Bergstol v. Town of Monroe
| Decision Date | 07 February 2005 |
| Docket Number | 2003-08470. |
| Citation | 2005 NY Slip Op 00962,790 N.Y.S.2d 460,15 A.D.3d 324 |
| Parties | KENNETH BERGSTOL, Appellant, v. TOWN OF MONROE, Respondent. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Orange County, for the entry of a judgment declaring that Local Law No. 1 (2002) of the Town of Monroe is valid and is not in violation of Town Law § 272-a (11).
In 1998 the Town of Monroe adopted a comprehensive "Master Plan" which, among other things, provided that land meeting certain criteria, which the plaintiff's property allegedly satisfied, would be compatible with multiple-residence use. In 2002 the Town adopted Local Law No. 1, which excluded "multiple dwelling groups" from the zoning district where the plaintiff's property is located. The plaintiff claims, in this declaratory judgment action, that Local Law No. 1 (2002) of the Town of Monroe violates Town Law § 272-a (11) because it is inconsistent with the provisions of the Town's 1998 comprehensive plan.
Town Law § 272-a (11) provides that where, as here, a town has adopted a formal comprehensive plan, the town's zoning decisions must be consistent with that plan. Compliance with the statutory requirement is measured, however, in light of the long-standing principle that one who challenges such a legislative act bears a heavy burden (see Matter of Town of Bedford v Village of Mount Kisco, 33 NY2d 178, 186 [1973]). "`If the validity of the legislative classification for zoning purposes be fairly debatable, the legislative judgment must be allowed to control'" (Shepard v Village of Skaneateles, 300 NY 115, 118 [1949], quoting Village of Euclid v Ambler Realty Co., 272 US 365, 388 [1926]; see De Sena v Gulde, 24 AD2d 165, 169 [1965]). Thus, where the plaintiff fails to establish a clear conflict with the comprehensive plan, the zoning classification must be upheld (see Taylor v Incorporated Vil. of Head of Harbor, 104 AD2d 642, 644-645 [1984]; Blumberg v City of Yonkers, 41 AD2d 300, 306-308 [1973]).
The plaintiff did not satisfy his burden here. Although the Town's comprehensive plan provides that multiple residences may be permitted in certain locations within the Town, including the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Bonacker Prop., LLC v. Vill. of E. Hampton Bd. of Trs.
...854 N.Y.S.2d 524 ; see Matter of Hart v. Town Bd. of Town of Huntington, 114 A.D.3d at 683, 980 N.Y.S.2d 128 ; Bergstol v. Town of Monroe, 15 A.D.3d 324, 325, 790 N.Y.S.2d 460 ).The petitioners failed to establish that any of the challenged amendments are inconsistent with the comprehensive......
-
Restuccio v. City of Oswego, Common Council of City of Oswego, Honorable Thomas W. Gillen, Oswego, LLC
...in light of the long-standing principle that one who challenges such a legislative act bears a heavy burden” (Bergstol v. Town of Monroe, 15 A.D.3d 324, 325, 790 N.Y.S.2d 460, lv. denied5 N.Y.3d 701, 799 N.Y.S.2d 772, 832 N.E.2d 1188, citing Matter of Town of Bedford v. Village of Mount Kis......
-
Frontier Stone, LLC v. Town of Shelby
...16 N.Y.3d 711, 2011 WL 1643291 [2011] ; see Restuccio, 114 A.D.3d at 1191–1192, 979 N.Y.S.2d 749 ; Bergstol v. Town of Monroe, 15 A.D.3d 324, 325, 790 N.Y.S.2d 460 [2d Dept. 2005], lv denied 5 N.Y.3d 701, 799 N.Y.S.2d 772, 832 N.E.2d 1188 [2005] ). Here, the 2007 Law, which the parties agre......
-
Ferraro v. Town Bd. of Town of Amherst
...fail[ ] to establish a clear conflict with the comprehensive plan, the zoning classification must be upheld" ( Bergstol v. Town of Monroe, 15 A.D.3d 324, 325, 790 N.Y.S.2d 460, lv. denied 5 N.Y.3d 701, 799 N.Y.S.2d 772, 832 N.E.2d 1188 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Matter of Meteo......