, he could put a slide that up if you would like. Yes. Yeah, that's good. He shared uh May I request that you allow me to share the screen? Yeah. Oh, hey Peter, can you let them share the screen? He should be able to. Yeah. Yeah. Don't ask me. It's a host disabled participant screen sharing. [Applause] Yeah, they changed things on us this uh this Well, I I I have Try again. I mean, it says one participant. Yeah, now now it's good. Thank you. No, it's good. Thank you very much. Thanks, Peter. He'll have to show me what to do. That's the house. All right. Thank you so much. Yeah. Here we have the location of the property, the overview. Uh we have an

aerial view of the area of the uh in here we have a view of the property and in here we have uh a blow up of of the property as well. Um I would like to refer to the to the slide that that we are looking here. I hope you are seeing what I'm seeing. And um uh we have the access to the property the main residence that's the existing cottage at the moment. And this is the barn that we are proposing to convert into a dwelling unit by turning the existing one into a pool house. Uh I will also show you the images of the of the property here. This is the existing uh cage that will be converted into a pool house. Uh that's another view of the same structure in the back. And in here we have the existing barn that will be converted in this proposal into a two-bedroom carriage. Uh in here we have the the site plan of the property. uh screen here. Uh where you can see again in plan view the the access to the property existing existing main residence driveway that takes you to the back. The former cottage that will be turned into a pool house. And here we have the the cage that we are looking to create now with a garage expansion on the side. The blow up

here. Uh I can show you floor plans and elevations of the of the house uh that we're proposing of the structure that we are proposing. We have the the proposed carriage in here. Basically the the proposal is to create the the the living space in the location of the barn of the existing barn. Uh it has an open loft to the second floor where there will be located the one bedroom and then open to below. Here you can see the various elevations of the structure. Here we have the carriage, the the front side, the rear side, the two sides and the the next slide I will show you the the converted carriage into a pool house where this is existing condition. And in here we have the proposed condition which is a an open room with um with a bathroom basically here for the pool and a small loft that we have created by eliminating some of the existing floor area. And here we have the elevations of the structure uh that will be the pool house. the space in front of the pool and the other uh sides. Uh I will go back to the site plan. If you have any questions, I will be happy to answer. I think one of the points that Teao made is one to keep in mind that the current uh apartment in the uh cottage is going to be decommissioned. So it's it's not an additional accessory cottage. It's one accessory cottage. I have some questions about the barn.

The uh the barn uh doesn't look like it's or an early barn. It looks like a later barn that has it has had sort of a buff out in the back. So, it look almost looks like two two stages of of development of the barn and the the height of the replacement building is going to be similar to the height of the barn or or how how is that looking? Yeah, we we are not tea can answer that precisely. Yeah, but the the barn was built in 1983. Oh, it's an older bone, right? Yeah. Yeah. And the the the height of the structure will not change. It will remain at 22 ft 8 in. And I think I understand what you you're saying here that the reason the square footage is higher in the um in the barn is because the cars are being incorporated. Otherwise, if that hadn't happened, the structure would be smaller in We wouldn't need the area variance for the expansion to 4.18 if we weren't building the garage. I get it. Okay. Is there anyone in the audience or on the Zoom call that wanted to speak on this application? Have any questions, concerns? Seeing no one, can I have a motion? Sharing tail. What's that? I'm going to stop and sharing. Oh, I can see on the side though. I seeing no one, can I have a motion to close the public hearing? So moved. All those in favor? I public hearing is closed. discussion amongst us. Don't see any um the proximity issue exists exists today really quite frankly. Um the proximity the the setback issue. Yeah. So there's there's not much I think to weigh in there and they you know the proposed browsers moved a little bit even more forward away from that to allow for a little more breathing room on that sideyard set back. Yeah. and the dormers the Yeah, it doesn't seem to bother I mean that you

don't see other people on either side of them. No, no, it's a nicely designed area. It's in the architecture is in keeping kind of with the barn aspect that that aggregarian feel to begin with. I remember when this house was first built thinking that it was very cool that it was a shingle. It was it was one of the first non-colonial looking houses and I like that a lot. No. Um I don't I don't have any particular issues with the application. I think that it makes sense. I think we'll I think we will see more of these uh you know multigenerational aspects and use of some of these larger properties particularly because a bunch of them have existing his ex existing structures on them. Some of those structures are historic, some of them aren't. But it's a way to utilize those structures in that area in a more meaningful way um than just standing there and not really serving a purpose. So, uh, that is certainly appreciated. I take it from the notes here that you've been back to the Westchester County Health Department, uh, to deal with septic and that type of thing. All the joys. Um, and on this, have you been to the planning board? We have. We were in front of the planning board on April 14th. They were favorably disposed. There were no negative comments there. Obviously, they couldn't close that public hearing and vote because of the need for these variances. Okay. back. So you have the due back there on May 12th. You have the driveway as asphalt driveway 17,700 square ft. The driveway list all of that is computed within. Okay. Now when I was there the the there's a gravel on the driveway while there's a little harder surface underneath. So that's the calculation because of the under underllayment. Yes, could answer that. Yeah, I apologize. Can you please repeat the question? The calculation of the asphalt driveway, it's listed as asphalt

driveway at 1,700 square ft. You have a gravel surface over that. Right around the main house is a large gravel uh uh driveway. We are referring to the to the impervious areas. Yes. Yes. Yeah. That that has been calculated including the driveway where we have in here the the 1,700 square ft. Okay. I I can maybe help. There's only a small portion that's black. Okay, that's what I gravel. Nothing under the gravel but sand. No, I I appreciate that because that that looks nice, but it also lowers the strip down to the road. Black top. Thank you. It looked uh it looked like u mostly gravel to me as you said. Okay. Thank you. And just to note, there is no issue with the impervious being over. It's just building coverage and the setbacks that we're dealing with here. So, the dormer is what prompted this setback, not anything else. Correct. Yep. Well, if your kids don't want to move on, I'll move in. I'll volunteer. [Music] If there are no more questions, I'll make a motion. I propose that we grant a variance as as um noted in the agenda. Um doing so um we believe that um uh what's being sought by the applicant cannot be ch um achieved in any other means feasible. Um there'll be no undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or detriment to nearby properties. Um the variance is somewhat um substantial but actually I mean numerically it's substantial but um as it fits on the property it seems to to fit nicely and none of the neighbors seem to be affected or even see your prop see see what's going to happen here. Um the

variance request will not result in an adverse physical or environmental effect on the neighborhood or community and the alleged difficulty while self-created is only one of the factors to be considered by the board and it's rel relatively dimminimous at that. Um if approved um the applicant shall use their best efforts to ensure that a building permit is issued within one year of the board's approval of this variance and then diligently pursue such construction to completion. and the applicant shall submit a certified asbuilt survey including building and impervious coverage act calculations to the building department prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Um, the variance is granted in accordance with plans submitted to the board dated Well, there are a bunch of them. March 13, 2025. March 13, 2025. And um, we have Oh, not site plan, but they have sheet numbers on. What's that? Can you just refer to the sheet numbers on there for each? Yeah. SP1 and D1. And then we have PH 101, A101, and A200. Yeah. And then there's a survey. And then when's a survey? Yeah, exactly. Which is relatively old because it still has the lambs listed as nextdoor neighbors. Um and um we will make note that you have already been to the planning board. Um and um they have to return and will be returning returning on May 12th for yet. Um So, but uh we understand that there they they they also uh are supportive of the plan. There was no But this is still conditioned on their approval. It's conditioned on their approval as well. Yeah. On their vote. That's fine. Need a second. Second. Mr. Stern? Yes. Ms. Lee? Yes. Mr. Van Love? Yes. Miss Black? Yes. Mr. McCallis? Yes. You got it. Thank you. Good. Good evening, everyone. Mr. You

may. Thank you, board members. Thank you. Good night. Thanks, T. Thank you so much. Good night. Thank you. Extra plans. Extra plans. Yeah. That way you won't need them. You'll need them, but you'll be glad you don't have to pay for them again. Thank you. Thank you very much, Mr. Hollis. Anybody else? Yeah, there you go. Contributions to the Good to see you, Dan. Good night. Good night. This one. Just this one. Kevin Warren and Helen Mayabberg 60 Blackbrook Road Bedford section block and lot 62.17-1-7.1 residential 4acre zoning district. The applicants are seeking a variance to permit the construction of a shed which results in 3.82% of building coverage where ZBA variance was granted on March 2nd, 2023. Resolution 3-232 for 3.72% of building coverage and where 3% is the maximum building coverage permitted in the residential 4acre zoning district article 5 section 125-50. Good evening. Hello. Good evening everyone. Back again. Sorry about that. Where's Lawyers will be speaking with the architect and builder soon. Trust me. I'm sorry, Michael. Where's the sh um there's like color little brown [Applause] square need to to announce your name. I'm Steven with KCJ um consulting the site development consultants for this project. Can you can you repeat your name please? Steven Cis Nano. [Applause]

