Matter of County of Rockland v. Town of Clarkstown

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Matter of County of Rockland v. Town of Clarkstown

128 A.D.3d 959, 9 N.Y.S.3d 634

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

DecidedMay 20, 2015

Docket2013-06216

StatusPublished

This text of 128 A.D.3d 959 (Matter of County of Rockland v. Town of Clarkstown) 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

Matter of County of Rockland v. Town of Clarkstown, 128 A.D.3d 959, 9 N.Y.S.3d 634 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

In a hybrid proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, inter alia, to annul Resolution No. 442-2012 of the respondent/defendant Town Board of the Town of Clarkstown, and action for declaratory relief, the petitioners/plaintiffs appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Walsh II, J.), dated May 1, 2013, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

*960 Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

In Resolution No. 229-2012, the Town Board (hereinafter the Town Board) of the Town of Clarkstown (hereinafter, together with the Town Board, the Town) authorized the installation of a temporary barrier on Samuel Road and directed the Town Police Department to conduct traffic studies to determine the effect of the barrier on local traffic. Therefore, the Town was not required to first undertake a review under the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act (hereinafter SEQRA) before authorizing the installation of the temporary barrier (see 6 NYCRR 617.5 [c] [21]; 617.3 [a]; Matter of County of Rockland v Town of Clarkstown, 128 AD3d 957 [2015] [decided herewith]). Accordingly, contrary to the appellants’ contention, the Supreme Court properly declined to annul the Town Board’s approval of Resolution No. 442-2012, which included a negative declaration under SEQRA and authorized the barrier as a permanent traffic device on Samuel Road. Moreover, the Town complied with SEQRA since, prior to approving Resolution No. 442-2012, the Board, as the lead agency, took the requisite “hard look” at the environmental impact resulting from the proposed action and made a “reasoned elaboration” for the basis for its determination (Matter of Jackson v New York State Urban Dev. Corp., 67 NY2d 400, 417 [1986] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Chinese Staff & Workers Assn. v City of New York, 68 NY2d 359, 361 [1986]).

The petitioners’ remaining contentions are without merit (see Matter of County of Rockland v Town of Clarkstown, 128 AD3d 957 [2015] [decided herewith]).

Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding. Eng, P.J., Leventhal, Hall and Roman, JJ., concur.

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

In a hybrid proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, inter alia, to annul Resolution No. 442-2012 of the respondent/defendant Town Board of the Town of Clarkstown, and action for declaratory relief, the petitioners/plaintiffs appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Walsh II, J.), dated May 1, 2013, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

*960 Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

In Resolution No. 229-2012, the Town Board (hereinafter the Town Board) of the Town of Clarkstown (hereinafter, together with the Town Board, the Town) authorized the installation of a temporary barrier on Samuel Road and directed the Town Police Department to conduct traffic studies to determine the effect of the barrier on local traffic. Therefore, the Town was not required to first undertake a review under the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act (hereinafter SEQRA) before authorizing the installation of the temporary barrier (see 6 NYCRR 617.5 [c] [21]; 617.3 [a]; Matter of County of Rockland v Town of Clarkstown, 128 AD3d 957 [2015] [decided herewith]). Accordingly, contrary to the appellants’ contention, the Supreme Court properly declined to annul the Town Board’s approval of Resolution No. 442-2012, which included a negative declaration under SEQRA and authorized the barrier as a permanent traffic device on Samuel Road. Moreover, the Town complied with SEQRA since, prior to approving Resolution No. 442-2012, the Board, as the lead agency, took the requisite “hard look” at the environmental impact resulting from the proposed action and made a “reasoned elaboration” for the basis for its determination (Matter of Jackson v New York State Urban Dev. Corp., 67 NY2d 400, 417 [1986] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Chinese Staff & Workers Assn. v City of New York, 68 NY2d 359, 361 [1986]).

The petitioners’ remaining contentions are without merit (see Matter of County of Rockland v Town of Clarkstown, 128 AD3d 957 [2015] [decided herewith]).

Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding. Eng, P.J., Leventhal, Hall and Roman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

128 A.D.3d 959, 9 N.Y.S.3d 634, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-county-of-rockland-v-town-of-clarkstown-nyappdiv-2015.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack