Last year, the New York County Supreme Court heard an Article 78 challenge by Preserve Our Brooklyn Neighborhoods (“POBN”), a civic organization dedicated to maintaining the unique character and historical significance of the Fort Greene area of Brooklyn, New York. This lawsuit, which I discussed in a previous post, turned on whether a resolution passed by the New
Continue Reading First Department Affirms Dismissal of Constitutional Challenge to Zoning Resolution
Letters Exchanged Between Developer and Architectural Review Board Insufficient to Constitute Enforceable Settlement Agreement
In Matter of Pittsford Canalside Props., LLC v Village of Pittsford Zoning Bd. of Appeals, et al., the Fourth Department held that settlement correspondence between a development firm, Pittsford Canalside Properties, LLC (“PCP” or “Petitioner”), and the Village of Pittsford Architectural Preservation and Review Board (the “ARB”), was not an enforceable settlement agreement.
PCP owned property located within the
Continue Reading Letters Exchanged Between Developer and Architectural Review Board Insufficient to Constitute Enforceable Settlement Agreement
Second Department Reverses Dismissal of Article 78 Proceeding on Ripeness Grounds
A recent Second Department decision, Matter of Village of Kiryas Joel v County of Orange, et al., addresses the intriguing justiciability doctrine of ripeness, as applied to judicial review of municipal administrative action.
In 2007, Orange County (the “County”) acquired property known as Camp LaGuardia from the New York City Economic Development Corporation. Originally, the County’s plan was to
Continue Reading Second Department Reverses Dismissal of Article 78 Proceeding on Ripeness Grounds
Constitutional Challenges to Zoning Subject to Very High Standard
A recent Supreme Court decision, In the Matter of Preserve Our Brooklyn Neighborhoods v. City of New York, demonstrates the difficulty a litigant faces when challenging a zoning determination on constitutional grounds. The petitioners are “an incorporated association of community members” from the Fort Greene area of Brooklyn (the “Petitioners”), who oppose proposed development in their community in the
Continue Reading Constitutional Challenges to Zoning Subject to Very High Standard
Village Board’s Rejection of Application to Develop Single-Family Residence in Agricultural Overlay District Upheld
In Matter of Sagaponack Ventures, LLC v Bd. of Trustees of the Vil. of Sagaponack, the Second Department upheld the denial of an Article 78 proceeding seeking to vacate and annul a determination of the Board of Trustees of the Village of Sagaponack (the “Board”). In its determination, the Board denied the site plan application submitted by Sagaponack Ventures,
Continue Reading Village Board’s Rejection of Application to Develop Single-Family Residence in Agricultural Overlay District Upheld
Municipal Moratoriums, The Suffolk County Planning Commission and The Sag Harbor and Patchogue Experience
In recent months, the Village of Sag Harbor and the Village of Patchogue enacted moratoriums aimed at halting large-scale residential development, and in Patchogue’s case, including multi-family residential development. Both Villages learned that enacting moratoriums is not only subject to referral to the Suffolk County Planning Commission (“SCPC”) pursuant to General Municipal Law § 239-m but also, moratoriums can be