Well, that seems to be an innocuous shed. What's it what's it housing or what's what's it its purpose? Um, the purpose of the shed is just this is a modern Japanese house with an extensive garden. The whole place is a Japanese themed um property. So the goal was to have this prefab structure that would blend in with the existing house. The purpose of it is it needs to house this is a 6acre Japanese garden. Shovels, rakes, buckets, um soil amendments, fertilizers, the electric tractor, the cart that goes behind the electric tractor, the lift to change the blades on the mower of the tractor. Uh it's right now the garage is jacked full of everything to take care of the property. Gotcha. Um when I was out there, Al, have you been out to this property? No. No. Okay. I was just curious whether I thought the shed initially might have been I didn't I only had the I only had the agenda, not the not the um plans, drawing or plans. So, I thought the sh was maybe the one that was right at the front of the front of your gate. In front of your gate, which is which is for receiving packages. Oh, no, no, no. There's a gate. We have a 6ft deer fence to protect like Yeah. But in front of the gate there's a there's like a a little shed for gathering packages. Oh. Oh. Oh, yes. That's Well, no, that's that's a sh that is a trash that is something that the trash goes into because I know my neighbors have bears and raccoons and everything taking the trash out of the trash cans and throwing them down the street. So, in order to stop that from happening, there is that little thing for the trash cans there. Okay. Yeah, I understand. Okay.

I understand the need for a sh. Thank you. I have a problem. Is there is there anyone in the audience that wanted to speak on this application or on the Zoom call? Again, seeing no one, can I have a motion to close the public hearing? I'll make the motion. I'll second public. All those in favor? I I public hearing's closed. Uh looking at the property, the shed is needed because there's a very very large planting area with trees and native plantings uh in this big section here. So, it's The shed is just a convenience to be able to tend to the to the property and considering the size of the entire property. This is like a dimminimous item to add to it. Very minimous. So I don't have a a problem with I have a question. Yes, ma'am. So on here you flagged that this there's an old highway easement. Does that highway easement preclude structures from being within the easement? That that highway easement doesn't exist anymore. That was the original old poster road before what you drive on now existed. Okay. It was decommissioned I think in 198 something. The decommissioned documents are all in place with the deed to the property. I see this um that no longer exists. It's been removed from the property entirely. When we bought the it there was an old broken up piece of asphalt that no one had taken care of forever. And so we're planting um native blueg grass and m miscellaneous shrubs on it. Okay. All right. That was it. Um if there's no more questions, uh Rosemary, you want to just turn what you were started to into a var into a motion? get this here uh regarding the

um the application for uh Blackbook Road 60 Blackbook Road uh for a a permission of a shed resulting in 3.82% building coverage uh which is a slight overage from the original uh plan. Uh the benefit cost sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by another means feasible to the applicant. As explained, there's a large property with a large area of native plants and uh trees, native trees that have been installed. And this uh is simply to house uh garden uh tools implements to care for the property. Uh the variance is definitely not substantial because the property has as said uh six acres uh in and uh this is a slight a slight overage which happens. The variance requested will not re result in any adverse physical or environmental effects on the neighborhood or community. As noted, there has been no uh comments uh related to negative comments related to this. Um the applicant has come before us explaining this entire uh property and the design which is very very um environmentally uh improved and uh energy saving. Uh minimized coverage which definitely we appreciate. Um the difficulty is is uh not self-created because that was one of the factors to be considered by this board in making a decision and it's not determinative because this um is necessary for the uh care and improvement of the property. Approval of the proposed variance would be subject to the following conditions. Are we putting any specific conditions? The the building permit is not necessary in this case. You still need all those conditions. Okay. will need the building permit within one year of the board's approval of the variance and then diligently pursue such construction to completion. Uh the applicant shall submit a

certified asbuilt survey. Yeah. Does this contain I'm wondering is this one of these situations where we can because we obviously have a um an asbuilt for the house because that was all just done. You should be able to update it, but we need it because when they put the new structure up, there could be a miscalculation with the size of the structure. Yeah. Well, you're right. And they already have it, so it shouldn't be a lot. They should be able to That's fine. You have the as as built in the structure placed on it as done by um Steven and his firm. Yeah. But I'm happy to call Yeah. them and have them come out. We've had too many instances where there's been an inadvertent modification or miscalculation and nothing he will make sure such inadvertent modification to my shed. Trust me, I do not want to have to come back to your board ever again. Well, we'll we'll go for a tour of the house cuz it is unique. I would be happy to have everyone come and look at the garden and tour the house. And I'm sure it's fantastic. It has some unique design that we haven't seen. And it also has the energy aspect. So that's really interesting. Thank you. The applicants shall submit a certified asbuilt survey. Yes. Correct. Including building and impervious coverage calculations to the building department prior to the issuance of the certificate of occupancy for the permit and the variances granted with and we will not see you again in accordance with the plan submitted to the board dated March 20 March 21 March 21 2025 2025. Second. Thank you everyone. Roger second. Yeah. No. No. Just a second. Just a second. Hang on. Just a second. Mr. Stern. Yes. Ms. Lee. Yes. Mr. Van Love. Ms. Black. Yes. Mr. Mis. Yes. You got it. Here you go. Here's one more set of plans. Say goodbye

to that one. That was one. Now we're up to 100 birch. I think I got what I need from German. [Applause] Matthew and Jane Coleman 100 Birch Drive, Kona section block and lot 61.16-1-7 residential 4acre zoning district. The applicants are seeking a variance to permit the construction of a one-story addition to a pre-existing legal non-conforming residence where the front yard setback results in 40 ft 10 in where 75 ft is required in the residential 4acre zoning district. Article 3 section 125-11D and article 5 section 125-50. Mr. Sullivan, nice to see you again. He doesn't have to. If he wants to, you could. Good evening, Mr. Chairman, board members, you want to nice to see you again. Uh John Sullivan, our architect here tonight, uh representing um uniquely my daughter and my son-in-law, who is Matthew Coleman right here, daughter's home with babies. So, um so the Coleman's have purchased this house at 100 Birch Drive, which is all the way at the end of Birch Drive. Um do I put this up? Do I use a flash drive? I'm just confused. What do they have it? No, you have to if you want them to see your plans, you have to Let's give this a try. We can put this up for you. Little history on this though, while we're waiting for this to pop up here. I don't hit that screen. Um, I don't know. We have Peter's coming down. Ow. Peter's coming. Peter's coming to the rescue. Peter's coming. Peter's coming. Why is it just me? Nobody else needed Peter to come to the rescue. Oh, was that that long long password? Yeah, there we go. Wow. See, it's wonderful having He seems to

know what he's doing with technology. Do I'll hit the right thing. What a good [Applause] That's why it's working. [Applause] There we go. There we go. I want to make it clear for ideas. Okay. So, what we have here is um this house which is at I say at the end of Birch Drive uh which was constructed in 1982. May have been the first perhaps the last house as part of the Birch Drive subdivision when it was created. Don't know the exact date of that. Um but um interesting enough that you can see from the from the plan here that while this is a almost a 4.7 acre parcel of land, the house is tucked all the way in the back corner of the lot. Um I have no recollection or any history of whether or not there were variances granted for that house when it was created. Perhaps our zoning rags were different 42 years ago anyway. Um, but as you can see from the from the map that we have here that um this is a rather unique condition, which is why we call it a front yard setback. When Birch Drive was terminated at the at the intersection of Glennwood Lane, which may have been constructed at the same time as part of that subdivision, there was a 50-foot spur that continued toward the back of their what was no doubt that site. You can see to the right it says lot number eight was part of that that whole subdivision. Um so consequently while the house fronts to the left it looks more like a sideyard but it's actually a front yard

