Laserfiche WebLink
MASI-IPEE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS <br /> MEETING MINUTES <br /> November 18,2020 <br /> Mr. Ford said that the application consists of a Special Permit under §174-33 to remove <br /> and existing pool and patio that is situated between the house located on 63 Waterline Drive <br /> South, and Great River and replace it with a new pool, patio, and a small 48 sq. ft. three <br /> season porch. Since the pool and patio is setback within the wetlands,they are altering this <br /> under a Special Permit application. There are other non-conformities on the site as well, <br /> and are listed in the narrative of the application that Mr. Ford reviewed with the Board. <br /> The lot has 15,975 sq. ft., and the lot coverage will be increasing from 36.7% to 36.9%. <br /> The Board reviewed the site existing site plan prior to the hearing. <br /> Mr. Ford submitted exhibit plans that shows the increase of the proposed impervious <br /> surface area highlighted in green, and the proposed changes in red. The change is the <br /> configuration of the patio, the proposed area will increase to 169 sq. ft., removing 121 sq. <br /> ft., which is a net of 48 sq. ft. The benefit is that the 48 sq. ft. is further away from the <br /> wetlands.The existing pool equipment is located within about 15 ft.of the wetland resource <br /> are, and is being removed from outside of the 50 ft. setback requirement..This project was <br /> approved by the Conservation Commission. The other aspect in addition to removing the <br /> pool, and installing a new pool and patio is the proposed addition of a three season porch <br /> in the area where there is an existing patio which is over an impervious surface. It will be <br /> and unheated, screened and windows on each side and 6 ft. 15 ft. This is what requires the <br /> Special Permit relief, as well as the reconfiguration of the patio and pool within the 50 ft. <br /> setback area. There is no change to any sideline setbacks. There is a small 2% increase in <br /> the lot coverage. <br /> Chairman Furbush confirmed that this house is located in the Little Neck Bay District.The <br /> lot coverage in this zone is 30%. Mr. Furbush has concerns with the increase of the lot <br /> coverage. He mentioned there were several situations that were denied because of the <br /> requests for increase of lot coverage. The Board has set a precedent for these applications. <br /> Mr. Furbush polled the Board for their comments. Mr. Gould has the same concerns as the <br /> Chairman.Mr.Blaisdell believes there can be some reconfiguration to keep as is or smaller. <br /> George agreed with both Mr. Furbush and Mr. Blaisdell. He asked if the lot coverage was <br /> involving the 48 sq. ft. addition. Mr. Ford said no; it's the increase of the impervious. Mr. <br /> Goldstein agrees with the other members. <br /> Mr. Ford asked Chairman Furbush for a continuance to the next available meeting as <br /> recommended by the other members. <br /> Charlie asked why the applications were filed under §174-17.1, and §174-33. He believes <br /> it should be filed under §174-17. Charlie said that 174-33 is not required.The Board agreed <br /> that the application only requires a Written Finding under §174-17 because the project is <br /> not going any closer to the water. Mr. Goldstein thought that the lot coverage was <br /> detrimental. Mr. Blaisdell said that the applicant will refile with the decrease in the lot <br /> coverage. Mr. Ford agreed. <br /> 6 <br />