2 No. 73
In the Matter of Margret Dreikausen, et al.,
Appellants,
v.
Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of Long Beach, et al.,
Respondents.
_________________________________________________________________
2002 NY Int. 67
June 6, 2002
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication
in the New York Reports.
Charles S. Kovit, for appellants.
Michael G. Zapson, for respondent Bay Club.
Corey E. Klein, for respondent Board.
Eliot Spitzer, Attorney General of the State of New York, amicus
curiæ.
_________________________________________________________________
KAYE, CHIEF JUDGE:
As this zoning dispute has made its way through the courts to us, the
question has become one of mootness. We now dismiss the appeal as
moot.
The case centers on a 56,000 square foot commercially zoned waterfront
property located on Reynolds Channel in Long Beach.(1) The site was
used as a marina, which after decades of financial difficulty, in 1991
ultimately went into bankruptcy. The property, located in an otherwise
residentially zoned neighborhood, is bounded by single- and two-family
homes, a youth center, and a veterinarian and pet center (the only
other business in the immediate area).
In 1999, Keystone Design and Construction Corporation entered into a
contract to purchase the site for $2,400,000, with the intention of
developing condominiums. Keystone applied to respondent Zoning Board
of Appeals of the City of Long Beach (the "Board") for a use variance,
proposing to build 23 semi-attached condominium units and 35 boat
slips on the property. That application was denied, setting in motion
the events leading to this appeal.
Keystone reapplied for a use variance, reducing the proposed number of
condominiums to 20. At a February 24, 2000 Board hearing, Keystone's
SNIPPETS:
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the New York
Michael G. Zapson, for respondent Bay Club.
As this zoning dispute has made its way through the courts to us, the question has become one
The property, located in an otherwise residentially zoned neighborhood, is bounded by single-
In 1999, Keystone Design and Construction Corporation entered into a contract to purchase the
Keystone applied to respondent Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of Long Beach for a use
At a February 24, 2000 Board hearing, Keystone's counsel supported the application with
Petitioners -- four owners of neighboring single-family homes -- and several other local
That very day, Keystone's owner formed a related corporation, Bay Club of Long Beach, Inc.,
On July 27, 2000, the Board voted unanimously to grant the use variance and additionally
The Board found that Bay Club had introduced sufficient evidence of its need for a use
que; and Bay Club's hardship is not self-created because, regardless of ownership, the site cannot
On February 13, 2001, Supreme Court dismissed the petition, finding the Board had acted
By this time, work at the site was underway, with the marina torn down, the bulkhead
Petitioners first sought injunctive relief on February 22, 2001, in conjunction with their
The Appellate Division denied petitioners' requests for a temporary restraining order and
A dissenting Justice urged reversal and denial of a use variance on the ground that Bay Club
of Fayetteville v Jarrold,, 53 NY2d 254 ).
Chief among them has been a challenger's failure to seek preliminary injunctive relief or
v Barile, 210 AD2d 562, lv denied, 85 NY2d 805 ).
|