and I the pond is more your front than uh Yeah. Yeah. Um but as you can see the road does not you know go that distance. Yeah. Um, and for all intents and purposes, even where it says reserved for future road, that that's a lawn area that no doubt the previous owners, which by the way, the Coleman's purchased this property on December 4th, so it's only about 5 6 months ago. And we've gone through a rather extensive alteration to the interior of that, which we have permits for, which Al knows only too well. But what they would like to do is what you see on the plan on the right is to at some point construct a onestory um addition in a in a form of a den or an office on the ground floor of of the building. Um consequently it further infringes upon effectively what's a front yard setback to us there's really no impact on the surrounding properties there. Um, it all feels rather comfortable. And you guys can also see that we have, particularly on one of these plants here, the one on the left, there's a pond and there's so on. So there's a wetland on the site, but even where this is located is well outside of a wetland and outside of a wetland setback. And that's not by design, by the way. It's just this is where the best place is for this room to be in the floor plan of this house. Here's an elevation of the front of it, which is the textured part to the right, as you can see, which is set back. Um, that nice large window you see to the left of it, is uh a new addition that we did to the twotory living room space. This is the rear rear elevation that just disappeared. And the side elevation, which you can see on the right here, does not have does not have any windows on that side. The windows are to the front and to the rear. So, and there's the plan of the room. Is that your cho choice, sir? Yes. Yeah. Okay. I mean, it it works best here in

terms of uh where to put it. Not just as I said earlier, not because of other impacts that may be on the wetland or the wetland setbacks. Um the house is was permitted and designed as a four-bedroom house and is permitted as a four-bedroom house, including septic. Um, should this room be considered a bedroom, which is highly unlikely, it doesn't have a closet, and if you might notice, there's not a full bathroom on the ground floor. Um, we removed a bedroom on the second floor in favor of enlarging the primary bedroom m or primary bathroom. So, even if it gets counted as that, we're still good with the health department. We still would have a four-bedroom house. It'd be a heck of a trick to go from that bedroom out the door across their family room up stairs to the second floor and the bedroom was all the way over to the left. So So I guess you're not moving in. No, you know what? No, you got a lot of room for that. If they if they want their father-in-law to move in there, I might just find an alternate location. But in any event, um, no, so um, so we're here because of the unique condition that we have here with the relationship of this building to the property line and, uh, consequently, we ask for the board's approval. Uh, there are no there are no other impacts, site coverages, um, etc. Uh, so it's only that one property setback. [Applause] And what are you doing with all the rest of the property besides the bond? Trust me, you know, when we looked at this and they called me in, I said to myself, how about we build a new house way over here to the left where we have lots of property, you know, but um it's u who knows why they did what they did back then. Um it's rather unique. Uh but in any event, no was fun going out to the site cuz the guys on the working on the second story, they were breaking out the windows and I said, "Hi, how you doing? I'm looking at the spot and they

they're all Yeah. Yeah. Go around the back there. Were you there today? They I was there today. They were knocking out the Yeah. A lot of work today. Must have been four or five trucks there. Well, hopefully including the sun's truck. We're at We're at the uh we're at the end of this interior renovation of the building and with the hopes that they will move in in the next three weeks. Wow. So, the interior obviously the addition will come at a later date. Um, obviously hopefully within the year, you know, and um but um I'm sorry. Did you say within the year? I'm sorry. Okay. No, just don't worry. Doesn't want to answer the question. He heard it and answered it. Is there anybody in the audience or on the Zoom call that wanted to speak on this application? Again, hearing no one then, can I have a motion to close the public hearing? All those in favor? I I public hearing is closed. any discussion? No, I appreciated the marking. You know, the stakes were out, so that was helpful. Yeah. Yeah. Thank you. Because uh Matt and I just did that on Saturday, so helps you guys out there. It It makes sense. It's a unique positioning of the house on the property overall, which creates any challenges for trying to do additions and modifications to it without triggering any type of variance or setback or the like. Um they've done it in a way where it keeps the the floor plan. So it makes sense, but quite frankly with the reservation of the future road there, that that piece parcel there extends anyway. So it's not as though the this addition is really sitting closer necessarily to to a road per se in in a sense. You know, it's it's much more green space in some respect. I will I will share with all of you. All the years that I had sat on the planning board here, which I'm sure you guys remember, um we reviewed the property that's to the uh north of this for rather significant subdivision, which I'm sure some of you may even be

aware of. The discussion of whether or not this rideway uh would get extended to that property was one that was not wellreceived. So even to the extent that I question whether or not the town um will even allow that access there, the residents of the Birch Drive and Glenwood Lane would be not receptive to that to say the least. Um if that's the case, there's been some discussion about applying to the town to acquire this rightway of strip of land. So we'll see what the future holds here in any event. But that might even improve upon that to you to to help that out. Meredith Roger's gonna make a motion here for you. Um I make a motion to grant uh variance um for the uh addition uh on 100 Birch Drive. 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 benefits sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by another means feasible to the applicant. Uh, one of the bigger constraints on this property is the 100 foot setback and um, this would favor uh, not uh, adding the addition in that uh, setback. There will be no undesirable change to the character of the neighborhood or detriment to nearby properties. The variance requested is in this case not very substantial and the variance requested will not result in any adverse physical environmental effects on the neighborhood or community. and the alleged difficulty is although um self-created. This is not the only one of the factors to be considered by a 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 the building permit is issued within one year. The board's approval of this variance and then

diligently pursue such construction to completion. that the applicant shall submit a certified asbuilt survey including building and impervious coverage calculations to the building department prior to the issuance of certificate of occupancy. Um the variances granted in accordance with the plan submitted to the board date October 1st 24 what he said I'll second that [Music] Mr. Stern. Yes. Ms. Lee. Yes. Mr. Van Loverin. Yes. Ms. Black. Yes. Mr. McCallis. Yes. You got it. Thank you all. It's always good seeing me. Thank you for your help. Welcome. Thank you. Thank you. All right. John. Thank him. Thank you too for your At this moment, Meredith, I'm going to step out. If you'll take over as chair and less Marin, I'm very excited. You'll be coming up here as our alternate for the first time. All right. Excellent. Welcome. Then you won't need it. You never know if you don't do it anytime. You'll need it. Here's another plant. In this case, they come free. I will pay a price. Don't worry. You want to use your spell? Put it in front of Peter. Thank you. [Music] [Applause] [Music] [Applause] [Music] Michael Silera, 465 Old Post Road, Bedford, section block and lot 84.11-1-65 residential quarteracre zoning district. The applicant is seeking a variance to permit an already constructed shed where an area variance was granted on October 3, 2012

resolution 10-12 for a 4ft rear yard setback and where the shed resulted in a rear yard setback of 3 ft where 40 ft is required in the residential quarteracre zoning district. Article 3 section 125-11D and article 5 section 125-50. You can just state your name and Okay. Hi all, my name is Mike Salera. Um, the story behind the shed was originally we had uh tree damage. I had two 8ft shed 8t by 8t sheds in the in this space. And when the trees took them out, we got rid of everything and we ordered one shed 16 by8. So, it's the exact same size as the other two with no space in between. When I put the shed in place, there was a uh the neighbor that lived there prior to the neighbor that's there now. I was very friendly with him. There are trees on the property line. There was probably six huge trees. So, what I said was, I'll put the fence on my side of the trees because I didn't need the foot, 2 foot, whatever it was. So, the fence is on my side of the the trees. When it gets towards the Greenwich Road side, it curves back in. So, that's where it goes to 3T. So, the front of the shed is 4T, the back of the shed is 3T. the shed lines up with the back of the house uh equally, but the fence itself is running a little bit awkwardly. It Well, it's actually that the property line isn't parallel exactly what's causing it. So, the fence the fence is is is not parallel with the shed to begin with, but that's not what the marker is. The

the marker is the property line and the shed is not running parallel to the property line. So that's why so the back is at the four feet and the front is at the 3 ft which is the need for the variance and this the fence belongs to you the stock gate fence the fence is oh belongs to both of us yes I I I replaced the fence after a storm and I had to do both sides so okay I see and incidentally the woman who lived behind me I got her letter back today. She's not there. The There's no one in the house. I don't know if it's up for sale, but there hasn't been anyone in the house in close to a year. Okay. All right. So, in uh 2012, uh you received the variance to allow for the four fee. Yes. Uh at that time, was it just a lack of realization of that the shed didn't run parallel to the property line? Cuz it I'm sorry. Why? Why wasn't the three-foot caught at the in 2012? I don't really I don't remember. I'm sorry. Okay, that's okay. No, it's it's quite a while ago. Um, why is this coming up now? Let's say because we have 2013 we had the survey. So, what flagged it now that triggered it to I'm selling the house. I want to make sure all the per all all the um incidentals are taken care of before I let it go. Okay. All right. that that's why I was just wondering with the gap because I see the survey shows shows that. Okay. So, and and there's never been a complaint from my neighbor because my neighbor hasn't been there in over a year. Okay. All right. Um does anyone else in the public have any questions? Seeing and hearing no one on that front, I'll close the public hearing. Um members of the board, any questions or comments? None. Concerns?

