A husband and wife have filed a pair of lawsuits against the Westhampton Beach Zoning Board of Appeals after the ZBA denied their repeated attempts to subdivide 1.5 acres that the couple insists were wrongfully combined by the village into a single lot last year.
Andrew and Lynne Edelman, who have owned two homes on Stacy Drive since the 1980s, filed the first lawsuit against the village in September 2015. That suit was leveled after the review board blocked their attempts to get village officials to recognize that two of three neighboring lots—located at 26 and 30 Stacy Drive—are, in fact, separate properties based on the original deeds.
The two homes are at 30 Stacy Drive and 28 Stacy Drive, which are in both the Edelmans’ names.
The third, mostly undeveloped property, at 26 Stacy Drive is owned by Mr. Edelman alone, according to village records. That lot measures 54,331 square feet, or just less than 1.25 acres, while the property at 30 Stacy Drive is 12,221 square feet, or only about one-quarter of an acre.
Both of those properties have Residential 40 zoning, meaning that each house lot must measure at least 1 acre. However, the house at 30 Stacy Drive is considered a pre-existing, nonconforming use, which the ZBA allowed the Edelmans to expand when it approved an addition in the early 1990s. The approval was based on the understanding, however, that 30 and 26 Stacy Drive were in fact one parcel, and it allowed the addition to encroach 900 feet onto 26 Stacy Drive, which contained only an accessory structure.
The house at 30 Stacy Street was later damaged in a fire, and last year the couple applied to have the addition removed with the intention of making the two original lots separate parcels again.
The village denied the application, noting that the earlier variance had been granted based on the total square footage of both lots combined.
As part of their claim in the lawsuit, the Edelmans said they would lose approximately $900,000—the estimated value of one property, although it did not specify which—if the lots cannot be separated. Filed in September 2015, the suit contests the ZBA’s decision on the grounds that, while 30 Stacy Drive is owned by both Mr. and Ms. Edelman, 26 Stacy Drive is in Mr. Edelman’s name only. The lawsuit also contends that the properties have separate deeds and separate tax bills from both the village and Southampton Town.
While the court case is pending, the Edelmans once again tried to move forward by applying to have the land re-subdivided. After a series of hearings, the ZBA denied the application, 3-2, saying it would interfere with an existing easement through which the driveway at 30 Stacy Drive is used to access 26 Stacy Drive. In addition, the house at 30 Stacy Drive could not meet the village’s required 150-foot setback from neighboring property lines.
That decision, filed on July 21 of this year, prompted the second lawsuit, which was filed with the State Supreme Court on August 20 and seeks to overturn the ZBA’s ruling.
Frank Isler of Smith, Finkelstein, Lundberg, Isler and Yakaposki LLP of Riverhead, the attorney representing the Edelmans, declined to comment on the lawsuit while it is pending.
ZBA Chairman Gerard Piering did not return calls seeking comment.
on Sep 16, 2016