Flood Compliance Review of Crescent Project Delayed

by Meg Yergin -

Confusion and a lack of urgency regarding flood-zone compliance marked the review of 714 The Crescent at the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) meeting on November 6, 2025.  

The owner of the waterfront home is seeking to add 118 square feet to an existing home, build a ~6’ deep second-floor balcony across the width of the house connected to exterior stairs, and construct a roughly 17’ long deck extending into the back yard within inches of a neighbor’s lot line.  The applicant is asking the ZBA for area variances to build into the site’s minimum required side yards. (See HERE for a prior article describing side yard setbacks.)

Flood Zone Rules

Because the project is in a VE flood zone, under the Code the applicant must provide certification that it complies with Village flood-damage prevention requirements at the time that the building permit application is submitted. Chapter 186-4 C (10)

VE flood zones are high-risk flood zones designated by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) as a Special Flood Hazard Area. The “V” is for “velocity,” and indicates areas susceptible to high-velocity wave action, and “E” denotes that a Base Flood Elevation (BFE) has been determined for the area.

FEMA Coastal Zone Schematic

For V zones, NYS requires that a Floodplain Development Permit Application be filed with any building permit proposing improvements. The Village also requires that the application be accompanied by a statement from an architect or engineer certifying that the projects’ plans comply with all V zone rules contained in Chapter 186, along with the plans’ design and construction specifications. Chapter 186-4 C (10)

Flood Compliance Delayed

The ZBA’s meeting materials for 714 The Crescent, however, do not include a statement from a licensed architect or engineer certifying the project’s flood damage prevention compliance.  Similarly, the Village Clerk could not produce the project’s design plans and specifications or flood compliance statement in response to a Freedom of Information Law (FOIL) request dated November 25, 2025.

At the meeting, Building Inspector Scott Ransom said that the parameters that the applicant will need to provide in the application for the Flood-Plain Development Permit will be looked at by a consulting engineer.  “That determination is made at that point” he continued, without clarifying when “that point” would happen and without acknowledging that under the Code the applicant was required to provide it when the building permit application was filed.

Applicant Minimizes Flood Zone “Stuff”

Kristen Motel, the attorney representing the owner of 714 The Crescent, told the ZBA that “the flood zone stuff…gets worked out later” in response to a neighbor who brought up base-flood elevation requirements for the proposed new construction, without acknowledging the neighbor’s flood risk concerns.

Attorney Kristen Motel tells the ZBA that the flood zone stuff gets worked out later.

Motel also claimed that the project does not need a flood variance because the plans do not constitute a “substantial improvement” to the property.  She made this claim even though Chapter 186 is clear that flood-prevention requirements for this site pertain to all new construction, regardless of whether they are considered substantial. See HERE.

Motel also stated that “Decks don’t meet the definition [of structure] under the flood code” referencing the roughly 44’ x 17’ deck to be extended out into the back yard against the neighbor’s lot line.  However, FEMA’s Free-of-Obstruction Technical bulletin includes detailed requirements for new decks and porches built in V zones, see HERE, and Village Code states that the more restrictive FEMA rules supersede any conflicting requirements in the local code.

“Whenever the requirements of this article are at variance with the requirements with any other lawfully adopted rules, regulations, ordinances, or local laws, the most restrictive or that imposing the higher standards, shall govern.” Section 186-3 C (2).

Flood plain development compliance with FEMA regulations is necessary to ensure the Village’s continued participation in the National Flood Insurance Program which benefits all residents. 

Next-Door Neighbor’s Concerns

At the meeting, the neighbor told the ZBA her main concern with the project is flood risk.  She stated that the plans for the project do not comply with FEMA rules and would increase the risk of flooding to the neighborhood overall and certainly to adjoining properties. 

She recommended that the flood prevention issues be resolved before the ZBA considers granting any variances as the elevation of the new construction will likely need to be revised and the ZBA needs to understand the impact the height of the deck would have on adjoining properties.  “It is pointless in my view to do a zoning variance if you are proposing an unbuildable structure because of flood-zone nonconformity,” she said.

The applicant is seeking a variance from the ZBA to build the new deck with an outdoor kitchen within a ¼ inch of the neighbor’s property line - as shown on the site plan presented at the meeting - where a minimum setback of 15 feet is required.  If the proposed ~750 sq ft deck needs to be raised above Base Flood Elevation for flood compliance, it would be hovering several feet above her backyard within inches of her property line.

Impact of Flood Zone Compliance Delay

In the Village, flood zone and wetlands permit approvals are often reviewed for a project only after all ZBA approvals have been obtained and the project’s site plan review is in progress.  At that point in the review process, it can put a land use board in the position of deciding if an applicant must go back to their architect to draw up new plans to comply with the flood zone requirements (such as elevating construction, shifting the location of structures, and eliminating basements) after the application has already been under review for months.  This adds time and expense for applicants.  It could also put pressure on the PB to grant a flood plain development variance.

In addition, if flood zone compliance is not completed at the start of the land-use review process, the ZBA may be asked to consider area variance requests without the opportunity to consider the full impact these Code exceptions will have on neighboring properties once compliance measures - such as raising structures above base flood elevation - are added.

Additional Issues at ZBA Meeting

Additional issues with the project were also raised at the meeting.  These include conflicting information about the side yard calculations, the location of a two-story exterior stairway in a side yard leading to the second-floor balcony, and the presence of an existing raised patio that was constructed by a previous owner against the side-yard property line shared with a neighbor without an area variance from the ZBA or a flood-development variance from the PB. 

In a letter to the applicant, the neighbor of the project said that the proposed plans will essentially eliminate any space between the new deck and her property line which will diminish her property value and undermine her efforts to keep her pool and property safe and private.  She also pointed out that the proposed outdoor kitchen immediately adjacent to the lot line presents a fire risk to both properties. 

Next Steps

The applicant told the ZBA they plan to provide a set of updated plans.  The next meeting of the ZBA is scheduled for December 4.  The agenda is not yet available.