Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

SUBURBAN CLUB LARKFIELD v. TOWN HUNTINGTON (09/26/68)

SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, SPECIAL TERM, SUFFOLK COUNTY 1968.NY.42905 <http://www.versuslaw.com>; 294 N.Y.S.2d 4; 57 Misc. 2d 1051 September 26, 1968 SUBURBAN CLUB OF LARKFIELD, INC., PLAINTIFF,v.TOWN OF HUNTINGTON, DEFENDANT Charles T. Matthews for plaintiff. Arthur Goldstein for defendant. William R. Geiler, J. Author: Geiler


William R. Geiler, J.

Author: Geiler

 This is an action for a permanent injunction to restrain the defendant Town of Huntington from removing or demolishing an air-supported pool dome on plaintiff's property and from revoking a building permit issued on February 29, 1968 authorizing construction of this dome.

Plaintiff also seeks to recover approximately $2,500 for damages allegedly caused to the dome by the employees of the Town of Huntington and approximately $100,000 for loss of profits allegedly sustained because of the action of the Town of Huntington.

Plaintiff, since 1964, has been the owner of a parcel of land, approximately 300 feet by 300 feet, situated 471.25 feet from the southeast corner of Larkfield Road and Clay Pitts Road in the Town of Huntington. The subject parcel is adjacent to a gasoline service station, which is on the corner of Larkfield Road and Clay Pitts Road and is in a general area comprising varied commercial enterprises.

The first 150 feet, in depth, of plaintiff's property is zoned "General Business". Plaintiff's predecessor in title, Drabor Enterprises, approximately seven years ago, applied to the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Huntington and requested an extension of the business depth of the subject parcel for an additional 150 feet and also requested permission to operate a large swimming pool and related recreational facilities. The board handed down the following decision on March 28, 1960:

"On Application of Drabor Enterprises, 260 East Jericho Turnpike, Huntington Station, New York, for permission to extend depth of Business use and operate a place of amusement, property located in General Business and Res. B-1 zones at the east side of Larkfield Road 175 feet south of Clay Pitts Road, East Northport, New York.

"Application granted with the following provisions:

"1. No organized activity to which the general public will be invited is permitted.

"2. Applicant must provide and maintain on-site parking for all members at all times. At no time will parking on the public roads be permitted.

"3. The pool and any area of recreation in the area beyond 150 feet from Larkfield Road must be closed off at or before 9 p.m.

"4. All lights must be extinguished in the rear or pool area at or before 9 p.m., and the lights must at all times be shielded from the residences.

"5. The club building must be built entirely within the 150 feet area.

"6. A buffer zone between the residential area and the parking space must be established and shall be at least 20 feet wide along the easterly line of the property, and this buffer zone must have a fence to the extreme east in front of which there must be landscaping containing plants and evergreens.

"7. Subject to the approval of all regulatory bodies having jurisdiction."

Shortly thereafter, Drabor Enterprises erected, on the premises herein, a large outdoor swimming pool, cabanas, and a large clubhouse building within which there is a restaurant and bar. The clubhouse is located on the first 150 feet of the property.

The plaintiff, just as its predecessor, has operated this recreational complex on a membership basis and the swimming pool has been open from Memorial Day to Labor Day each year.

During the spring and summer of 1967, plaintiff investigated the possibility of erecting a plastic air-supported dome over the swimming pool so that it might be used on a year-round basis. The investigation not only proved the feasibility of this idea, but also the great need for such a facility in the area.

Birdair Structures, Inc., after careful inquiry, was engaged by the plaintiff to draw up plans for the air-supported dome.

Shortly thereafter, plaintiff met with a town councilman and the Building Inspector of the Town of Huntington. They suggested that plaintiff make a presentation of his plans to the members of the Town Board. This was done and the Town Board advised plaintiff to submit plans to the Engineering Department. Plans were submitted to the Engineering Department and numerous conferences were had with that department and with the Building Inspector. Many changes, ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.