Good. Okay. Is that walk always there? I'm sorry. Is the walk always there along the side of the house when you have the sheds? The walk there's a walk. Yeah. There's always there. Yes. So that that's interesting because if that walk was always there then it would be interesting why that 4 foot would never I think it was always three feet probably. Well yeah pro probably was. It was just no one caught no one was paying attention that I was just thinking. Right. Um, okay. Roger, do you want to make a motion? Sure. [Applause] Um, I make a motion to grant variance um for the um certification of the what is it certification of the asbuilt uh variance for the sheds on well actually now shed on um 465 Oldpost Road. 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 benefit saw by the applicant cannot be achieved by another means feasible to the applicant. You know, this is a this was a replacement of destroyed um uh sheds um that were out of the applicant's control. And this replacement is set in the same position and have the up updated at survey shown uh 3 ft not the 4T that was previously uh granted by this board. Um having said that there were no there there uh will be no undesirable change to the character of the neighborhood or detriment to the nearby properties and the variance requested is not substantial and the variance requested will not result in any adverse physical environmental effects to the neighborhood or community. The alleged

difficulty in this case was probably not self-created. Um and the approval of the proposed variance would be subject to the following conditions. Um the applicants will use the best efforts to ensure that the billing permit is uh followed through and and that it is uh closed out within one year of the board's approval of this variance. Was there one minute, Al? Was there a building permit issued and closed for that for the sheds? We're waiting for this. There's a permit issue. Yes. But it needs to be closed. Okay. Just continue. construction of completion. Um the applicant so submitted certified. Do we uh we have to update this? Do we need to update the survey? He's got the survey. Uh it is already updated. The survey is updated. There's nothing changed in that. Um the one I have says February 2013. Yeah. Yeah. Is that the one we're talking about? Yes, that's correct. there there's no need to uh to submit a new certified asbuilt survey. U building department already has that and that the variance is granted in accordance with the set survey. Um you just provided the date dated 2013. What's the new February 7th, 2013? It was prepared on February 7th, 2013. February 7th. Yeah. 2013. Okay. I'll make note in this particular instance here on the record also the structure went in in place back in between 2012 2013 and there was a certified survey done in 2013. So that is what the board is referencing and accepting as the certified survey because it did did include the coverage requirements information at that time and no changes have been made to the property or structure since that point in time when that survey was done. So

that is why a new survey is not required to be issued at this juncture. Okay. Good. That's old. I second. Mr. Stern, yes. Mr. Maron, yes. Miss Lee, yes. Mr. Van Lren, yes. Miss Black, yes. Thank you all. I appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you. [Applause] This is [Music] [Applause] like my own. Thank you, Mike. I'm sorry. Mark Shyitz, Family Trust, 449 Guard Hill Road, Bedford section block and lot 83.8-1-4 residential 4acre zoning district. The applicant is seeking a variance to permit interior renovations to convert a loft into usable floor area, adding to the gross floor area to a pre-existing legal cottage where the additional gross floor area did not exist prior to 1989 and the adoption of the town code for cottages and where the proposed cottage renovation results in 1,225 ft of gross floor area where a cottage shall contain no more than 800 square ft of gross Gross floor area article 8 section 125-79.1 A2 and 7. Good evening members of the zoning board. Uh Steven Helms with the Helms Group Architects. I'm representing Mark and Joyce Sowitz on this project. Um they bought the property about 5 years ago just before CO I think and uh it consists of a 11 acres. There's a principal main house, a pool house, a barn and there's a

cottage. Uh when the cottage was built for the previous owner, 1986, it was built as a one-bedroom that was filed, a one-bedroom cottage. Um over the years, that owner finished off the second floor loft into a bedroom. We were retained last fall, late summer, to measure up the structure. My client would like to renovate the cottage. It's tired. It's over almost 40 years old. There's a a round window. The roof needs work. Uh the headroom is not great. We'd like to renovate the cottage. Uh no increase in the footprint, no increase in the overall height. We'd like to add a couple of dormers, a shed dormer to, uh improve our headroom. And there's a vated ceiling on the west side of the cottage, which he would like to fill in with a floor. Hence, that's the increase in floor area so he could get more livability out of the cottage. He has grown kids and grandchildren. He'd like to take the bedroom on the first floor, put it upstairs on the second floor, relocate it, if you will, and uh free up the space on the first floor for just living space, kitchen, dining room, and family room, and then have two bedrooms upstairs. The health department recognizes this cottage is a one-bedroom cottage. Um we uh there was a thousandgalon tank put in and 200 linear feet of fields, but they did specify that it's a onebedroom. Our plan showed two bedrooms. We are right now in before the health department. We either going to enlarge the system for a two-bedroom or modify the plan with a 5-ft opening so it's not deemed a private bedroom. That is already into the health department and you can hopefully make your decision that can that can be a condition of your variance uh approval. We are going we were at the planning board last month for a special use permit for the cottage and we're going back May 12th. Um they couldn't act on it because we need the variance. It's uh

um a little under 400 ft. It's 353 400 ft that's being um added inside the structure. Um if I could uh just to show you the [Applause] plan these are the hello these are the first and second floor at eighth inch scale just so we can show everything on the same drawing. to this area here was a vated ceiling and all we want to do is fill in the floor area and create more living and actually we created a 5ft opening there and that's going to be an office gym type thing. So that's before the health department and uh um I guess back the the code for cottages where it was amended in 1989. So this was predated that. However, this additional square feet is being added. So that's why we're before your board. [Applause] Don't think there's any impact with the neighbors. Uh again, we're not changing. We comply with all setbacks, building coverages, impervious building heights, and it's an internal type of uh operation, if you will. I do like those round windows. I'm sorry. They're going. Do they? Yeah. Um, so are have you an excavator in there pending the possibility of expanding, you know, the septic system? Yeah, we have reached out to actually Tim Allen from Bibbo. We're going to it's either going to go that route where we can expand it and if we can't then we're going to modify which we sent to the health department a plan that demonstrates it's only one bedroom and it's a So you removed all those flagstones from the back of the You were at the cottage. Yes. Yeah. There's a deck off the southside that's coming off

and being replaced with a porch. Um pretty much the same. There's no net increase in coverage a lot of flag stone. It looked like, you know, you were going to use it or were you I don't know if they used it from part of the property, but uh the I'm not aware of that. Um so the health department again that's uh we they're going to he would like to get two bedroom, but if it's not going to happen, then it's going to retain as a one-bedroom cottage. This part of the property is there's a conservation easement. They cut they reserved an area of about 4 acres for this and we did go before the Westchester land trust and got their approval for this. Okay. Um and that's document conservation ement is off in the distance away from it's just 11 acres. This area about 4 acres is is of conservation. Okay. So it's still part of the main lot. He actually owns the empty lot to the south of the property. It's another parcel that he's not doing anything right now, but uh Yeah, I know. Well, the cottage is just a little out of character with the It's just the pictures here. Okay. Uh do any members of the public have questions? No one on Zoom. Okay, we close the public hearing. I'll move to the board. I'm sorry. I That's okay. Yes. Yes. Make a motion to close the public. I was moving to close it. Thank you. Yes. What are you saying yes to, Roger? Closing the public hearing. Okay. Members of the board, do you guys have any questions? No. I asked I have a question. Okay. So, Mr. homes. The uh the issue with the one versus the

