Petitioners owned two adjacent parcels of real property located in the general business zoning district of the Village of Monroe. In early 2012, the petitioners entered into a contract to sell the parcels to Goddard Development Partners IV, LLC, which Goddard intended to use the parcels for tire sales and automotive repair services. The Village’s Zoning Board of Appeals denied Goddard’s application for an interpretation of the zoning provisions of the Code of the Village of Monroe that the proposed use was a use permitted as of right. The ZBA alternatively determined that the proposed use of the properties for tire sales was instead a conditional use, requiring a conditional use permit and site plan approval. The Zoning Board of Appeals of the Village of Monroe appealed from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Orange County, which annulled the determination, and directed the Building Inspector of the Village of Monroe to deem the proposed use to be a permitted use.
Here, under the Zoning Code, uses permitted as of right and conditional uses were set forth in two zoning schedules. The permitted uses enumerated in column A of the Table of Use Requirements of Zoning Schedule I–F included, “retail sales” and “repair service, including automotive”. However, column C listed “tire sales and service” among the conditional uses. Section 200–3 of the Code of the Village of Monroe provided that “in the event of conflict in the terminology of any section or part thereof of this chapter, the more restrictive provisions shall control.” Accordingly, the ZBA’s determination that the proposed use of the properties for tire sales was a conditional use was confirmed.
Robert E. Hayell Revocable Trust v Zoning Board of Appeals of Village of Monroe, 2015 WL 1810220 (NYAD 2 Dept. 4/22/2015)
The opinion can be accessed at: http://www.courts.state.ny.us/reporter/3dseries/2015/2015_03369.htm