631.655.7255 |
bclose

Q2:Grandfathered Structures

GRANDFATHERED STRUCTURES: Do you respect the sanctity of pre-existing and grandfathered structures, or, if elected, will you move to remove or diminish property owner rights?

(Candidate responses appear in the order in which they were received)

Bill Edwards:Bill Edwards

      Yes, within reasonable limits. Repair and replacement of existing functioning structures should normally be permitted just as it is in other elements of the zoning code.

 

    _______________________________________

Jim King: Jim King

      Grandfather permits are no longer issued. We now issue wetland or administrative permits for pre-existing structures based on a site visit.

 

    _____________________________________

Bill Ruland:Bill Ruland

      Yes, the sanctity of pre-existing and grandfathered structures should be respected. If elected, I will continue to support the rights of all property owners.

 

    ________________________________________

Bob Ghosio: Bob Ghosio

      I

do

      respect the sanctity of pre-existing and grandfathered structures. One example of this is a property on New Suffolk Ave. that is comprised of mostly wetlands on the creek by the marina. A small, roughly 400 square foot cottage existed there since the early to mid 1900’s. It looked to be an old hunter’s or fisherman’s shack. The property and structure did not meet any code by today’s standards. Furthermore, it didn’t meet any setback code we have today. It was too close to the wetlands, to the road, to the side yard, to the septic, to just about everything. The cottage was also uninhabitable due to age. The family who owns it decided to tear it down and wanted to rebuild it to have a small place to live. They also wanted to add a 2

nd

      story to have more living space.

Upon receiving the application, I have to admit, I was more inclined to decline allowing a structure there because of the closeness to the water and intertidal wetlands. To think it possible to get the structure away from the wetlands and still have a home big enough to occupy without doing damage to the existing wetlands seemed perhaps a little overzealous to me. During the hearings however, I couldn’t help but hear the owner and feel that I just couldn’t tell him he had to give up a structure on a parcel of land he owned that had a cottage for maybe 75 years. It didn’t seem right. And further, the benefit of letting the parcel stay empty didn’t outweigh the property owner’s rights, at least in my mind.

The Trustees were not unanimous in the decision making process but the majority voted to mitigate the project to the best for all considerations, including the environment. And I believe it was the right thing to do. By the way, this is also an example of good DISCRETIONARY decision making and why there are five Trustees who vote on applications.

Just one note on property rights. I am a conservative Republican who believes in family values, freedom, capitalism, and the sanctity of property rights. I do not however, advocate for greed. There is a difference in wanting to own waterfront property, use it for one’s enjoyment etc., and owning waterfront property and abusing the resources. Traditionally, one’s use of one’s property is predicated on it not having an adverse impact on other property owner’s rights to enjoy their property. Respect for one another’s rights includes responsible use of one’s property and the proper conservation of the natural resources that includes.

________________________________________

Chris Baiz: Chris Baiz

      Pre-existing and grandfathered structures should be protected and maintained. Replacement and new structures should be allowed when geomorphologically correct.

________________________________________

Scott Russell:Scott Russell

      I support the legitimacy of grandfathered and pre-existing structures in almost all cases. Under very rare circumstances that such a structure actually reduces the inherit property rights of another owner, the reasonable approach would be to consider mitigating actions to continue the existence of a preexisting structure. Incidentally, I voted against several proposals passed by the current Town Board because these would have created even more nonconforming properties and structures in the community.

________________________________________

Dan Ross: Dan Ross

      I respect the rights that accrue to the owner of a pre-existing structure.

 

________________________________________

The following candidates were invited to respond to this question also, but chose not to do so by publication deadline: Vincent Orlando, Anne Trimble, Frank Wills. Everyone is encouraged to add their own comments and questions below, including all candidates.

About "Janet Deluca"

Comments ( 2 )

Comments are closed.