Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
ZBA denies lot‑coverage and court setbacks at 4 Tyson Lane; allows two generators
Summary
The East Hampton ZBA denied a 700 sq ft lot‑coverage variance and the large side‑yard variance for a full‑size basketball court at 4 Tyson Lane, finding the overage and setback violations self‑created; the board approved smaller generator setbacks after deliberation and discussion of mitigation and site constraints.
Member Mearing led the board’s deliberation on the SBMFG LLC application for 4 Tyson Lane, summarizing property history and post‑construction changes that, she said, made the variances self‑created. She reviewed aerials and as‑built surveys and said the applicant "did not demonstrate uniqueness to this property" and recommended denial of the lot‑coverage variance and the large side‑yard variance for the basketball court.
Several members agreed. Vice Chair Terry said the 700‑square‑foot overage and the court’s orientation were ‘‘an overage’’ built without permits and that denying the coverage and setback variances was appropriate. Member Burger and Jim concurred that alternative placements or smaller features could achieve recreational use without the requested relief.
On the generators, the board heard competing views. Mearing said alternative locations existed and initially leaned to denial; Terry, Jim and other members acknowledged the generators are large but concluded their siting created less neighborhood detriment and voted to allow the two generator setbacks to remain. Board counsel confirmed the outcome during closing discussion.
The board’s decisions were grounded in the variance standards: several members cited self‑created hardship, a lack of demonstrated uniqueness, the expectation that variances should be the minimum necessary, and concern about setting precedent.
The board did not record a detailed roll‑call tally in the hearing record provided in the transcript; the transcript shows a majority direction to deny coverage and court variances and to approve the generator variances. The board noted any covenant offered by the applicant would not substitute for meeting variance standards.
The board moved on after issuing those determinations; no formal conditions for the generator approvals were read into the transcript beyond discussion of alternative siting and neighborhood impact.
The ZBA’s ruling means the court and lot‑coverage relief were not granted; the two generator variances were allowed.
