The owners of an oceanfront property at 33 Lily Pond Lane, who are seeking permission to tear down a house in a coastal erosion hazard area and construct a new one, presented a drastically scaled-back plan for the property to the East Hampton Village Zoning Board of Appeals on July 12.
In January, Norman and Helene Stark initially proposed a 7,567-square-foot house and a pool within the coastal erosion hazard area, but landward of the existing house. Richard Warren, a consultant who is advising the Starks, told the board Friday that the new plan is to build a house in the same-size footprint as the existing structure, which, he said, is nearly 2,600 square feet, not including patios. At an April meeting of the board, Mr. Warren said the pool would be sited farther north on the property, behind the hazard line.
As now proposed, the house would not extend nearly as far into the hazard area, Mr. Warren said on July 12. The existing house is 88 feet seaward of it, while the proposed one would be 25 feet. “That’s a dramatic improvement from a coastal erosion point of view,” said Mr. Warren.
Siting the house farther landward, said Linda Margolin, a lawyer representing the Starks, would mean it would only have ocean views from the second floor.
The section of the village code meant to preserve ocean dunes requires a 100-foot setback from the 15-foot contour line of the dune, and a 150-foot setback from the southerly edge of beach grass. The existing house, said Mr. Warren, is 64 feet from the 15-foot contour line, whereas the proposed one would be 118 feet away and in compliance.
The lot coverage seaward of the coastal erosion hazard area would be reduced from the existing 7,770 square feet to 4,137 square feet. A certificate of occupancy issued in 2000, said Mr. Warren, allowed for 6,888 square feet in that area.
The Starks, he said, were also willing to implement a nearly 10,500-square-foot conservation easement at the seaward end of the property, as well as a 10-foot buffer, filled with sea grass, between the dune and the lawn.
A tennis pavilion built by the previous owners, which is 303 square feet larger than allowed, will be reduced to its permitted size, Mr. Warren said, and a tennis court that violates setback rules would be reduced by 5 feet on each end, to lessen the degree of nonconformity.
Security lights installed in the dune would be removed, he said, and the drainage structures on site would be improved to meet village regulations. “We’ve worked very hard to try to bring this into compliance,” said Mr. Warren.
Unlike the existing house, the new one would be compliant with Federal Emergency Management Agency regulations pertaining to flood-hazard areas, he noted.
The changes to the building plan came in response to the board’s suggestions, and an analysis of the project by Robert Hermann, a coastal management specialist who is a consultant to the Z.B.A. In a May 17 memo to the board, Mr. Hermann had recommended the proposed dwelling be sited farther landward, and downsized to limit the lot coverage within the coastal erosion hazard area. Although he had lingering questions about the buffer and the lot coverage, in a July 9 letter to the Z.B.A. he said the latest proposal “represents a significant improvement over the existing conditions.”
The Starks’ neighbors, however, are still not fans of the project. Brian Matthews, a lawyer representing the owners of 41 and 37 Lily Pond Lane, described the application as a “moving target,” and suggested the board re-notice the hearing to give the public a better understanding of what it now entails, including the variances requested. The original application had been seeking 54 variances, but the Starks are now seeking 11 — although Lys Marigold, the chairwoman, pointed out that “they do have a few missing, so it might go up to 17.”
The matter was adjourned until the board next meets, in August.
Also on July 12, the board announced five determinations. John Morrongiello, the owner of 73 Dayton Lane, was granted a variance to install swimming pool equipment inside a garage 10 feet from the rear lot line and 10 feet from the side lot line, where the required setbacks are 20 feet. The permission was granted with the following conditions: acoustically-enhanced gypsum board must be installed on the inside wall of the garage, a three-quarter-inch rubber pad must be placed between the pump and the floor to absorb vibration, and no doors or windows can be installed on the garage’s east wall.
Nicholas Caragiulo, the owner of 1 Church Street, was granted a variance to allow lot coverage of 2,599 square feet, where the maximum permitted is 2,444, to build a new front porch, 24.6 feet from Gingerbread Lane and 14.4 feet from Church Street, where the required setbacks are 35 feet.
Michael and Sandra McManus, the owners of 17 Fithian Lane, were granted variances to construct additions to an existing house 18.8 feet from the side lot line, where a setback of 22 feet is required, and a variance to permit 3,862.5 square feet of gross floor area, where variance relief was previously granted in 2014 to allow a gross floor area of 3,883 square feet for an unimplemented plan, and where the maximum gross floor area is 2,895 square feet.
Andrea Olshan, an owner of 32 Middle Lane, was granted area variances to make alterations and construct a dormer adding 11.5 square feet to a pre-existing second residential use, as well as variances to make alterations to an apartment in a building located 51.5 feet from the front yard, and 25.5 feet from the side lot line, where the required setbacks are 80 and 55 feet, respectively.
The owner of 25 Cove Hollow Farm, whose application was submitted by Leonard Ackerman, a lawyer, was granted a wetlands permit, and variances to remove phragmites by hand-cutting and hand-digging, and revegetating with native plants was granted on the conditions that the proposed revegetation in the easement area is fully implemented within one year of the date of the determination, and that the applicant notify the code enforcement office before and after the work is begun.