The Zoning Board of Brookhaven convened on May 28, 2025, to address several key applications and community concerns regarding local zoning regulations. The meeting began with a discussion on a proposed construction project that included a wood-burning fireplace, which raised safety concerns among nearby residents.

Dr. Sheila Perino Sabienza, a local resident, voiced her opposition to the fireplace, citing the area's heavy woodlands and a previous fire incident that involved multiple fire departments. She expressed fears that the proposed fireplace could pose a fire hazard to her home and others in the vicinity. Additionally, she raised concerns about existing drainage issues on the property, which she believed had not been adequately addressed during the construction process.

The board acknowledged Dr. Sabienza's concerns but clarified that drainage matters fall under the jurisdiction of the highway department, not the zoning board. The applicant's architect responded to the fireplace concerns, explaining that the design would include safety features such as a spark arrestor to mitigate fire risks.

Following this discussion, the board moved on to a second case involving the Kaysle Family Limited Partnership, which sought height and rear yard variances for a proposed barn on a property previously used as a strawberry farm. The applicant requested permission to construct a 28-foot high barn, exceeding the permitted height of 18 feet. The barn would be used solely for agricultural purposes, housing farm equipment and supplies.

Concerns were raised by a neighboring resident, Dr. Charles D. Shemit, who argued that the property had not been actively farmed for decades and expressed skepticism about the barn's intended use. He feared that the structure would be repurposed for commercial storage rather than agricultural needs, which could disrupt the residential character of the neighborhood.

The board deliberated on the proposed barn's placement and the requested variances, noting that similar variances had been granted in the past for other barns in the area. The applicant indicated a willingness to adjust the barn's location to comply with setback requirements, which the board considered as part of their decision-making process.

The meeting concluded with a motion to hold and close the discussions on both cases, allowing the board to further review the applications and community feedback before making final decisions. The board's next steps will involve assessing the implications of the proposed constructions on local safety and zoning regulations.