Skip to main content

They Never Promised Her a Rose Garden

By
Christopher Walsh

Mindful of the density and scarcity of parking in the neighborhood, the East Hampton Village Zoning Board of Appeals took a long look at a proposal to alter a pre-existing nonconforming residence and make several additions to a .3-acre parcel on Friday.

Keith and Anne Cynar own an undivided lot at 52, 54, and 56 McGuirk Street. They want to convert a two-apartment building at the rear of the property into a single-family residence while retaining two cottages that face the street.

The applicants want to increase the height of the rear structure by 2.2 feet, to rearrange windows and doors, and construct a cellar. The building is only 2.4 feet from the side-yard lot line, where the required setback is 17.07 feet. In addition the couple seeks multiple variances for a swimming pool and patios and to install window wells and an air-conditioning unit. One variance would allow coverage greater than the maximum permitted.

The village code requires two off-street parking spaces for every house, but the parcel now has one space for each of the cottages and none for the apartments at rear. Overnight parking on village streets is prohibited.

“You don’t have enough parking now,” John McGuirk, a board member, said to Patrick Gunn, an attorney representing the applicants, noting that the swimming pool was to be constructed on space now used for parking, and Frank Newbold, the board’s chairman, asked Mr. Gunn where parking for the main house would be.

The Cynars will occupy that residence, Mr. Gunn said, “and it’s just two people. They don’t have a large family.” He also told the board that the existing spaces could probably accommodate four cars. “I know you’re concerned about density. We’re actually going to reduce density by taking this from four habitable units down to three. The two apartments in the rear unit are going to become one unit.”

Following the rear structure’s renovation, the cottages are to be rented. When all the residences are fully occupied, Mr. Newbold said, “there are seven bedrooms . . . and we didn’t see a plan for the lower level” of the renovated house. He also questioned the planned use of the basement. The basement will be unfinished, Mr. Gunn said.   “But whether we have vacant basement or not,” Mr. McGuirk replied, “there’s still not enough parking.” After Mr. Gunn said the parking situation had existed without issue in the past, Mr. Newbold asked him to provide plans for parking and for the cellar.

Turning to the added height proposed for the renovated house, Mr. Newbold said that several neighbors had objected. One of them, David Powers of 42 McGuirk Street, was present. He said that three bedrooms in his house, which he said complies with the required side-yard setback, face the building to be converted. “There are some evergreen trees on my property that serve as a barrier,” he said, “but they only go part way up the windows that face out toward us. Raising it farther up, for a nonconforming structure, seems to be a bit of an ask,” he said.

The house must be taller, Mr. Gunn said, because the ceilings on the second floor are less than seven feet high. “State code requires it to be raised,” he said. But Ken Collum, a village code enforcement officer and fire marshal, disputed that. “He’s correct if you’re building it today — seven feet — but if the house was built prior to the 1984 building code, which I believe it was, there is no retroactivity to make them raise the ceiling,” he said.

Mr. Gunn asked Robert Smith, the project’s architect, to address the board. “One of the concerns I have about the existing roof is, structurally, it scares me,” Mr. Smith said. “Even if you weren’t going to raise it, it’s not in great shape. There are leaking problems, which obviously lead to rot.” Compliance with the present code “makes sense,” he said.

The hearing was left open, and the issues are to be reconsidered at the board’s April 8 meeting.

Two decisions were also announced on Friday. The actress Candice Bergen and her husband, Marshall Rose, were granted multiple variances to allow a generator, air-conditioning units, sheds, pool equipment, slate patios, and a garbage shed/bin to remain in place at 72 Lily Pond Lane. All exist and are within property-line setbacks, but variances were granted to allow them to remain on several conditions. They include removing cabinets and fixtures from an accessory structure that the board said was illegally converted to a residence. The space is to be used for storage only, and the couple is to file a covenant with the Suffolk County clerk detailing the restrictions. The pool equipment must also be enclosed.

At 40 West End Road, Emilia Saint-Amand, the widow of H. Frederick Krimendahl II, was granted a wetlands permit and variances to allow landscaping and fencing, bluestone patios, and dry wells closer than the 125-foot setback required from wetlands, on the condition that an erosion and sediment control plan is fully implemented. However, the board denied Ms. Saint-Amand’s request for a rose garden and deer fencing. Instead, a fescue lawn can be extended into the area proposed for the rose garden.

 

Your support for The East Hampton Star helps us deliver the news, arts, and community information you need. Whether you are an online subscriber, get the paper in the mail, delivered to your door in Manhattan, or are just passing through, every reader counts. We value you for being part of The Star family.

Your subscription to The Star does more than get you great arts, news, sports, and outdoors stories. It makes everything we do possible.