Development

|

Developer’s Taking Claims Survive Motion to Dismiss

WC Woodmere LLC v. Incorporated Village of Woodsburgh
2024 WL 4225562
U.S. Dist. Ct, E.D.N.Y.
(Ross, D.J.)

In landowner’s action against two Long Island villages alleging that rezoning violated federal and state law, the villages moved to dismiss the claims. The court granted the villages’ motions to dismiss equal protection, due process and some state law claims, but denied the motion to dismiss landowner’s taking claims.
In 2017, landowner purchased a former country club located on the border of three municipalities. The then-applicable zoning regulations would have permitted a development of 284 total single-family homes, 248 in Hempstead, 24 in Woodburgh, and 12 in Lawrence. Landowner filed an application for subdivision approval with the Nassau County Planning Commission, which served as the lead agency for the SEQRA process. Before landowner’s purchase, Hempstead had issued a temporary moratorium on development of golf course properties, a moratorium it extended six times. Later, in 2019 to 2020, the three municipalities entered into an agreement to rezone the property into a Coastal Conservation District, in which permissible development would be reduced from 248 lots to 41 in Hempstead, 24 to 18 in Woodsburgh, and 12 to zero in Lawrence. Landowner then challenged the rezoning on various grounds, but the court dismissed the action without prejudice as unripe. Landowner then applied to the villages of Lawrence and Woodsburgh for variances that would have permitted residential construction in areas where the challenged zoning would prohibit residential development. When the villages denied the applications, landowner appealed the denials. Both appeals were denied. Landowners then brought another action challenging the amendments.