Town of LaGrange v. Giovenetti Enterprises, Inc.

• Decision Date: 14 October 1986
• Citation: Town of LaGrange v. Giovenetti Enterprises, Inc., 507 N.Y.S.2d 54, 123 A.D.2d 688 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)
• Parties: TOWN OF LaGRANGE, Respondent-Appellant, v. GIOVENETTI ENTERPRISES, INC., et al., Appellants-Respondents.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Page 54

507 N.Y.S.2d 54

123 A.D.2d 688

TOWN OF LaGRANGE, Respondent-Appellant, v. GIOVENETTI ENTERPRISES, INC., et al., Appellants-Respondents.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division Second Department.

Oct. 14, 1986.

Crane, Wolfson, Roberts & Greller, Poughkeepsie (William G. Crane and Ronald Sinzheimer, of counsel), for appellants-respondents.

Van DeWater and Van DeWater, Poughkeepsie (Ronald C. Blass, Jr., of counsel), for respondent-appellant.

Before THOMPSON, J.P., and WEINSTEIN, RUBIN and SPATT, JJ.

MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.

In an action, inter alia, to enjoin the defendants from storing or transferring refuse on their property, the defendants appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Beisner, J.), dated June 2, 1986, as, after a nonjury trial, dismissed their counterclaims and granted the plaintiff's demand for a permanent injunction against them, and the plaintiff cross-appeals from so much of the same judgment as dismissed its second cause of action.

ORDERED that the order and judgment is modified, on the law, by deleting the provision thereof which dismissed the plaintiff's second cause of action, and substituting therefor a provision by granting the plaintiff judgment on its second cause of action. As so modified, the order and judgment is affirmed, with costs to the plaintiff, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Dutchess County, for the entry of an appropriate amended judgment enjoining the defendants from using the premises in question for the storage of garbage-filled trucks and the transfer of garbage from truck to truck.

The trial court properly dismissed the defendants' challenge to the relevant statutes. The exclusion of commercial solid waste transfer stations from the schedule of permitted uses contained in the town's zoning ordinance does amount to a complete prohibition. However, such a prohibition is not per se unreasonable; the ordinance must be scrutinized to determine whether it is "clearly arbitrary and unreasonable, having no substantial relation to the public health, safety, morals, or general welfare" (see, Berenson v. Town of New Castle, 38 N.Y.2d 102, 107, 378 N.Y.S.2d 672, 341 N.E.2d 236). To the extent that this ordinance prohibits transfer stations, it is sufficiently related to the town's concerns with the effect that garbage, rubbish and refuse kept, even temporarily, on private lands within the town would have on the public health, safety and welfare (see, Local Laws, 1980, No. 3 of Town of LaGrange). Moreover, it cannot be maintained that the prohibition may have a disproportionate impact on the neighboring regional area (see, Berenson v. Town of New Castle, supra ). The presence or absence of a commercial transfer station can only affect the expense incurred by the commercial hauler in taking refuse longer distances from the town of...