This post was authored by Tyler Doan, Esq.
Petitioner owns real property on a short dead end roadway in the City of Ithaca abutting Summit Avenue. An adjacent property, that Summit Ave is on, has been owned by various entities during the relevant period. In 2017, after the then owner of the subject property blocked a portion of Summit Ave on the property in preparation for constructing an apartment complex there, the Petitioner commenced and an action contending, among other things, that it had a right of unobstructed access to Summit Ave because the roadway was either a public street…
Posted by: Patricia Salkin | June 30, 2023
NY Appellate Court Dismisses SEQRA and Consistency with LWRP and Zoning Ordinance Claims Finding the Matter Moot
Petitioners brought an Article 78 proceeding to annul the determination of the Erie Canal Harbor Development Corporation issuing a negative declaration pursuant to SEQRA with respect to a construction project and to annual the determination of the City of Buffalo that the project was consistent with the City’s Local Waterfront Revitalization Program and the City’s zoning ordinance. However, the petitioner did not move for preliminary injunctive relief to enjoin the construction from continuing pending the…
This post was authored by Sebastian Perez, JD
The question before the Court of Appeals of Georgia (the “Court”) was at what point a landowner had vested rights in real property where Plaintiff purchased the subject property (the “Property”) to develop 9,000 square foot lots when the county’s zoning code (the “Code”) allowed for such density at the time but was later amended to require larger sizes. After the county, where the Property was located, passed, and extended a moratorium on processing land disturbance permits, the Plaintiff’s application to develop the Property was returned due to the moratorium. Plaintiff sought…
This post was authored by Tyler Doan, Esq.
Petitioner appealed a decision of the ZBA town, town board, and related defendants challenging a dismissal by the ZBA of the challenge to the zoning enforcement officer’s determination that a proposed subsurface sewage-disposal system was a permitted nonresidential accessory use that could be located on a split lot (one zoned partly for residential and partly for commercial use). The town board, while the petition was pending, adopted a local law on the subject of subsurface systems on split lots that effectively codified the zoning officer’s determination. The petitioner amended their complaint also…
This post was authored by Robert Thomas, Esq. and originally appeared on the InverseCondemnation Blog and is reposted with permission. See, https://www.inversecondemnation.com/inversecondemnation/2023/05/ca6-legislative-conditions-are-subject-to-nexus-and-proportionality-requirements.html
The 6th Circuit Court of Appeals in Knight v. Metro. Gov’t of Nashville, No. 21-6179 (May 10, 2023) held that conditions imposed on every development — and not just ad hoc administratively-imposed conditions — must conform to the Nollan-Dolan-Koontz close nexus and rough proportionality standards.
The Sixth Circuit has added to the growing split in the lower courts about whether legislatively-imposed conditions on development which cover everyone are, as some courts characterize them, mere land use regulations subject…
Opening the Floodgates: Axon Enterprises, Inc. v. FTC and the Weakening of Public Power
Keenen McMurray
In November of 2022, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments on a pair of consolidated cases including Axon Enterprise, Inc. v. Federal Trade Commission[1] and Securities and Exchange Commissionv. Cochran.[2] These cases concern whether challenges to the adjudication processes of administrative agencies can properly be heard in a federal district court, without first going through the agencies’ respective processes.[3] This administrative agency adjudication process is established by the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”), which is a federal act that governs the procedures of administrative law.[4]…
This post was authored by Matthew Loescher, Esq.
Charlestown Township, a municipality in Chester County, enacted a zoning ordinance that permits outdoor, off-premises advertising signs in a particular district. A statewide regulation concerning roadside billboards promulgated by the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (“PennDOT”) had the practical effect of barring that use. The property owner Charlestown Outdoor, LLC appealed the decision of the township zoning board, which denied the property owner’s challenge to the validity of the township’s zoning ordinance that permitted the construction of billboards in the zoning district. The Court of Common Pleas, Chester County, affirmed the zoning board’s…
This post was authored by Matthew Loescher, Esq.
Appellants, Douglass Ebner, 2253 Cedar Point LLC, and 2243 Cedar Point LLC appealed the judgment of the Erie County Court of Common Pleas, which granted summary judgment in favor of appellee, the City of Sandusky, on Ebner’s counterclaims that Sandusky Ordinance Nos. 12-107 and 17-088 were invalidly enacted and were unconstitutional. The litigation at issue was initiated on October 31, 2017, when Ebner’s neighbor, Judith Kinzel, filed a complaint against Ebner seeking injunctive relief and damages. Specifically, Kinzel alleged that Ebner’s use of the properties for short-term rentals was in violation of…