twobedroom. Yeah. Could you show me where the actually it really doesn't matter for zoning purposes, but there is a way that there's a doorway that's not going to exist and instead it's being a more open space. Yeah. Basically, at the top of the stair, we're creating a 5ft wide opening, a clear 5t. Two doorways are there now. So, just one doorway will be taken away. Yeah. We're going to remove that so it's not private. Um, and that uh and then there probably won't be any closets in that space then cuz it appears to show closets now. Actually, there might be built-ins. Uh, there's going to be an office. Um, and uh I was instructed that if we get the 5 foot wide opening again a cover letter went into the health department uh uh on early April uh for their sign off. Okay. With hopefully the no objection. Thank you. Yeah. I hadn't seen that at first when I looked at the plan. Yeah. Anyone else? Any questions, concerns? No. No. No. I mean, this sits this sits almost in its own 4 acre space. I mean, this is plenty of room. Plenty of room. Rosemary. Um, no. I already asked my questions about uh Okay. about the cottage. Would anyone like to make a motion? Really wasn't much to stake out on a chair renovation, so I I saved the stakes. All right. I'll make a motion to approve the application as noticed. Benefits off by the applicant cannot be achieved by another means feasible to the applicant. In this case, there's an existing cottage here on the property. The changes to it are really interior overall to the to the to the um floor plan itself. So, it won't create any exterior really I would say significant exterior changes. Um the there will be no undesirable change to the character of the neighborhood or detriment to nearby properties. Again, uh the cottage this particular structure has been there for quite a significant amount of time.

Uh there are no real close neighbors that would that this would be of concern with anyway. Um but again, the changes are really largely um in cosmetic I would say to the structural overall. Uh the variance requested is not substantial. The variance requested will not result result in any adverse physical or environmental effects on the neighborhood or community. The alleged difficulty is self-created, but that's only one of the factors to be considered by the board of making its decision and is not determinative. Approval of the proposed variance is subject to the following conditions. The applicant will use their best efforts to ensure that a building permit is issued within one year of the board's approval of its variance and then diligently pursue such construction to completion. The applicant shall submit a certified asbuilt survey including including building and impervious coverage calculations to the building department prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Um our approval is still conditioned on approval of the planning board as well as approval of the health department. Depending on the outcome of the health department's approvals, the applicant will need to submit a revised uh revised sheet number three of 11 to reflect what the interior floor plan is going to look like and whether that will in fact include one or two bedrooms. But uh with regard to the overall structure itself, the balance of the documents uh as far as location and um appearance of the structure should remain the same. uh the variance uh let's see and that was that that was that okay uh I will also note just for the record that the applicant pointed out that there is a conservation easement on the property here and the applicant has already uh presented and secured from west the necessary approvals from Westchester land trust to proceed with the renovation and modifications to this existing cottage. The variance is granted in accordance with the PL plan submitted to the board

on last date here. Uh oh, these are tiny. You're killing 310. There's no date. 310 dated day. 310 2025. Yeah. 31025 on the bottom left. Drawings one. Yeah. Can't read anything. I'm not seeing I'm going to take your word on because I can't read your very tiny print on these printouts. So, we're going to go for drawings. There's uh one of 11, two of 11, three of 11, four of 11, five of 11, 6 of 11, 7 of 11, 8 of 11, 9 of 11, 10 of 11, 11 of 11. And again, as I noted, uh depending on the uh determination of the health department, you'll need to adjust potentially page three of 11 to correctly uh reflect the outcome. [Music] Second, [Applause] Mr. Marin in favor. Mr. Stern, yes. Miss Lee, yes. Mr. Van Loverren, yes. Ms. Black. Yes. Great. Thank you all. Appreciate it. Thank you. Mr. Helms, extra copies. And you won't need them. a lot. 39 Trudy Lane. If the light color one, the black ones. Okay. We should consider that 39 Trudy Lane, Bedford, section block and lot 74.14-1-9 residential 4acre zoning district. The applicants are seeking a variance for the construction of a pool house where the front yard setback results in 63 feet where 75 ft is required and where a pre-existing shed resulted in a sideyard setback of 13.7 ft where 50 ft is required and a rear yard setback of 45 ft where 50 ft is required in the residential 4acre zoning district. Article 5 section

125-50. Okay. Uh, good evening. Can everyone hear me? This is um, my name is John Roundtree. I'm the architect representing Keith and Lisa Braraw. Um, Keith is on the call also. Um, I'm going to share my screen right [Applause] now. [Applause] Work. Let's see. This is work. [Applause] Can you see my screen? Not yet. Can you see this plan? Nope. Not yet. No. Okay. Peter, can you let him share this the screen? Okay, you should be able to share now. There we go. All right. Can you see that now? Yes, we can. Thank you. Okay. Okay. So, I'm going to um just walk you through the uh this is the site plan. Uh it shows the existing house. This is the proposed new pool house which is replacing an existing pool house uh right in this area. Uh this is the 63 foot setback um to I believe this is a side setback but I may be wrong. I I we have it at 70 ft from the from this part of the this property line which I believe is a front setback. Any event, it's it's basically in the same location the existing pool house is in. Uh this is a kind of a blowup site plan showing the pool house in relationship to the pool and the house

main house. You see what he's talking about? This is the existing pool house which is rather dilapidated and actually very dangerous. Floor is caving in so it has to be it has to be replaced or taken down. Um this is the uh design for the new pool house. It's basically a a large room uh with a with a um kitchen, living area, exercise area, um bathroom, and a changing area. [Applause] This is the elevations and the sections. Okay. Um so that's the main thing. And the second thing is we're also seeking a variance to um legalize this shed uh which is a pre-existing shed that was on the property built in the we think in the 1970s. uh the clients want to keep it to use it for storing you know yard equipment and things like that uh but it is over the uh over the uh setback and we are planning to get a building permit for it uh to legalize it. Okay. And I see on the plans there's another shed to be removed on this southerntherly side. There is. Yeah, that's correct. There's a shed um right in this area that's going to be removed. Okay. Correct. Yep. [Applause] table. Okay. Do members of the public have any questions. If not, I'll close that part of the public [Applause] hearing. Roger. Second. All right. Members of the board, any questions? [Music]

Is it there's a question here about a generator on your application? A generator. There's a question mark about a generator. [Applause] Um tank I don't know the answer. Keith, do you want to chime in on that? Is there is there a generator installed? There was a generator that was installed. My understanding is that the permit was not perfected. We are putting a new one in which we will be obtaining a permit for. Okay. So, they're going to increase their cover. Yeah. Well, and I for the generator, will there be then a concrete pad that's placed below that or do you have an existing pad it will go on? Yeah. Go on now. Um, my understanding is there's a pad there. Um, they just put it in. I will have to check and see if there was um what it exactly it's on. I haven't really been out there, but and you know, my understanding is we're you know, we have permits that are are in the works for that. Okay. All right. I there's there's no um there's no need for imperous or coverage variances here. Those are are not part of the application itself. Um and when you look at the chart overall, you're still well below what's permitted. Uh I would just make note uh that probably when you go to do as part of uh any approval as you've heard from the prior applications you'll have to get a certified survey. So my suggestion is that whatever you're doing that would require a footprint. If you're going to add a generator here and it needs an extended footprint, you do that prior to having your new survey done so that the survey of record will reflect those those changes in numbers and that that would be um okay because it's not none of your numbers are violative of what the code allows. It's just so that your service is most

recent. Yes. Just want to add that I visited this property with the gentleman for the propane tanks because I saw where they were here and he's going to move them on the side of the pool there and I think the generator is going somewhere there but I'll take a look at it. Okay. So, uh they should be fine there. Okay. Okay. Yeah. I don't I don't have any again that application submitted with all the information calculated is not showing any issues with respect to building coverage and pvious. That's not why you're before us. I just pointed out since you're going to if you get approved, you're going to be required to do an updated survey. You might as well just make note of that for yourself record. Okay. Members of the board, do you have any question other questions or concerns here? Yeah, just a clarification on those those three little uh little ponds. Is that part of wetlands or is that just a man-made um those are koi ponds? Uh koi. Those those are koi ponds. One of which those are just man-made structures. Yes. Yes. Got it. And just let you know the tanks, they they're going to be moved. You see the propane tanks that are on the on the uh existing survey. I spoke to the uh gentleman and said he was going to move it back so it's past 75 ft because they are above ground. So they would be within the setbacks. So they are moving. It is the board. Okay. It's 8%. This is This isn't Okay. All right. Um, anyone any other questions or concerns? No. Did we do the public any Yep. We already asked. Mr. Stern, would you like to do a motion on this? I would like to give it a try. Yes. Thank you. Thank you. In particular, board found that the benefits of the applicant by granting the variance outweighs any alleged detriment to the community and determine the following. The benefit sought by the

