Too Much Power

Too Much PowerOn Thursday, March 7, the Town of Southampton Zoning Board of Appeals voted—with one opposing vote—to allow a variance for a property that had been operating since 2012 with two nonconforming uses, a commercial tennis club and a commercial day camp, within in a residentially zoned district [“Camp In North Sea Wins Approval,” Eastern Edition, March 14].

According to the Southampton Town code, Chapter 330: “A nonconforming use shall be changed only to a conforming use.”

It is clearly evident, that commercial activities are not conforming uses within a residential zone. It seems that if members of the ZBA were following the town zoning code, this variance should not have been granted.

Also, in my opinion, it is clear that the majority of the ZBA who sided with the developer did not consider the impact that this variance would have on the residents in the surrounding area—or perhaps they did not care. There was only one member of the ZBA who considered the town’s Comprehensive Plan along with the town code in support of the majority of property owners and residents of the neighborhood; the other ZBA members voted in support of the commercial interests of the developer applicant, an influential person in New York State politics.

With consideration to the town code, Chapter 330, Article 18, Board of Appeals: “The Zoning Board of Appeals shall have the power to grant variances. In making its determination the Zoning Board of Appeals shall take into consideration the benefit to the applicant if the variance is granted, as weighed against the detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the neighborhood or community by such grant.”

The Town of Southampton’s Comprehensive Plan recommends the termination or phasing out of preexisting, nonconforming uses. There is no reasonable explanation why a majority of the ZBA members are not following the objectives stated in the town’s Comprehensive Plan.

Once again, the ZBA has not been adhering to the requirements outlined in the state’s open government guidelines: the ZBA deliberations, considerations and decision-making process occurred behind closed doors. The rationale for their vote for a variance, along with the substantiating threshold and criteria, was not defined.

The ZBA, being an appointed board, has too much power over the quality of residential life and property values in our town. Perhaps our elected officials, who appointed these members once, may be able to address this.

Larissa PotapchukNorth Sea