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
A recent case from the Appellate Division, Second Department, addresses one of our favorite topics, standing. It is a cautionary tale about how not to establish standing.
Tilcon New York, Inc. v Town of New Windsor involved a hybrid proceeding in which the plaintiff/petitioner asserted nine separate causes of action. The appellate court determined that
In Matter of HV Donuts, LLC v. Town of LaGrange Zoning Board of Appeals, the Second Department recently held that a property owner’s nonconforming use rights continue despite a temporary business interruption caused by a fuel truck accident and gasoline spill.
The property owner, Leemilt’s Petroleum, Inc. (the “Owner”), leased the subject property (the
In 1999, the Greenport Group, LLP (“Greenport Group”) acquired a 31 acre parcel of land located on the east side of Chapel Lane and the north side of the Main Road in Greenport in the Town of Southold. The southerly portion of the property was zoned “Limited Business” and the northerly portion was zoned “Hamlet
In a decision dated October 30, 2018, Supreme Court Judge Joseph Pastoressa remanded a decision made by the Southampton Village Architectural and Historic Board (BARHP) for further consideration. Manger et al. v. Board of Architectural Review and Historic Review of the Village of Southampton.
The property owner in Manger applied to the BARHP
The Appellate Division, Second Department, issued a decision on October 10, 2018, which rejected a town’s attempt to saddle an applicant with over $17,000 in consulting fees supposedly incurred by the town in reviewing special use permit and area variance applications for an antenna tower to be used by an amateur radio (a/k/a ham radio)
New York State Town Law § 277(9) authorizes a town Planning Board to require a developer to provide a performance bond or other security covering the cost of installation of subdivision infrastructure and improvements in case the developer fails to finish the required work. Specifically, Town Law §277(9) states: “[a]s an alternative to the installation
Following the adoption of a moratorium on development along Port Washington’s waterfront, North Hempstead Town officials have proposed new zoning regulations designed to preserve public access and prevent excess building in Port Washington’s Waterfront Business (“B-W”) District. The Town’s B-W District encompasses approximately 10 acres adjacent to Manhasset Bay, and runs along the west side
General Municipal Law §239-m requires that before taking action on a land use application, a municipal agency like a Zoning Board of Appeals or Planning Board must refer the application to a county or regional planning commission for its recommendation. This referral and receipt of comments and recommendations from the planning commission is no longer
It turns out, according to the Supreme Court, Orange County, that the standards for review of municipal contracts are noticeably less stringent for New York Village Boards than for Town Boards. Village Boards may approve a contract in principal, allowing the Mayor some room for further negotiation and language changes. Town Boards must review and