applicant cannot be achieved by another means feasible to the applicant and there will be no undesirable change to the character of the neighborhood or detriment to the nearby properties. Noting that this property in and of itself is in excess of 5 acres. Uh the variance requested is not substantial. You're removing a building and replacing it with a somewhat smaller somewhat larger building with a somewhat larger but not a significant addition to the footprint. The variance requested will not result in any adverse physical or environmental effects on the neighborhood or community. and the alleged difficulty while self-created is just 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. The applicant shall use their best efforts to ensure that a building permit is issued within one year of the board's approval of this variance and then diligently pursue such construction to completion. The applicant shall submit a certified asbuilt survey. Uh noting the chair's comment about they should probably uh note if there is going to be a pad for the generator or for the propane tanks for that matter. and an asbuilt survey, including building an impervious coverage calculations to the building department prior to the issuance of a of a certificate of occupancy and the variances granted in accordance with the plans submitted to the board believe dated April 8th, 2025. [Applause] Second the motion. That's one vote. Mr. Baron, yes. Mr.

Stern, yes. Miss Lee, yes. Mr. Van Lover, yes. Ms. Black. Yes. [Applause] You're off the hook. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you. Hi. [Applause] [Music] [Applause] Wow. We're at the last one already. Colleen Cananan, 10 Hickory Lane, Bedford section block and lot, which I don't have on here. Uh, residential 1acre zoning district. The applicant is seeking plan aboard subdivision approval for the creation of an additional lot where in 2012 the Pound Ridge Road lot A was merged with the Hickory Lane lot B and where lot A does not meet the required 150 foot effective square and where the pre-existing legal non-conforming residence existing sideyard setback is 18.7 ft where 30 ft is required in the residential 1acre zoning district and where where the pre-existing legal non-conforming cottage existing sideyard setback is 4.5 ft where 30 ft is required and where the pre-existing legal swimming pool results in a sideyard setback of 10 ft where 30 ft is required in the residential 1acre zoning district and where the pre-existing legal non-conforming shed existing rear yard setback is 30.3 ft where 50 ft is required and where the sideyard setback results in 13.7 ft where 30 ft is required and where the combined yard side yard setback results in 14.5 ft where 60 ft is required in the residential 1acre zoning district and where ly pre-existing legal

non-conforming residence results in a rear yard setback of 23.9 ft where 50 ft is required and where the existing sideyard setback is 22.2 2 ft where 30 ft is required in the residential 1acre zoning district article 5 section 12550 and article 5 section 125 attachment 5. Can I just for full disclosure I did work for Colleen uh for the additional lot B uh probably several decades ago. Yeah. Um and I'm not part of this project. If you were uh you're comfortable with me staying on, I I can just I can never recuse myself of you. Oh, no. I have no problem. Thank you. Um so I'm looking to subdivide two lots. One of which has a two-bedroom cottage as well as Can you just introduce yourself first, please? Cool. I'm sorry. Can you introduce yourself, please? Oh, I'm sorry. Colleen Canavan. I guess you saved the best for last here. I'm wondering why, but Okay. Okay. So, anyway, I'm looking to subdivide two lots. One of which um has a two-bedroom cottage as well as a pool pool house. The other is a four bedroomedroom house. Um both on one acre in a 1acre zone. Um I am seeking variances on lot A and B. The lots each comply with lot coverage. I realize the effective square does not fit and I need a variance for that as well. The variances that border any of my neighboring properties are pre-existing and were there when the home was purchased. Therefore, the variance will have no adverse effect on or negative impact on the neighborhood because nothing will change. Nor does it affect my neighboring ordering neighbors. There are no improvements or changes to the property at this time. Two families

current currently live on the lot and the changes I am making would allow that to remain the same. Okay. Do you want to walk us through the plans exactly and those modifications? Sure. Should I come over here? Just grab the microphone. I don't know where the handheld. Thank you. If you'd like to come up, if you're here for this application, like to see, you're welcome to come up front so you can see the drawings better. Okay. Um, so let's [Applause] see. Okay. So, this is the um Can you just hold the mic up to your mouse so it picks up on Zoom? Thank you. This is the 150 square ft effective square which does not fit which I need a variance [Applause] for. This is the uh pre-existing 18.7 ft which I'll need a variance for. There's pre-existing 4.5 feet, which I need a variant. Well, these are pre-existing, so I'm not sure. So, were those existing at the time you bought the house? Existing when I bought the house. All of these. This and this. Pause one minute. Uh, Al, do we know what year the house was and the additions were built? These were when I purchased the property. So do you know the timing the structures on the slot A were constructed because we're in the setbacks but we don't have any indication of whether a variance was previously given and whether it was needed.

Okay. I was just gonna check I don't have Okay. Um cuz one of the questions so this was also because I don't know if we looked into whether any of those setbacks that you were requesting the variance for on that lot lot A are they pre-existing non-conforming there's no variance there hold are they legal pre-existing non-conforming I gave him a copy of an old variance on something okay so pool um so house inground There was a variance for the pool that was withdrawn and then the properties were merged. Is that correct? Well, we got together. Okay. Well, this is a one, too. It says 2012 poundage lot A was merged with lot, right? But prior to that, they were still existing. Porch patio. Okay. Voided. Okay, you can move your chair. [Applause] Let's see. Okay, resist. So, we don't have a date of construction on this. 19 Well, they they also go to visual [Music] inspection. That's why we can't. Okay. So, is this for lot A or for lot B? Then would this be this house or this house? I believe it would be this one. Okay. So, this double check the existing

cottage. There you go. So, there's the cottage. So, that's the one. So, we got a cottage and we got the seven codes. Okay. So the record is showing so the building inspector was just showing us the the the record of permits and whatnot that were issued in conjunction with this particular property. Now as to lot A and the one-story frame house and the one-story frame cottage the building department records are designating those by way of its number allocation that it was pre-existing legal non-conforming. So, um, with regard to those, I'm going to make note for the record, you're seeking a variance, but essentially they they are legally pre-existing. Yes. Okay. So, just for the board that edification then when you look at granting so this that in my sense in legally there's no basis to deny illegal pre-existing non-conforming unless there's modifications being made to those structures at this time. That is not what the applicant is presenting. applicant is seeking the variance because they're non-conformance with code today. But where it's pre-exist legally pre-existing non-conforming, there is no need to bring that into conformance unless changes are made to those buildings. So we essentially when we go through the variances, those will be be deemed acceptable and granted um because they are they don't even need the a variance really for those particular aspects that are being sought as part of the application. What you're saying is should there be changes in that in that lot uh in the future lot a they would have to come before if they're changing those structures. So both of those structures the onetory frame house and the one-story frame cottage that are being shown on the plans we have today as lot A. Those two structures are both shown from the building department records as being pre-existing non-conforming structures. So to the extent that they sit within the setback, that's already legal legal and valid. So we can issue a variance

because the applicant is here anyway and we can document that more formally for the record and for the property. Um and if and when and she comes and and or future owner comes to change those buildings and those setbacks are impacted then they they need to come and and work on rectifying. What's the pool? So everything has a swimming pool has a CC. It's it's certified. It's a So the the structures on lot. So we go through. So wait, let me just make sure I got them all. Where's my pen? Okay, so we've got our one story. We got our frame cottage, the ingground pool. What do we have as a designation? So that's Hold on. We're I'm just going through each of them. Swimming pool 116 2013 has a CC CC. Okay, so that was done. Then we got um our patios. I'm just going through on this pre-existing cottage. You got this right here. That's this one. You got it. So that's it. Yep. And then um do we have a a frame shed here? Yes. I saw a shed somewhere. Let me see. Okay. Frame shed. Shed. Uh see co. Okay. And the pool. So the shed is legal. Pool visual inspection. One family. This is confusing. Pre-existing cottage then. And then the shed. I guess it would be a co. There's nothing here showing description. Okay. Co. It says garage but co. Okay. Cuz this one doesn't have that. So this all right. Okay. So it uh it so for all the structures that we have on lot A, it seems that we have clear we have documentation and confirmation from the building department that those are all valid. So now sorry continue walking us through now. So the first two setback variances that you're requesting are

