STATEMENT OF THE LONG ISLAND BUILDERS INSTITUTE
IN OPPOSITION TO A PROPOSED LOCAL LAW AMENDING CHAPTER 246
TO IMPOSE A SIX-MONTH MORATORIUM ON THE ISSUANCE OF
BUILDING PERMITS…WITHIN THE OYSTER BAY HAMLET STUDY AREA

The Long Island Builders Institute opposes this proposed six-month moratorium, which would prevent the Town from considering building permits, demolition, sub-division approvals and area variances within the Oyster Bay Hamlet Moratorium Study Area.

The Institute is not opposed to valid moratoriums that serve a useful purpose. Moratoriums are valid when land is to be re-zoned or when major open space set aside and similar requirements of subdivision regulations are proposed for change. This is the well-known concept of preventing “shifting sands”, or developing underlining lands while regulations are being developed.

Moratoriums must also be justified by a clear threat to public health, safety or welfare created by a dire necessity or crisis. Further, the moratorium must be of reasonable duration and appropriate to its purpose. To justify the draconian interference of beneficial enjoyment of property, the moratorium should not be applicable unnecessarily.

The Study Area is relatively confined and the duration is limited. But, a moratorium affecting building permits is the worst kind. The impact falls on homeowners in advanced stages of planning an expansion, homeowners selling their homes to someone who desires to expand and to builders just about to get building permits. Everyday’s delay costs jobs, sales and can waste previous investments in architectural drawings conforming to the existing rules.

Only a handful of new single-family homes can be built within the Study Area on scattered lots. In a town of this size, that such a level of activity would create an emergency situation necessitating a moratorium, is implausible. That aside, please note that each new home delayed by a moratorium represents two full person years of employment. The completion of the home from start to finish provides work for 150 to 200 individuals, from a few minutes to many weeks. Most of those affected live or work in this town.

Solutions to the problems stated in Councilman Coschignano’s release earlier this summer, a large number of demolitions and lot subdivisions, do not require six months.

This moratorium is unusual, in that it would prevent the town’s board of appeals (ZBA) from acting on applications for area variances in residential zones, which would result in a new or additional building lot. Fundamental to the validity of any town’s zoning system is an appeals board. Simply stated, I don’t believe the state allows you to zone without permitting a citizen to take an appeal to an independent ZBA. Any affected citizen may ask for relief from zoning rules as long as zoning is in effect. This right cannot be taken from citizens, for any period of time zoning remains in effect, without calling into question the towns zoning. Zoning without an appeals mechanism is not valid under state statute.

Stripping the ZBA of decision making for area variances within the Study Area would seem to have no valid purpose, if you consider the findings required of the ZBA.
For area variances the ZBA must balance the benefit the applicant would gain if its request were granted against an undesirable change in the community, alternatives to granting the variance, the substantial nature of the variance, any adverse physical or environmental impact on the conditions in the neighborhood and whether the difficulty was self created. The ZBA must grant the minimum variance that it deems necessary and at the same time preserve the neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare of the community. The ZBA can and should impose any conditions it deems necessary to minimize any adverse impacts.

The Town enacted a moratorium to deal with flagpole lots only two years ago. From a real estate and tax base development viewpoint, flagpole or pot handle lots are often found desirable. Homes on such lots can command serious valuations. Certainly too many in one area or inappropriate site planning can produce problems. But the ZBA must address these issues.

Another deficiency of the proposed statute is its failure to include a hardship provision. Applicants should be permitted to apply to the town board for a hardship determination during the moratorium and expect a prompt answer. Almost every local moratorium law enacted in the last few years contains such a provision, following N.Y. S. Dept. of State guidelines.

LIBI is available to meet with town officials to recommend alternatives, which could provide for site plan reviews on individual lots or additional standards for lot development. The current moratorium proposal is not the way to go.

LIBI appreciates the opportunity to submit testimony.

Respectfully submitted on behalf of The Long Island Builders Institute,
Robert A. Wieboldt
Executive Vice President
September 27, 2005