Agenda - Planning Commission - 03/06/2003

Home

128 Page 2 -- February I0, 2003 Permitted Use Landf'ffi CtTM 'hdjoini-~ parcel does not expand use into conservation district -. City issues notice of violation fOr non-permitted use . NEW YORK (12/26/02) -- Partition Street Corporation owned Property di- recdy on the boundary line between East Greenbush and the City of Rensselaer. It also owned a much Smaller adjoining parce! in Rensselaer that provided the sole method of access to the East Greenbush parcel. The only improvement on the Rensselaer property was a gravel road and an entrance gate to the East Greenbush parcel. ' The Rensselaer parcel was in a tand conservation zoning district. Such dis- tricts could only be used for parks, athletic fields, golf courses, farming, or other similar uses. . Cristo DemotStion Inc. and 4C'S Development CorPoration used the Rensselaer parcel to gain access and. conduct business on the East Greenbush parcel. 4C's business was a construction and demolition debris landf'flI operated in accordance with a permit from the Department of Environmental Conservation. The City of Renssetaer issued a notice of violation to Partition Street alleg- ing that the use of its property as a landf'dl was not a permitted use. Partition Street sued, and the. court ruled in favor of the city. Partition Street appealed, arguing the Rensselaer parcel was merely an ac- cess road and all landf'~ operations took place in East Greenbush. DECISION: Affirmed. The city could issue the violation. It was rational for the city to view the access road as a use appurtenant to the landfill, and landfills were not allowed in the district. The Department of Environmental Conservation authorized up to 70 truck- loads per day on the access road to transport solid waste, and other materials. The road was. solely used for commercial purposes. - Consequently, the Rensselaer parcel was an integral part of the operation of the East Greenbush parcel and was a use appurtenant to the. Iandf'fll itself. Citation: Partition Street Corporate'on v. Zoning Board of Appeals-of City of Rensselaer, Supreme Court of New York, App. Div., 3rd'Dept., No. 92094 (2002). see also: City of Yonkers v. Renrways [nc., I09 N.E. 2d 597. see also: Hllage' of Great Neck Estates v. Bemak & Lehman, 162 N.E.2d 562. Variance -- Building slab placed too close to setbacks Neighboring property owners contest variance NORTH CAROLINA (12/31/02) Burnham obtained a special use permit to construct a mira-storage facility on his property, He submitted a site plan to the I I I I 1 I '1 I I I I I I I i I I I !