After a Two-Year Dispute, Neighbors’ Agreement Is Put on Hold Because of Sale

Two neighbors’ long dispute over a tennis court in East Hampton Village, a quarrel that occupied the zoning board of appeals at many meetings over two years, has been scheduled for yet another hearing because the property of one of the combatants has been sold. At the board’s meeting on Friday, the board also continued to discuss an application for a substantial renovation of a house on Hook Pond, with its chairman, Frank Newbold, looking favorably upon it.

 Shahab Karmely had received variances in 2014 to build a tennis court at the historical Gardiner property at 127 Main Street. Mr. Karmely’s neighbor, Kenneth Kuchin, of 121 Main Street, had objected that the court would be too near a cottage he uses for meditation. The dispute had seemed settled on July 22 when Mr. Karmely agreed to add soundproofing to a fence separating the properties. His property has been listed for sale at $26 million.

On Friday, Mr. Newbold said 121 Main Street, which had been listed for sale at $11.95 million, had a new owner who had asked that the agreed-upon sound-attenuating material be put on hold. He did not name the new owner, as the board agreed to review the matter on Friday, Aug. 26.

The board then returned to Greg Blatt’s application for extensive variances and a wetlands permit to allow the substantial renovation of a house at 14 Hook Pond Lane. A hearing had been held on July 8.

Andy Hammer, an attorney representing Mr. Blatt, told the board that concerns about the project’s impact on both the neighborhood and the pond had largely been eased following a meeting with neighbors, several of whom had now sent letters of support. Furthermore, he said, his client’s request to extend the cellar beyond the exterior walls of the first story of the house, which the village prohibited last year, had been abandoned.

While a septic system would be just 132.5 feet from wetlands, where a 200-foot setback is required, the applicant proposes to split the effluent into two systems, one of which would be in a conforming location. Mr. Hammer called this a better alternative to moving the existing system. A landscape plan also proposes a vegetative buffer along the Hook Pond side of the property, and a portion of the house’s east and west ends are to be razed.

“Our application is largely making almost every condition on this property better, including retreating the house,” Mr. Hammer said. “That vegetative buffer, we feel, is adequate mitigation for all the improvements.”

The board remained concerned, however, about the building’s height, proposed to be 32.6 feet. Under one interpretation of the zoning code, which Mr. Newbold said was “admittedly very complicated,” the structure could be 34 feet high, whereas the board’s position on July 8 was that 26 feet was the maximum permitted.

The roof is considered flat due to a proposed deck. However, according Mr. Newbold, flat roofs that have gabled roofs around them are a way for developers, frankly, to get a bigger mass by not going all the way up to the peak, so from the ground level it would appear to be a gabled roof while actually being much thicker and bigger.

Linda James, who has owned a house on Hook Pond Lane for 48 years and was highly critical of the renovation at the July 8 meeting, returned on Friday, her concerns only slightly assuaged. She quoted extensively from an editorial in last week’s issue of The Star supporting laws to restrict allowable floor area and lot coverage on residential properties.

“Shoreline owners are the stewards of this village’s extraordinary natural resource,” Ms. James said. “This is one opportunity to address an owner’s stewardship awareness to the future well-being of shoreline responsibilities, and how their plans will support their property’s native habitat.” The board, she said, now bears “the difficult responsibility to weigh requested variances on behalf of laneway residents and the precedent your decision will have on future variation applications for projects that reach beyond the scale of their neighborhood.”

Mr. Newbold, however, called the plans “a net positive for the neighborhood,” given that the floor area is less than the maximum permitted, that the septic system is to be upgraded and part of it farther from wetlands, and a 30-foot buffer created. The hearing was closed. 

Three decisions also were announced at the meeting. The Everit Albert Herter Post of the Veterans of Foreign Wars was granted variances to legalize extensions and alterations to the Highway Restaurant and Bar, a pre-existing nonconforming restaurant use on its property at 290 Montauk Highway.

The variances permit the relocation of three outdoor dining tables from a slate patio on the west side of the building to a wood deck on the east side, and an air-conditioning unit, roof overhang, walk-in cooler, and shed to remain inside required setbacks. The board also granted the V.F.W. a special permit to continue using a separate building there, which has a certificate of occupancy for a dwelling, as a meeting hall.

Several conditions were attached. The restaurant’s deck must be reduced to 15-by-18 feet and the benches along its perimeter removed, no more than 12 seats for dining are to be on the deck, with the number of seats inside the restaurant reduced commensurately whenever there is seating on the deck so that the maximum number of seats never exceeds 116, and there can be no dining on the slate patio.

In another decision, Alan Patricof was granted variances allowing play equipment to remain at 49 Huntting Lane, a lot that does not have a main structure. Along with adjacent parcels at 55 and 63 Huntting Lane, his property is a family compound, the applicant told the board on July 22, and the play equipment was installed several years ago.

Christian and Francesca Howe were also granted variances to allow a swimming pool, spa, patio, dry well, and retaining walls within required setbacks at 20 Egypt Close.