really pre-existing legal non-conforming issues. Exactly. Okay. And then that was a visual. Okay. Fourth one. Okay. All right. Four. The fourth one is uh 10. It's currently 10 ft uh where 30 is required. So 10 ft between the pool and Oh. Oh. Okay. So this is the new one. Yeah. Exactly. This is the new one here. The bottom left. Yeah. So on lot A when you go from the pool microphone you don't know. Okay. So, I'll speak up too. So, we we're looking at the ingground pool with stone coping around it. And when you look at that, it's denoting a 10-ft setback. So, the applicant today includes is part of essentially a subdivision request that's putting in a new property line here. So, now a setback is being created here that didn't previously exist to a property line. So these this 10-ft setback that happening that in fact is what would need a variance because this is a new part that wasn't previously um contemplated. Can I also just clarify because it may not be clear that this new subdivide subdivision line that new subdivision line is different from the way the original uh line was meaning that it's favoring the favoring the the pool setback uh in in the new layout. It's giving more grace to the pool setback. Giving more grace. Okay. So along this new property line, subdivide division line, I suspect we have a comparable issue. Is that also the 23 foot? Is that also part of the issue here? Yes. Right. Yeah, I think so. 23 ft is with the um the the cottage,

the front house. Yes. Yep. Uh no, from the onetory frame house. Onetory frames house. Exactly. Yeah. So 23 and 147. So there's 147. Okay. Where's this one? See 239. That's this [Applause] one. Uh Alex, can you look on the notice here? I don't see one for the 23 foot from the onetory frame house on lot A to the property line. I see the 10T for the pool. I see the 14 ft for the frame shed, but I don't we put the closest 10 ft. Oh, okay. We were marking each I think each each but we gave you one was giving it. So, she she's covered. Okay. So, I'm going to know for the record. We called up the 10 and 10 and the 14 in the notice, but the since the 10 is closest, we still can denote also that the one-story frame house on this setback is now would be at 23 ft from the new property line. Um, okay. Sorry, that's that line. Keep going. Okay. And then I have, let's see, the shed setback is 30.3 where 50 is required. Um, that's pre-existing. I mean, the shed's been there for probably 20 plus years. Wait, I'm trying to look the visual inspection. I believe the shed. Yeah. from the from the northerly property line. No, from the southerntherly property line 14.7 where 30 is required. Sorry. And and then it says the shed setback is 30.3 where 50 is required to Oh, okay. I see. I see. Okay.

Sorry. Tricky to comparing the two. This outline changed like this is the same but this is shorter. This is okay. Okay. All right. I I see that inspe uh building inspector Kelly showed it's the diagonal from the corner of the shed to the what is that considered my westerly property line um outside property land not the middle one. So that's how you got to the 30 ft. It's still um within this it's still not compliant with code. That's okay. Keep going. Okay. And then this should be existing. There's 23.9 between the house on lot B and the 10 foot line by the pool. Okay. Where 50 is required. Yep. Got it. Yep. Okay. Okay. I think that's I think that's the totality of them, right? Did I miss any? of lot A. Now, if we look at lot A, are there any here? This is You're done with Sorry. Lot Yeah, I'm done with lot A. Okay. And the the entrance to this lot A is coming off Poundidge Road. There's two entrances. There's one on Poundidge Road and there's one on Hickory Lane to to the lot A. Yeah, because they're they're two separate. No, no, she understand. So, lot A just lot A just lot A lot A has a pounded room entrance. Okay. Okay. And then lot B is going to come in off of Hickory Lane and remain that way. Okay. Are these houses on I take it that they're on separate septic? Yes. Yeah. Okay. One has the septic septic here and the other one you can't see this blocking. Okay. All right. Um this these were two locks before. This is the is this the exact separation that you had prior or it's slightly different? No, it's been

adjusted. lights. Okay. But but it was separated once before. They were two lots. They were two bits. Yeah. Okay. But were you bought it? They were connected individually. Individually. Yeah. All right. So, you merged them at one point. So, were they merged by the assessor by operation or did you or a previous owner merge them? Do you know? You merged them. Okay. Yeah. You're going to unmerge them. Okay. Okay. So you want and you acquired you acquired the whole property at the same time. No over time because they were adjacent to each other and then you merged it. Yes. Okay. The merching came at the time of when you wanted to add the pool. Right. Right. Right. Do any members of the public have questions? No. Okay. Members of uh I move to close the public hearing. Thank you. I just make note also there's no one on Zoom at the moment. So, um Okay. And so, uh Roger seconded to close public hearing. All right. Members of the board, do you have any questions or concerns here? Remarkably how dense the lot A is? I said the lot A is remarkably dense, but the coverages are acceptable on on both. So that's when I saw the number of, you know, structures or buildings pool, I thought it would go over, but it doesn't. Yeah. Okay. I um I walked off your driveway and then around and then into the back. I would encourage you to make your driveway bigger. Which driveway? Backing the one on the backing out there was onto onto Hickory, which is the one way where people are coming at you that way. Um I Yes, there was no for me turning around was very important, but I did it. No problem.

Dowsing. Uh it's for the septic. Um so as shown kind of on the plans, I just kind of note for the record that both lots are compliant with overall the size requirements here in excess of a of the acreage that's required here. Um they we do have the effective square issue, but as the applicant noted, actually we have houses and structures on both uh pieces of property that were really pre-existing here. So the effective square doesn't have the same meaning and utilization it would if we were doing with new construction. Mhm. Um when we look at the overall setback issues that that are largely the variances that we're talking about today, those those issues arise because of the placement of this subdivision line. Um and really are in what I would say is interior property today as far as the impacts and going forward an owner who would be impacted by those changes would certainly be aware of them at the time of acquisition of the property. Um the other setbacks that are along the perimeter are really pre-existing non-conforming. So they don't have any new impacts on the neighbors uh or on the community at large since we're not changing those structures and they have uh they in fact predate uh code here and are pre-existing in that sense. Uh just because of the sensitivity around the pool and the frame house. The only thing I might consider uh here is whether any landscaping needs to be put in or looked at since where this this setback is because it is a close setback 10T to the pool with you know 20 ft to the back of the house. Um well I don't how did you do the the uh pool enclosure? Well, there's a fence right around the pool. There's a fence and there are some um hydrangeas and there's trees around around the pool now. Around the pool the outside. But honestly, if they get approved, I think it would make more sense to have maybe more of a definitive separation. Yeah, cuz you have to kind of reestablish the pool enclosure at the

new property line. So, at that point, you can put up a nice fence and that gives you something. I'm not sure why or privacy shrubs, you know, something. I I think what's interesting is that if you because of the lot line change I think I think if if this had come up as a variance the pool with the old lot line I think you would have had a much harder time to get a variance where I think in this particular case if these were the lots that just me talking if this was lot A that you were proposing now to fix pool I think you would have a much better case than the previous lot line Right. So that's kind of how district right because you can meet all of the the coverages and and and the lot sizes and like you said I think the the square is is a um is not as heavy weighted. So right I I think the pool would have gotten a variance with this line. Well and even I mean the also though the timing here like this this wasn't an intent to put in the pool and then come and get it back door you know. this the the pool and whatnot was applied for. So the last time that you did you the merger was in 2012. So that's quite a significant amount of time. This clearly was not contemplated at the time the pool was put in and these distances weren't contemplated. It would have been shielded at the time. So within the context of the application today, it's really asking, you know, does the subdivision line allow for lots that are conforming and meaningful and and she has the most to say about whether she correct, right? You're the double neighbor here. So, you have the most to say about and and it's leaving two uh the subdivision is allowing for two lot functioning lots to remain at play here, which is also what's important. You don't want to allow C subdivisions where you don't have a functioning lot. It's also good. It has a separate driveway.

