Petitioner commenced a proceeding seeking to annul the decision of respondent Village of Fayetteville Board of Trustees to enact Local Law No. 1 of 2015, which amended the zoning district classification of two parcels following the issuance of a negative declaration of environmental significance under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, but provided that the amendment would “take effect only after approval by Onondaga County Department of Transportation and final site plan approval by the Village of Fayetteville Planning Board has been granted.” Respondent Village of Fayetteville and the Board of Trustees filed a joint motion seeking the dismissal of the petition. The Supreme Court granted the motion, concluding that the petitioner’s proceeding was “premature” and that the Board of Trustee’s action under SEQRA was “not ripe for judicial review.”
On appeal, the court found that the Board of Trustees’ simultaneous issuance of a negative declaration and adoption of the zoning amendment rendered petitioner’s challenges to the Board of Trustees’ action ripe for review. Furthermore, the fact that the zoning amendment “was conditioned upon successful reviews and approvals by other agencies did not alter the fact that it became final and binding as to petitioner on the date it was filed.” Moreover, although “rezoning is an ‘action’ subject to SEQRA”, and the future site plan approval process could also constitute an action under SEQRA, the court determined that the fact that petitioner might be aggrieved by a future SEQRA action did not affect the judicial ripeness of the SEQRA challenge relating to a prior action. Accordingly, the court found that when the Board of Trustees issued the negative declaration and amended the zoning laws, the Board of Trustees’ “decision-making process with respect to those issues was complete and petitioner became aggrieved by the SEQRA violation. As such, the court reversed the judgment, and remitted the matter to Supreme Court.
Cor Route 5 Company LLC v Village of Fayetteville, 2017 WL 460613 (NYAD 4 Dept. 2/3/2017)
Posted by: Patricia Salkin | February 11, 2017
NY Appellate Court Finds Board of Trustee’s Action under SEQRA and Adoption of Zoning Amendment was Ripe for Judicial Review
Categories
- Access to Government
- Accessory Uses
- ADA
- Adequate Public Facilities Ordinances
- Adirondacks
- Adult Entertainment Facilities
- Aesthetics
- Affordable Housing
- Aging
- Agricultural Uses
- Airports
- Alcohol Sales
- Alienation of parkland
- Amending Zoning
- Annexation
- Architectural Review Board
- Authority to Zone
- Big Box/Formula Retail
- Book Reviews
- Brownfields
- Building Codes
- Cemeteries
- Climate Change
- Collateral Estoppel
- Comprehensive Plan
- Condemnation/Eminent Domain
- Conditions on Approval
- Conservation Easements
- Constructive Approval
- Contract Zoning
- Current Caselaw
- Current Caselaw – New York
- Density Bonus
- Development Agreements
- Development Rights Agreements
- Discrimination
- Drones
- Dual Zone Parcel
- Due Process
- Easements
- Educational Use
- Endangered Species
- Energy
- Enforcement
- Environmental Justice
- Environmental Review
- Equal Protection
- Equitable Estoppel
- Ethics
- Exactions
- Exclusionary Zoning
- Exemption from Zoning
- Extraterritorial Jurisdiction
- Fair Housing Act Amendments
- Family
- Federal Preemption
- Fees
- FHA
- Financing
- first amendment
- Floating Zones
- Flood Control
- FOIL
- Food Trucks
- Formula Retail
- Fourth Amendment
- Fracking
- GIS
- Growth Management
- Hearings
- Highways and Roads
- Historic Preservation
- Home Occupations
- Homeland Security
- Host Community Agreements
- Hours of Operation
- Housing
- Immunity
- Impact Fees
- Incentive Zoning
- Intergovernmental Conflicts
- inverse condemnation
- Junkyards
- Laches
- Marcellus Shale Gas Drilling
- Mediation
- Medical Marijuana
- Mining
- Mobile Homes
- moratoria
- New Legislation
- Non-Conforming Uses
- Notice
- Nuisance
- Oceans
- official map
- Overlay Zone
- Paper Streets
- Pine Barrens
- Planned Development Districts
- Players in the Land Use Game
- Preemption
- Procedural Issues
- Certiorari
- Consent Decree
- Declaratory Relief
- Estoppel
- Final Decisions
- Findings
- Injunctive Relief
- Intervention
- Judicial Abstention
- Jurisdiction
- Legislative vs Adjudicatory
- Mandamus
- Mootness
- Necessary Parties
- Notice of Decision
- Prior Precedent
- Referral Requirements
- Res Judicata
- Rooker-Feldman Doctrine
- Time of Application Rule
- Property Rights
- Public Trust Doctrine
- Purchase of Development Rights
- qualified immunity
- Redevelopment
- Referenda
- Regional Planning
- Religious Uses – Non-RLUIPA
- Remedies
- Residency Restrictions
- Restrictive Covenants
- Rezoning
- Ripeness
- RLUIPA
- Second Amendment
- Section 1983 Liability
- Senior Housing
- Setback Requirement
- Short Term Rentals
- sign
- Signs
- Site Plan Review
- SLAPP Suits
- Smart Growth
- solar energy
- Special Facts Exception
- Special Use/Exception
- Spot Zoning
- Standing
- Statewide Planning
- Statute of Limitations
- Straddled Parcels
- Student Housing
- Subdivision Regulation
- Takings
- tatoo parlors
- Transfer of Development Rights
- Uncategorized
- Urbanism
- Utilities
- Variances
- Various Uses
- Vested Rights
- Waivers
- Wetlands
- Wind Development
- Wireless Communications
- Younger Abstention Doctrine
- Zoning – Interpretation
- Zoning Administration
- Zoning Boards of Appeal
- Zoning Map
- Zoning-Adopting/Amending

Leave a Reply