In Matter of Bernstein v Putnam Val. Zoning Bd. of Appeals, property owners sought to construct a hot tub on their residential property, located in a protected area known as a wetland buffer. The Wetlands Inspector for the Town of Putnam Valley (the “Town”) granted the owners a permit waiver, and shortly thereafter, the Town’s Zoning Board of Appeals
Continue Reading Second Department Upholds Town’s Determination Allowing Property Owners to Build Hot Tub in Wetland Buffer
Second Department Affirms Article 78 Reversal of Village Zoning Board Determination
Petitioner, Claude Simon (“Petitioner”), owns approximately 2.25 acres of property in the Village of Upper Nyack (the “Village”), which he sought to subdivide into two separate lots. The first lot would contain the existing dwelling and other existing improvements. The vacant second lot would be improved with a single-family dwelling. However, the Village advised Petitioner that he would need to
Continue Reading Second Department Affirms Article 78 Reversal of Village Zoning Board Determination
Landowner’s Intent to Mine Property Sufficient to Establish Nonconforming Use
In a recent decision, Matter of Red Wing Properties, Inc. v. Town of Rhinebeck, et al., the Second Department held that a landowner’s intent to continue using its property for mining operations established a valid pre-existing nonconforming use.
Red Wing Properties, Inc. (“Petitioner”) owns roughly 241 acres of property located with the Town of Rhinebeck (the “Town”). For several
Continue Reading Landowner’s Intent to Mine Property Sufficient to Establish Nonconforming Use
How Executive Order 202.8’s 30-Day “Tolling” Affects Statutes of Limitations in the Article 78 Context
Recent executive and administrative orders carrying-out COVID-19 mitigation and public safety measures will impact litigation within the Article 78 context, specifically the deadlines for commencing a proceeding to challenge municipal determinations. This impact is significant given the short statutes of limitations periods typical to land use litigation. Governor Andrew Cuomo’s Executive Order 202.8 (“Executive Order“) “temporarily suspends or
Continue Reading How Executive Order 202.8’s 30-Day “Tolling” Affects Statutes of Limitations in the Article 78 Context
Court Upholds Zoning Board’s Denial of Gas Station’s Area Variance Application
In Matter of Magid Setauket Assoc., LLC v The Town of Brookhaven Bd. of Zoning Appeals, the petitioners were the owner and the operator (“Petitioners”) of a Shell gas station located in the Old Setauket Historic District (the “Historic District”) Transition Zone, in the Town of Brookhaven (the “Town”). Petitioners applied for an area variance to permit them to
Continue Reading Court Upholds Zoning Board’s Denial of Gas Station’s Area Variance Application
Unique Procedural Rule Requires Transfer of Article 78 Proceeding to Appellate Division
A recent Second Department decision, Matter of Reddock v New York State Dept. of Envtl. Conservation, highlights a unique procedural quirk involving Article 78 proceedings where the challenge is based upon “substantial evidence”.
The petitioners in Reddock own a 2.07-acre parcel of property in the Town of Smithtown adjacent to the Nissequogue River (the “Property”) and within the Nissequogue
Continue Reading Unique Procedural Rule Requires Transfer of Article 78 Proceeding to Appellate Division
Doctrine of Laches Bars Neighbor’s Challenge to Development
A recent Second Department decision applying the doctrine of laches highlights the importance of taking prompt action against a property owner who may be acting in violation of a zoning or building code.
The dispute in Kverel v. Silverman arose when the defendant contracted to purchase an undeveloped parcel of land (the “Premises”) in the Town of Southampton (the “Town”)
Continue Reading Doctrine of Laches Bars Neighbor’s Challenge to Development
Time-Frames for Prosecuting an Article 78 Challenge May Be Shorter Than You Think
In Rimler v. City of New York, 2019 N.Y. Slip Op. 03599 (2d Dept, May 8, 2019), which involved a challenge to the issuance of a negative declaration, the Appellate Division, Second Department, affirmed a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, granting respondents’ motion to dismiss the petition and denying the petitioners’ cross-motion to extend the time
Continue Reading Time-Frames for Prosecuting an Article 78 Challenge May Be Shorter Than You Think