ZBA: Project can restart, but no more unapproved changes
Bob Plumb of Salt Construction (left) won a go-ahead from ZBA members Patricia Shillingburg, Doug Matz, William “Punch” Johnston III and Phil DiOrio on construction of a house on Ram Island drive with a warning: No more changes without first clearing them with the ZBA.
There was a sharp difference in tone Wednesday night — less frustration and rancor than previously — but the message was the same to builders of a house at Ram Island Drive: There are to be no further changes in construction without first clearing them with the Zoning Board of Appeals.That was strongly written into a 4-0 approval this week, with member Neal Raymond absent. Further changes without permission would result in “permanent revocation” of any permit to build anything that needed variances.
Just a week earlier, ZBA members who expected to approve lifting a stop work order that had been served last October by building inspector Chris Tehan, found themselves faced with still a new set of plans.
Along with the plans came a debate over whether they should just ignore changes since they fit within the building envelope, or demand a full set of plans that showed all changes made since the project was first green lighted last year.
They chose the latter course, demanding that representatives of homeowners Rob and Genevieve Lynch return to the ZBA this week.
Contractor Bob Plumb of Salt Construction in Sag Harbor explained why additional changes were made and not reported to the ZBA.
“The rationale was that little bump out doesn’t require a variance” because it stayed within the footprint of the original house, he said.
Last week’s anger was about a suspicion that the Lynches’ representatives considered the ZBA an obstacle to be avoided while they went ahead and did as they pleased with the construction.
“Mr. Anderson in December told us we don’t know what we’re doing,” ZBA member Patricia Shillingburg said last week, referring to the couple’s representative, Bruce Anderson.
But a week later, with Mr. Plumb and Mr. Anderson in the room, the tone was softer from most ZBA members, but the message remained firm: “We’re saying firmly, ‘rip it down and build to code’” if additional changes are made in the plans without first getting permission from the ZBA, Chairman Doug Matz said.
A week earlier, frustration in his voice, Mr. Matz said, “We don’t feel we were told the right story from day one. I don’t know what else has changed. What else aren’t we seeing?”
“There used to be a time when people would come in with a drawing on the back of an envelope,” Ms. Shillingburg told the Lynch representatives this week. “Now we want the final thing.”
Only member William “Punch” Johnston III continued to scowl, complaining, “I’ve got three sets of plans here. Let’s get it right this time.”
The project approved last year needed both area variances and a special permit to replace more than 50 percent of the structure. But Mr. Lynch and his representatives said the foundation would remain. On October 29, 2014, Mr. Tehan issued a stop work order when he saw the foundation had been removed.
That brought Mr. Lynch and his team back to the ZBA to appeal the stop work order and after a period of wrist slaps by the ZBA and mea culpas from the team, it was agreed that the project could go forward.
Then came new plans in December that included features not previously shown and the ZBA balked. While the changes still kept the proposed building within the same footprint, they were different from what the ZBA was expecting.
Now the contractors must go back to the Building Department for new permits and then can proceed with work that both the ZBA and Mr. Tehan can be expected to carefully monitor.
