Agenda - Planning Commission - 02/06/2003

Home

114 Page 8 -- December 24, 2002 g.g. Citation: ZapPata Group Inc. v. The Zoning Hearing Baord of &e ToWn of McCandless, Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, No..979 C.D. 2002 (2002). see also: Yeager v. Zoning Hearing Board of the City of AIlentown, 779 A.2d 595 (2001). .Environmental Issue -- Developer seeks to build retail shopping center Zoning board adopts negative declaration of environmental'significance NEW YORK (11/07/02) -- Gallogly applied to the town board of the Town of North Greenbush for the rezoning of an undeveloped 35-acre meadow and woodland. Gallogly sought to have the property rezoned from a combination. of professional business district and residential sinCe-family designations to a general business zone permitting the construction of a retail shopping center on. the site. ' W'~th few exceptions, Gallogly's environmental assessment reflected that the proposed 231,000 square foot shopping center would have little or no negative environmental impact on the community or neighborhood: The board adopted a negative declaration of environmental significance and approved the rezoning. Owners of residential properties adjacent to Gallogly's parcel sued. The court ruled against the .rezoning, finding the board failed to even consider most of the obvious negative environmental effects on the nei'ghboring residential areas and the possible town that would result once the land was redeveloped. Gallog~y appealed. DECISION: Affirmed. The property was not properly rezoned. The record clearly revealed an effort by Gallogly and the town to dilute the nature of the action subject to environmental review from the construction of a "231,000 square foot retail shopping center with public water and sewer ser- vice'' to simply "proposed rezoning of the Gallogly property." The shopping center review included estimates relating to the proposed retail comp[ex, such as the number of jobs created, parking spaces required, number of vehicular trips, tons of trash created, and gallons of water used. The negative declaration used stated that no construction Project had been proposed for the area subject to rezoning. However, although no specific site plan had been. developed for the prop- err,y, the' rezoning request was unquestionably made in specific contemplation of constructing a shopping center or ~'big.box'.' retailer on the site. The rezoning was the first step in the process of developing the,property. A fundamental and necessary prerequisite to the act of construction iSthe acqui- sition' of the right to construct on a particular parcel of property. Under the circumstances, the board was obligated, to consider the impacts to be expected' from such. future development at the time of mzoning, even absent a specific site plan for the project. Citation: Defreesrville Area Neighborhoods A-ssociarion [n.c.v. Town Board of the Tow~a of North Greenbush, Supreme Court of New York, App. Div., 3rd Dept., No. 91.775 (?,002).