Legal Opinion

Kanaley v. Brennan

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

Decided May 23, 1986PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

— Judgment unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Memorandum: We affirm for the reasons that the developers failed to submit a site development plan with sufficient dimensional information to permit the Planning Board to determine that *975the proposal meets lot size and density requirements (see, Town Law § 281 [b]) and that the Board failed to make a reasoned elaboration of the basis for its negative declaration (see, H.O.M.E.S. v New York State Urban Dev. Corp., 69 AD2d 222, 232). (Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, Onondaga County, Roy, J. — art 78.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Callahan, Doerr,…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. H.O.M.E.S. v. New York State Urban Development Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1979

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Bayswater Realty & Capital Corp. v. Planning BoardNew York Court of Appeals · 1990
  2. In re New York Archaeological Council v. Town Board of CoxsackieAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991
  3. Purchase Environmental Protective Ass'n v. Town Board of the TownAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1995

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API