Gabe Realty Corp. v. City of White Plains Urban Renewal Agency

• Decision Date: 30 June 2021
• Docket Number: 2020–00407
• Citation: 151 N.Y.S.3d 143,195 A.D.3d 1020
• Parties: In the Matter of GABE REALTY CORP., et al., petitioners, v. CITY OF WHITE PLAINS URBAN RENEWAL AGENCY, respondent.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

195 A.D.3d 1020
151 N.Y.S.3d 143

In the Matter of GABE REALTY CORP., et al., petitioners,
v.
CITY OF WHITE PLAINS URBAN RENEWAL AGENCY, respondent.

2020–00407

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

Argued—April 5, 2021
June 30, 2021

151 N.Y.S.3d 145

Watkins & Watkins, LLP, White Plains, N.Y. (John E. Watkins, Jr., and Liane V. Watkins of counsel), for petitioners.

Harris Beach PLLC, White Plains, N.Y. (Christopher Feldman and Shawn M. Griffin of counsel), for respondent.

REINALDO E. RIVERA, J.P., BETSY BARROS, LINDA CHRISTOPHER, PAUL WOOTEN, JJ.

DECISION & JUDGMENT

195 A.D.3d 1020

Proceeding, inter alia, pursuant to EDPL 207 to review a determination of the City of White Plains Urban Renewal Agency dated December 5, 2019, made after a public hearing, authorizing the taking of certain real property by eminent domain.

ADJUDGED that the petition is granted, on the law, with costs, and the determination of the City of White Plains Urban Renewal Agency dated December 5, 2019, is annulled.

195 A.D.3d 1021

After a hearing, the City of White Plains Urban Renewal Agency (hereinafter the agency) adopted resolutions approving the acquisition of certain real property via condemnation and issuing a negative declaration pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act (ECL art 8; hereinafter SEQRA). The parcels to be condemned are included within a designated urban renewal area. The petitioners, owners of some of the parcels within the area to be condemned, commenced this proceeding, inter alia, pursuant to EDPL 207 seeking review of the agency's determination to acquire their properties by eminent domain.

Pursuant to EDPL 207(A) and (B), this Court has exclusive jurisdiction over challenges to the proposed exercise of the power of condemnation. Since " ‘[t]he Constitution accords government broad power to take and clear substandard and insanitary areas for redevelopment [and i]n so doing ... commensurately deprives the Judiciary of grounds to interfere with the exercise’ " ( Matter of Kaur v. New York State Urban Dev. Corp., 15 N.Y.3d 235, 253, 907 N.Y.S.2d 122, 933 N.E.2d 721, quoting Matter of Goldstein v. New York State Urban Dev. Corp., 13 N.Y.3d 511, 527, 893 N.Y.S.2d 472, 921 N.E.2d 164 ), a court "may only substitute its own judgment for that of the legislative body authorizing the project when such judgment is irrational or baseless" ( Matter of Kaur v. New York State Urban Dev. Corp., 15 N.Y.3d at 254, 907 N.Y.S.2d 122, 933 N.E.2d 721 ). Accordingly, a party challenging a proposed condemnation "has the burden of establishing that the determination does not rationally relate to a conceivable public purpose" ( Matter of Goldstein v. New York State Urban Dev. Corp., 64 A.D.3d 168, 181, 879 N.Y.S.2d 524, affd 13 N.Y.3d 511, 893 N.Y.S.2d 472, 921 N.E.2d 164 ; see Matter of Jackson v. New York State Urban Dev. Corp., 67 N.Y.2d 400, 425, 503 N.Y.S.2d 298, 494 N.E.2d 429 ; Matter of River St. Realty Corp. v. City of New Rochelle, 181 A.D.3d 676, 678, 121 N.Y.S.3d 107 ; Matter of City of New York v. Yonkers Indus. Dev. Agency, 170 A.D.3d 1003, 1004, 97 N.Y.S.3d 123 ).

A condemning authority which has determined to take real property via

151 N.Y.S.3d 146

eminent domain must, among other things, render findings regarding the project, including, its (1) public use, benefit, or purpose; (2) approximate location; (3) general effect on the environment and nearby residents; and (4) such other factors as the condemnor considers relevant (see EDPL 204[B] ; Matter of National Fuel Gas Supply Corp. v. Schueckler, 35 N.Y.3d 297, 303, 127 N.Y.S.3d 427, 150 N.E.3d 1192 ). This requirement is intended to serve the purpose of EDPL article 2, which is " ‘to [e]nsure that [a condemnor] does not acquire property without having made a reasoned determination that the condemnation will serve a valid public purpose’ " (

195 A.D.3d 1022

Matter of National Fuel Gas Supply Corp. v. Schueckler, 35 N.Y.3d at 303, 127 N.Y.S.3d 427, 150 N.E.3d 1192, quoting Matter of Jackson v. New York State Urban Dev. Corp., 67 N.Y.2d at 417–418, 503 N.Y.S.2d 298, 494 N.E.2d 429 ; see Matter of River St. Realty Corp. v. City of New Rochelle, 181 A.D.3d at 677, 121 N.Y.S.3d 107 ).

Where a condemnee challenges an agency's determination to condemn real property, "[j]udicial review is limited to whether (1) the proceeding conformed with the...