Evening star., 1939-11-06
Protests Stables in
Residential Zones,
To the Editor of The Sta,

To the Editor of The Star:
AS the zoning regulations now stand,
Section III thereof gives express per-
mission for the erection of stables in
residential districts. The limitations i'm
posed upon such erection are inconse-
quential.
Paragraph of subsection (b) of Section
III OF the zonlng regulations permits the
erection in residential district as an
accessory building to a residence when
located on the same lot and not in
volvlng conduct of business on the
premises of "(b) a private stable not less
than o0 feet back from the front building
line of such lot and opening upon pub
lie alley
Note that the regulations do not pro-
VIDE for any notice and hearing. anv
opportunity for protest, do not establish
any minimum distances from neighbor-
ing dwellings, but merely require that
the stable be less than SO feet from the
front building line of the dwelling
1t is very simple to meet these require
ments. Hampshire Heights Citizens
Association had this experience:
One of the neighbors wished to keep
and did keep horse in his garage.
He was persuaded by delegation of the
neighbors to remove the animal. How
ever, had he wished to exercise his legal
rights, the use of garage for such
purpose would have been expressly con-
doned by the zoning regulations, since
If would
more than so feet back from the front
building line of the lot
The fact that there are very few stables
today increases rather than lessons the
actual damage done to those whose prop
erty is affected. AS result, gross dis
elimination in value against the property
of the person so affected is inevitable
Many people who would have no OBJ
lection to living next to a store, an
apartment house or row house would
not under any circumstances run the
risk of living next to a stable.
People purchasing in residential neigh
borhoods have relied upon the zoning re-
strictions as a guarantee that the char
acter of the neighborhood would be COM
patible with the establishment of the
home. Few citizens realize that there
still exists today the legal right to erect
the type of building which was outmoded
years ago, building whose erection
property and yet to which no minimum
distance requirements from the neigh
boring dwellings apply, and concerning
which no right of hearing, notice or op-
portunity for protest is given. High-class
residential neighborhoods are built up
on the basis legally or by common UNDER
standing that certain standards will be
observed.
1t seems contrary to the very spirit
and purpose of the Zoning regulations,
therefore, to permit in one property
owner an unqualified right to render SUBJ
stantially valueless for resale purposes
the property of others without any pro-
portionate benefit to himself or other
urgent necessity therefor It seems in
consistent that while at the same time
rigidly enforcing such minor restrictions
as height of buildings, percentage OF lot
area occupied to total lot area (the effect
of which is only to partially affect the
value of property the present zoning
regulations permit by granting the
right to erect stable, an unqualified
right to depreciate the value of resi-
Dental property. No correction of this
evil has been made because perhaps few
realized its existence. However, citizens,
nronertv ouners cjtizens' assnrta tiona
and other interested parties, In the inter.