Village of Dering Harbor
Architectural Review Board
Meeting Minutes
July 9th, 2022, 12:00PM 

• The meeting was called to order at 12:00pm

• Attendance- Susannah Rose (chairperson), Mickey Kostow, Stephanie Deutsch, Bridg Hunt, absent- George Birman; Vicki Shields(village clerk), Wayne Bruyn (village attorney), Donna Rittzmann (Tim Hogue’s stenographer), Melinda CArroll (applicant), Stuart and Alice Goldman

• A motion to accept the minutes from the April 23^rd and May 14^th meetings was made by Bridg and seconded by Mickey. 3 votes in favor, 1 abstention (Staphanie). Motion passed.

• New Business

Pre-Submission Conference

Applicant- Brian and Melinda Carroll, Property Owners
Street Address: 16 Harbor Lane
SCTM# 701 – 1 – 2 – 10.1

Request for first pre-submission conference for feedback on preliminary plans and ideas for renovation of existing dwelling on property, construction of a new trellis, patios, and swimming pool, relocation of the existing garage, and removal of existing/construction of new driveway and parking area (as listed in letter dated June 9^th, 2022).

Melinda Carroll came to present her plans, which were very thorough. She wants to renovate her house at 16 Harbor Lane and make it more in keeping with the history of the village. She wants to keep the integrity of the design of the house but it is in pretty serious disrepair and there have been some modifications made that are not in keeping with the original design. She is not seeking to change the front facade except for the extension of the porch (which she knows will require a variance). Because they are seeking to extend the main house and add 2700 square feet, having that massing so close to the existing garage feels like a lot. Right now the garage is pre-exising, non-conforming and they are carefully looking at relocating parking that makes sense.

She listed the challenges they face with this renovation considering the new law that was passed regarding driveways and off-street parking. She really wanted to show the community how they are approaching this project and that they are taking everything the village is currently tackling to preserve this special place into consideration. She was eager to hear the ARBs thoughts and feedback.

Public comments:

Stuart Goldman had a question about where Melinda plans to extend the house. She explained it to him by showing him the plan she was presenting.

Wayne interjected with some information. The survey submitted was done before two strips were deeded to the previous owner. A more current survey should show that new information indicating the correct setbacks and variance issues that come into play. He also pointed out the new requirements regarding setbacks for corner lots, taking into consideration minor and major streets. The plans the applicant submitted show incorrect setbacks/building envelope. He also let the ARB know that the BOT did adopt the new LL regarding driveways and off-street parking areas earlier this morning and that should be taken into consideration.

ARB comments:

1. 1. George Birman’s comments were in a letter form, which Susannah read and which was entered into the record. (see attached)
   2. Bridg had a question for Wayne about whether the addition of those strips changes the height and setback requirements. Wayne said he thinks so. Bridg commented that he thinks the design is beautiful but he thinks it’s flawed by the broken peak on the Dering Lane side. Melinda explained the thinking behind that decision but she said they are open to suggestions. Bridg thinks it should be a full peak.
   3. Stephanie commended the applicant for the work they are doing to restore this home, which she thinks is an asset to the village. She said she has no problem with the peak or the shape of the pool. She did say that the applicant is going to need to obtain variances for some of the work they are seeking (lot coverage, parking, location of the garage). She supports whatever it is they are seeking to do but she did say that she would need to hear any concerns from the neighbors and the community, if there are any.
   4. Mickey thanked the applicant for such a thorough and complete presubmission. He agrees with Stephanie that he would support the variances they would be seeking and thinks what they are doing is appropriate and in keeping with the village.
   5. Susannah commented that she thinks the plan is beautiful and remarked that she likes the broken peak and thinks it enhances the design and depth. She also commented that she really likes the oval shape of the pool and thinks it’s classic. She also disagreed with George’s desire for the parking area to be hedged. She doesn’t think the village wants to be a community of high hedges everywhere and cars are a part of life. She also asked about the decking proposed for the adjacent waterfront property and thinks it may require a variance. Melinda clarified the thinking behind it. Susannah then asked Wayne if the applicant changes the location of parking, will they need a new curb cut. He said yes and that the ARB is now responsible for approving curb cuts.

Susannah then asked for clarification about next steps from Wayne regarding demolition and the ARB’s new role in that process based on new laws that were passed. Wayne explained that the law that was adopted that morning clarifies that demolition permits will now also require ARB review. If an applicant is demolishing a structure, they must show what they plan to replace it with. In light of the current moratorium on demolition and material alterations to buildings, if the building inspector determines that what is being proposed is a material alteration, the applicant must seek an exemption from the moratorium from the Board of Trustees. If the applicant also needs to seek a variance from the ZBA, this pre submission conference is very important in establishing for the record that the ARB has no issues with the proposed plans from an aesthetic standpoint.

Melinda asked what the most streamlined process would be, taking all of this into account. She is concerned that this process is going to take a long time and considering that the house is falling down, any delay in approval is very concerning to her. Wayne responded that it is his opinion that what they are proposing is a material alteration and should be submitted to the Board of Trustees for an exemption to the moratorium. Then the ZBA, and then the ARB, all of which need public hearings scheduled and noticed. Susannah suggested that the applicant could request a Special Meeting to the various boards. Vicki explained the noticing requirements and the date she would need to have a notice into the paper by.

Susannah wanted to make sure it is noted that the neighbors have requested that this application be moved along. There was a request from Stuart Goldman that this process be streamlined so that the construction can be completed before next summer.

Some further questions from Wayne, including location of septic systems and Department of Health approval. He said that information, along with any drainage for parking areas, would be good to know. He also suggested the applicant make sure they locate properly sized trees on the survey, as well as any fences or walls. Melinda explained that they were waiting for feedback from the ARB before developing this part of the plan further.

Wayne suggested that in order to streamline the approval process, the applicant comes prepared, when they come before the Trustees, to identify the different variances they will be seeking and the nature of the variances. That way they will be prepared to submit their application to the ZBA soon thereafter. Melinda explained the thinking behind some of the variances they will be seeking and Susannah suggested that she explain all of that to the Trustees and the ZBA.

Mickey suggested that when the applicant submits their landscape plan, they indicate which trees are existing.

• Next meeting date- August 13th, 2022.

• A motion to adjourn at 12:50pm was seconded