A decision by the Southampton Town Zoning Board of Appeals on Thursday, December 15, could help clarify what is considered waterfront property in the town.
Specifically, the board will judge whether Chief Building Inspector Michael Benincasa erred in his decision to declare a Bridgehampton property owner’s land waterfront property last year to allow a pool to be installed in the front yard of the Hildreth Avenue home. Homeowner Janet Finkel’s attorney, John Bennett, of the Southampton firm, Bennett and Reid, argued that the backyard of the property is made up of wetlands and should be considered waterfront because it contains kettleholes filled with water that Mr. Bennett describes as “ponds.” Under town code, the front and rear yards of a waterfront home can swap spots, which allow the pool to be built in the front yard.
Neighbors who live near the home, located on Hildreth Avenue, have challenged Mr. Benincasa’s determination through their East Hampton-based attorney Jeffrey Bragman. Mr. Bragman has argued that there are no ponds on the property and that the waterfront ruling stretches the definition of waterfront while setting a dangerous precedent.
ZBA Vice Chairman Adam Grossman, who is the lead board member on the application, declined to divulge how he would vote this week. “Before determinations are rendered, I don’t indicate what my position is,” he said on Tuesday. “I don’t think I’ve ever done it … because I really don’t want anyone to think I’m prejudging an application.”
The ZBA meeting will convene at 6 p.m. on Thursday at Town Hall.
Rohma Abbas on Dec 13, 2011