Summary
affirming annulment of board's denial of special use permit where "[r]espondent offered no expert testimony to support its generalized claims of potential water and traffic problems"
Summary of this case from Harlen Associates v. Inc. Village of MineolaOpinion
April 8, 1999
Appeal from the Supreme Court (Williams, J.).
Petitioner sought a special use permit for the construction of a new church in the Town of Clifton Park, Saratoga County. Respondent denied the application, citing concerns relating to vehicular congestion, water supply and/or pressure, and the plan's incompatibility with the Town's comprehensive plan. Supreme Court annulled the determination, finding it to be arbitrary, capricious and an abuse of discretion, and directed the issuance of the permit subject to reasonable conditions and safeguards. Respondent appeals.
We affirm. It is well settled that religious institutions are presumed beneficial to a community, and consequently proposed religious uses should be permitted absent convincing evidence that they pose a direct and immediate threat to public health, safety or welfare ( see, Matter of Westchester Reform Temple v. Brown, 22 N.Y.2d 488, 494; Matter of Holy Spirit Assn. v. Rosenfeld, 91 A.D.2d 190, 197, lv denied 63 N.Y.2d 603). Respondent offered no expert testimony to support its generalized claims of potential water and traffic problems ( see, Matter of North Syracuse First Baptist Church v. Village of N. Syracuse, 136 A.D.2d 942). In fact, acting as lead agency for review pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act (ECL art 8), respondent issued a negative declaration for the project.
While the record contains no evidentiary support for respondent's proferred reasons for the denial, it does reveal considerable community opposition to the project. As noted by Supreme Court, generalized community objection, without more, is an improper basis for denial of a special use permit ( see, Matter of Lee Realty Co. v. Village of Spring Val., 61 N.Y.2d 892; Matter of Pleasant Val. Home Constr. v. Van Wagner, 41 N.Y.2d 1028; Matter of Chernick v. McGowan, 238 A.D.2d 586).
Cardona, P. J., Crew III, Spain and Graffeo, JJ., concur.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.