Development

In neighbors' article 78 proceeding to annul the town board's grant of a variance, both parties appealed from Supreme Court's partial grant of the petition. The Appellate Division reserved decision and remitted to the board for further proceedings, holding that the town board had not adequately produced findings of fact to support its grant of the variance.

When landowners bought their parcel, which fronted on Lake Cayuga, the parcel was out of compliance with the town's minimum lot size and setback requirements, but was grandfathered as a nonconforming use. Upon purchase, landowners made a number of changes without obtaining a building permit, and then sought a variance from the town's building permit requirement. Over the objection of neighbors, a divided town board granted the variance, and neighbors brought this article 78 proceeding challenging the grant. Supreme Court denied the petition to the extent it claimed that landowner had enlarged a previous non-conforming use, but granted the petition to the extent of invalidating the building permit variance. Both parties appealed, and the Appellate Division remanded to the board to set forth the factual basis for its determination. The Town Board submitted an unsworn document signed by its attorney purporting to constitute findings of fact.