35.6 °F
December 03, 2016
River Reporter Facebook pageTRR TwitterRSS Search

Court to decide junkyard fate; neighbors sue the town for zoning change

By Fritz Mayer
July 3, 2012

The question of whether board members in the Town of Liberty acted improperly when they changed the zoning from residential to industrial commercial will be settled by a judge. The land in question is about 39 acres, comprised of four parcels that are now a heavily forested mountain that sits on the border between the Town of Liberty and the Village of Liberty on Route 17.

Ben Weitzman and Son want to operate a junkyard or an automobile recycling operation on the site but, until December 2011, the land was zoned for residential use. The board, at the time, said that it had mistakenly changed the zoning to residential some months earlier, and it passed a local law to “correct an error.”

Four neighbors of the property filed an Article 78 lawsuit asking the court to overturn the local law because it was improperly done. The lawsuit points out that several maps showing the re-zoning process going back to 2007 all indicate the proposals for the parcels to be changed to residential, which would match almost all of the surrounding property, with the exception of one small industrial commercial lot, which was grandfathered to allow an existing asphalt plant to continue to operate.

The zoning update process dragged on for years, and the town board voted to formally adopt a town-wide zoning update in early 2011, which included changing the parcel in question to residential. The lawsuit by the residents says the vote that changed the zoning of the property was in line with the intent of the comprehensive plan that was jointly developed by the town and the village, which envisioned attracting industrial activity to a different part of the town, below the village, but which would still have ready access to Route 17.

The lawsuit says that state law provides for a zoning amendment but does not provide for a “correction.” By not treating the change as a zoning amendment, the town was able to avoid going through a State Environmental Quality Review process and environmental assessment.

Additionally, the Sullivan County planning department recommended that the town treat the matter as a zoning amendment and not a correction, saying, “This will allow the public input to revolve around the zoning map change.” The suit says the town did not react properly to that recommendation.

The response from the town, on the other hand, says that the suit should be thrown out because there are three property owners who were impacted by the change from industrial commercial to residential and back again, who were not included in the lawsuit as they should have been.