Maloco Realty Corp. v. Town of Brookhaven Planning Board

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Maloco Realty Corp. v. Town of Brookhaven Planning Board

34 A.D.2d 999, 312 N.Y.S.2d 429, 1970 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4431

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJune 22, 1970

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 34 A.D.2d 999 (Maloco Realty Corp. v. Town of Brookhaven Planning Board) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Maloco Realty Corp. v. Town of Brookhaven Planning Board, 34 A.D.2d 999, 312 N.Y.S.2d 429, 1970 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4431 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1970).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding pursuant to article 78 of the CPLR to review respondent’s determination approving petitioner’s application for a certain land subdivision, but conditioning the approval upon petitioner’s paying a “drainage contribution” ($7,000, on the basis of about $1,200 per acre), petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, entered October 22, 1968, which vacated the determination but remanded the matter to respondent for reconsideration. Judgment affirmed, without costs. In our opinion, in the special circumstances of this case, the “drainage contribution ” demanded does not qualify as an “ appropriate ” condition for waiving the drainage requirements of the subdivision regulations (Town Law, § 277, subd. 3), in that the stipulated sum does not represent a uniform area rate applicable to every development and keyed to the actual and contemplated expenditures by the municipality for the purpose of providing proper drainage therein (cf. Jenad, Inc. v. Village of Scarsdale, 18 N Y 2d 78; Billings Props. v. Yellowstone County, 144 Mont. 25; Jordan v. Menomonee Falls, 28 Wis. 2d 608, app. dsmd. 385 U. S. 4). Christ, P. J., Rabin, Hopkins, Brennan and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

In a proceeding pursuant to article 78 of the CPLR to review respondent’s determination approving petitioner’s application for a certain land subdivision, but conditioning the approval upon petitioner’s paying a “drainage contribution” ($7,000, on the basis of about $1,200 per acre), petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, entered October 22, 1968, which vacated the determination but remanded the matter to respondent for reconsideration. Judgment affirmed, without costs. In our opinion, in the special circumstances of this case, the “drainage contribution ” demanded does not qualify as an “ appropriate ” condition for waiving the drainage requirements of the subdivision regulations (Town Law, § 277, subd. 3), in that the stipulated sum does not represent a uniform area rate applicable to every development and keyed to the actual and contemplated expenditures by the municipality for the purpose of providing proper drainage therein (cf. Jenad, Inc. v. Village of Scarsdale, 18 N Y 2d 78; Billings Props. v. Yellowstone County, 144 Mont. 25; Jordan v. Menomonee Falls, 28 Wis. 2d 608, app. dsmd. 385 U. S. 4). Christ, P. J., Rabin, Hopkins, Brennan and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

34 A.D.2d 999, 312 N.Y.S.2d 429, 1970 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4431, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/maloco-realty-corp-v-town-of-brookhaven-planning-board-nyappdiv-1970.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack