 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Berenson
v. Town of New Castle
A landowner attacked as exclusionary a suburban town’s zoning law that contained no provision for the development of multi-family housing in any zoning district in the jurisdiction. The Court of Appeals found the Town’s law to be exclusionary, stating that “[t]he primary goal of a zoning law must be to provide for the development of a balanced, cohesive community which will make efficient use of the town’s available land.”
The court held that
“in enacting a zoning law, consideration must be given to regional
[housing] needs and requirements” and that “[t]here must be
a balancing of the local desire to maintain the [s]tatus quo within the
community and the greater public interest that regional needs be met.”
The court also appealed to the state legislature for help on this matter,
noting that “[z]oning… is essentially a legislative act. Thus,
it is quite anomalous that a court should be required to perform the tasks
of a regional planner. To that end, we look to the Legislature to make
appropriate changes in order to foster the development of programs designed
to achieve sound regional planning.”
Developers are given standing to challenge zoning laws that exclude more affordable types of housing since their rights cannot “realistically be separated from the rights of… nonresidents, “in search of a comfortable place to live,” Berenson v. Town of New Castle, 67 A.D.2d 506, 415 N.Y.S.2d 669 (2d Dep’t 1979).