What is the end end result size of lot A and lot B in the 1acre zone? Where? I think it's listed under lot. It says 44098 for lot and 42, right? Yeah. Oh, so they're not too uh No, they're comparable comparable size. So, visually they don't look the same. Yeah, they don't look the same at all. No, they're not. The other one looks It's just the the way they are. So, I'm not as troubled by this as I thought I would be. But um I am a little troubled by calling I don't have a problem calling the the requested variances on the property line on the existing property line um prior legal non-conforming for example the 4.5 off off the lot. I do have a problem calling the the 10T off the pool and the 14 ft or so off the shed prior legal non-conforming because that line disappeared. So I think that really has to be a new variance. The 10 the 10 foot is a new variance. Yeah. But the way I the notice implies that it's a priority. So I think we have to clarify it. The what's pre-existing legal non-conforming is the pool itself. There's a CO on the pool, right? Yeah. That's what's pre-existing legal non-conforming. And that's what's confusing the the commentary here because the pool itself still isn't if you look at the when it was installed it was legal and then Okay. Yeah. Yeah. But once they took the line away, I think they're taking away those lot the yard. So what happened is it it's the dis pre-existing legal sign results in a sideyard. Okay. Right. Yeah. It's it's it's a lot. Right. Then I'm done. I'm I'm okay with that. It's a lot. This is also in a in a neighborhood of all kinds of quirky lots. I mean, this is one of the older neighborhoods. Any other questions or comments? No.

Okay. All right. Um, then I would make a motion to approve the application. The benefits sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by another means feasible to the applicant. applicant is seeking to subdivide the property and they've sought to they've attempted to draw a subdivision line so as to almost equally divide the properties uh while being respectful of the existing structures and allowing for some level of setback between the existing structures. Uh the net result of that though is that a number of variances are created as to various setbacks. Uh but there is no change mind you to the or no violation of building coverage or impervious coverage calculations even by way of the subdivision. There will be no undesirable change to the character the neighborhood or detriment to the nearby properties. While the applicant is seeking to subdivide the properties, there are existing structures and those structures themselves are not changing as part of this application. the variance um I would say because of the number of variances it appears to be substantial but when you review the application as a whole a number of the variances that are listed such as the 18.7 to the northerly line and the 4.5 to the northerly line and the 30.3 to the westerly line those are all actually existing legal pre-existing non-conforming um setback conditions due to uh legal pre-existing non-conforming structures as uh verified by the uh building inspector for address. The variance uh requested will not result in any adverse physical or environmental effects on the neighborhood or community. With that in mind, we'd ask the applicant uh when they when they do finalize the subdivision that they consider adding uh some additional screening between the back of the one-story frame house on lot B and the pool on lot A so that there's additional screening particularly just outside of

the wood fence for the pool so that there's appropriate privacy given uh the proximity of the pool and the back of that of the house uh primary house on lot B. Um the alleged difficulty is self-created, but that's only one of the factors to be considered by the board in making its decision and is not determinative. I'll also note for the record that um yes, the issue here is self is um is self-created, but these lots actually were previously uh subdivide had been two lots previously. they had been merged and we're reeparating them and again allowing for a subdivisional line that meaningfully divides the properties both um substantially in half here and allows for functioning use of both lots. Uh they each have independent uh driveways on separate roads um and both have functioning um homes and uh accessory aspects to them. The applicant the approval of the approved variances would be subject to the following conditions. The applicant will use your best efforts to ensure that a building permit is issued within one year of the board's approval of this variance and then diligently pursue uh such construction to completion. In this case, uh part of the that application is actually for the subdivision line. So that is what we will ask you to continue to pursue uh to completion. Uh the applicant shall submit a certified asbuilt survey including building impervious coverage calculations. In this case though board members we already there are no structural changes happening to this property as part of the variance applications. All the buildings are existing and all of the setbacks and information is has been included including the the um the setback information. I think what I would ask cuz I don't see it on here. Wait, maybe it's on the table. The only thing I would ask is if you can have the surveyor just usually we ask for a

certification as to the impervious and building calculations. Yeah. Did he certify that? He says the maps are not being used in connection. Oh, because there's that separate schedule. Yeah. Yeah. So, I don't Yeah. Or I I'm just trying to see where that is. Does anyone have the table the separate table? No, I have somewhere. I see the zoning. It says maximum building coverage of for each lot. It has 8.5 for lot A and 6.6 for lot B, but at least development coverage. I don't know. I assume that's the impervious. No, there's there's a separate I thought there was a separate you know what I'm talking about. So what I would ask is that is that you just have the surveyor um issue a certificate um certifying the building coverage and impervious surface uh and it can be attached to your existing survey. Okay. So that that way we have the coverage um certified and the impervious surface surface. I see the the surveyor did that schedule right to cover lot AMD. Yeah. Yeah. So they just need to copy and paste that as a schedule on the survey as a part of an official. I don't have a problem with him doing on on his letter head with like a stamp cuz the ser the survey is is is so this is the the subdivision plat. Do you want that chart on a lever letter head on letterhead? Yes, that's the the exact chart is there. Okay. So it's it's showing as being certified by the person. Okay. Normally what we would do is have you have the whole survey um updated and certified, but the subdivision a subdivision plat has to reflect all of the ex the structures and the like. So it's equivalent to the certification largely is equivalent to what you have on a survey. So the subdivision plat is actually um more updated. The only thing that it doesn't have is that certification of the

building uh coverage and the impervious surface. So rather than having an entire the entire plan all because you wouldn't be changing anything on the plan you'd be adding a table it's acceptable to submit a single sheet on letterhead that's certifying the building coverage and the impervious it will essentially the table that you submitted to certify that table. Yes tie it to the and reference then the preliminary subdivision plat. Okay. Okay. This will be part of the meeting minutes and whatnot. It's okay. It'll be part of of what the um Jeff could call me. Yeah, it's part of what the requirements will be. So, it'll be noted. Okay. Uh so, we'll handle that that way. And then uh this is conditioned on approval of the subdivision plat and uh and I think planning board approve and planning board approval of the subdivision plat. Uh, I think that's that's it. Yeah. Any Did I miss anything? Anyone? Just the plan. Oh, and the department in the Westchester County Department of Health. Yeah. Uh, to do that, too. Yeah. Anything? Oh, the health department. Yeah. They didn't sign this yet. This is just their preliminary. Did you indicate the plans dated March 18? Oh, thank you. Based on the plans dated March 18th, 2025. [Applause] I'll second. That was you Howard? Yes, it was Mr. Marin. Yes. Mr. Stern. Yes. Ms. Lee. Yes. Mr. Van Loverren. Yes. Ms. Plat. Yes. Thank you so much. All right. Um board members, is there anything else we need to discuss this evening? No. Only that June 5th I will be in the Boston annual architects convention. Okay. So, you will not be here. I I may have a

conflict on June 5th as well because I'm flying in from Italy. Good to go. I should be in town. Okay. Uh but we Alex, uh June 5th. What did you call me? Sorry. She's been here a while. It's been a day. It's been a minute. I will show you a big love to hear that you called me. Alex, did you are you in the field anyway? Uh, can you just look and we might have to send an email and I know notification is going to come up quickly. June 5th seems like we may have two members out. Is it too late to reschedu that if needed? No, I haven't done anything yet. Can you send an email out to all of us and just see if another date is available and make sense because it seems as though two of our board members will be absent and while we have one uh one alternate Peter and and Peter will be here that still leaves us one shy. So it was Wednesday of June. I'll be out that whole week. You're out the whole week. And she's just returning from Italy. So she's out the next day. I would probably be available. The Friday. Oh, you're right. We'll come back Friday. So would we look to the Good night the following week? Yeah. Thank you. Uh where are we? If if you want to just send email Wednesday and pool everyone. Not Wednesday. 11. The 12th. 12 is fine. Yeah, that would be fine. Okay. I could do the 12. Yeah, I could still do the 12th. I can't do the 11. All right. Well, I'll send out an email tomorrow. Confirm that. Who's available on the 12th? Okay. Okay. Members, do we close the public hearing? We close the meeting. I'll make a motion that we close the hearing. So, move. I I All right. Thank you, Chair. Thank you. Nobody ever says no.