North Fork Motel, Inc. v. Grigonis
| Decision Date | 25 April 1983 |
| Citation | 461 N.Y.S.2d 414,93 A.D.2d 883 |
| Parties | NORTH FORK MOTEL, INC., Respondent, v. Charles GRIGONIS, Jr., et al., constituting the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Southold et al., Appellants. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Smith, Finkelstein, Lundberg, Crimmins & Yakaboski, Riverhead (Frank A. Isler, Riverhead, of counsel), for appellants.
Esseks, Hefter, Cuddy & Angel, Riverhead (Stephen R. Angel, Riverhead, of counsel), for respondent.
Before MANGANO, J.P., and GIBBONS, BRACKEN and NIEHOFF, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
In a CPLR article 78 proceeding, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, entered July 1, 1982, which annulled determinations of building inspectors George H. Fisher and Edward F. Hinderman, dated February 13, 1980 and December 22, 1980, respectively, and a determination of the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Southold, dated June 25, 1981, which denied petitioner's applications for permission to change the form of ownership of certain premises.
Judgment affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
Zoning ordinances cannot be employed by a municipality to exclude condominiums or discriminate against the condominium form of ownership, for it is use rather than form of ownership that is the proper concern and focus of zoning and planning regulations (see Town Law, § 261; Maplewood Vil. Tenants Assn. v. Maplewood Vil., 116 N.J.Super. 372, 282 A.2d 428; Bridge Park Co. v. Borough of Highland Park, 113 N.J.Super. 219, 273 A.2d 397). Nor does the mere change in the type of ownership result in the destruction of a valid existing nonconforming use (see City of Miami Beach v. Arlen King Cole Condominium Assn., 302 So.2d 777 [Fla.]; Graham Court Assoc. v. Town Council of Town of Chapel Hill, 53 N.C.App. 543, 281 S.E.2d 418). Accordingly, Special Term correctly concluded that the conversion of ownership of the subject property from a corporate form to a condominium form is not violative of the zoning ordinance of the Town of Southold, provided the property's present use as a motel remains unchanged.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Coalition Against Columbus Ctr. v. City of New York
...non-conforming use are not affected by a change in ownership of the structure, ZR § 52-31; see e.g., North Fork Motel, Inc. v. Grigonis, 93 A.D.2d 883, 461 N.Y.S.2d 414, 415 (2d Dep't.1983); nor does the change from self-park to valet parking appear to be of significance in this zoning sche......
-
FGL & L Property Corp. v. City of Rye
...406, affg. 33 A.D.2d 923, 307 N.Y.S.2d 603; Allen v. Town of N. Hempstead, 103 A.D.2d 144, 146, 478 N.Y.S.2d 919; North Fork Motel v. Grigonis, 93 A.D.2d 883, 461 N.Y.S.2d 414; see, Matter of Park W. Vil. Assoc. v. Abrams, 65 N.Y.2d 716, 492 N.Y.S.2d 27, 481 N.E.2d 567). Most of the out-of-......
-
FGL & L Property Corp. v. City of Rye
...of Weinrib v. Weisler, 33 A.D.2d 923, 307 N.Y.S.2d 603, affd. 27 N.Y.2d 592, 313 N.Y.S.2d 407, 261 N.E.2d 406; North Fork Motel v. Grigonis, 93 A.D.2d 883, 461 N.Y.S.2d 414; Allen v. Town of North Hempstead, 103 A.D.2d 144, 478 N.Y.S.2d The instant ordinance, which purports to direct how th......
-
Amdur v. Village of Quogue
...virtue of the fact that it contains four condominium units, each under separate ownership, is without merit (see, North Fork Motel v. Grigonis, 93 A.D.2d 883, 461 N.Y.S.2d 414). ...