Development

In developer's article 78 proceeding and declaratory judgment action challenging the town board's failure to consent to a development application and recodification of the town code to eliminate planned unit development (PUD) zoning, the town board appealed from Supreme Court's grant of most of the petition. The Appellate Division modified to deny attorney's fees to developer, but otherwise affirmed, holding that the passage of time without final approval of the project did not cause zoning to revert to a prior classification.

In 2004, a prior developer submitted sketch plans to the town planning board for a patio home community on an 87-acre parcel. The project required rezoning from Residential Agricultural 5 Acres (RA-5) to PUD. A majority of the town code voted in favor of the rezoning but the town board mistakenly concluded that a supermajority was required. When the board deemed the project disapproved, prior developer brought an article 78 proceeding and Supreme Court corrected the error. After the town board rezoned the project PUD, the town, in 2006, entered into a sewer maintenance agreement with a neighboring town which would connect the project to the neighboring town's sewer system. The planning board then granted final approval to phase one of the project, subject to a proviso that prior developer's failure to abide by certain conditions would cause final approval to expire. Four years later, prior developer announced that it would not proceed on the project because it was not economically feasible.