A Pool On A Dune
Thompson and Barbara Chase's proposed house in Beach Hampton would be okay, but, according to neighbors, a proposed swimming pool and deck will endanger a secondary dune that extends onto their properties and under their houses.
"The adjacent properties are extensions of this dune and have a vital interest in its well-being," Randy Parsons of LandMarks, a planning consultant, wrote to the East Hampton Town Zoning Board of Appeals on behalf of his clients, Lee and Stewart Klein.
The Zoning Board held a hearing on the Chases' application on Aug. 26. The present plan calls for a minor shift in the location of the pool but an increase in the lot coverage, from an application heard in July.
Pool Or No Pool?
Sensing at the first hearing that the board might see room to move the pool, the Chases' planning consultant, Tim Collins of East Hampton, came in with the revised proposal before the board made its decision. The Z.B.A. then scheduled the new hearing.
The Chases' plan for their 14,000-square-foot Hampton Lane lot includes tearing down much of an existing house and building a new one with a first-floor footprint of 2,788 square feet, a 640-square-foot pool and surrounding deck, brick-and-sand patios, and a sanitary system. A natural resources permit is necessary because of duneland and beach vegetation on the property.
Other, smaller issues aside, the neighbors' primary concern was that the pool would have an adverse effect on the dune, Mr. Parsons said, adding that the location now proposed would place the pool up against the steepest dune slope on the property.
It "will likely have a greater impact . . . than the previous proposal," he said.
Concern For Underpinnings
Denying the pool "would go a long way to minimizing" his clients' concerns, Mr. Parsons said.
A retaining wall for the pool, proposed earlier, has now been eliminated. Mr. Parsons questioned, however, whether the pool could be built without it and the dune still maintained.
The proposal, he concluded, was too intensive for an environmentally constrained lot.
Jerry Owen, Frank Urrutia, and Mrs. Klein all expressed concerns for the dune; all three said their houses rest upon it. Mr. Owen foresaw the dune "slowly and gradually depleting," and Mr. Urrutia wondered whether disruption to the dune on the Chase parcel would eventually undermine the dune on his.
Mr. Parsons also questioned why a new environmental assessment was not done by the Town Planning Department in light of the revised application.
Vegetation
Mrs. Klein said the proposal also meant "a large portion" of vegetation "is going to be wiped out." She and her husband also said, in a letter to the board, that they believe the Chases have no intention of building the improvements themselves but rather are in contract to sell the lot, with permits for a large house and pool as requirements for the sale.
Cindy Fowx, speaking for the Planning Department, said she had no objections to the Chases' proposal, but suggested the board require any disturbed areas be revegetated with native plants.
"I don't think it's any more intrusive than the last proposal," Ms. Fowx told the board.
Natural Features
Mr. Collins called the shift in the pool's location - five feet to the north with another two feet gained to the east by reducing the size of the deck - "a positive change" that will offer "further protection to the dune."
The retaining wall would not be necessary, he said.
Much of the property is already disturbed, Mr. Collins told the board, and the owner plans to put in plantings at the bottom part of the dune in question. No variances are needed for the proposal, Mr. Collins reminded the board, and it meets the town's lot coverage restrictions.
The main issue for the board to consider, Mr. Collins said, was whether the Chases' proposal will have a negative impact on natural features. "And my answer to that is no," he said.