Judge bars appeal of Bar Veloce

By LIAM MAYO
Posted 7/26/22

NARROWSBURG, NY — Bar Veloce is one of the first businesses that visitors see as they enter downtown Narrowsburg. Starting soon, visitors may see that business with open doors.

This item is available in full to subscribers.

Please log in to continue

Log in

Judge bars appeal of Bar Veloce

Posted

NARROWSBURG, NY — Bar Veloce is one of the first businesses that visitors see as they enter downtown Narrowsburg. Starting soon, visitors may see that business with open doors. 

The cheese-and-wine franchise location did not open following the conclusion of its construction in 2021. Code enforcement officer Jim Crowley gave that business a certificate of occupancy in October, though only for the first floor: Bar Veloce had not gotten permission to build its rooftop deck. 

Kathy and Brendan Weiden, owners of neighboring business Narrowsburg Union, brought an appeal to Tusten’s Zoning Board of Appeals in February. Bar Veloce built beyond its approval from the planning board, so the Weidens claimed, and that made its certificate of occupancy invalid. 

Frederick Twomey, owner of the Bar Veloce franchise, filed an Article 78 proceeding in Sullivan County Supreme Court. He offered as a condition of the suit that Bar Veloce would not open until the case got resolved. 

Judge Mark Meddaugh made his decision after months, issuing an order on July 20. 

Conclusions from the court

Meddaugh considered three general points in his determination: the zoning board, the certificate of occupancy and the appeal. 

During the February meeting of the zoning board, the board voted quickly to dismiss the Weidens’ appeal. Later in the meeting, the board voted again to hear the appeal. Neither vote was unanimous. 

Twomey claimed the non-unanimity of the re-hearing decision made it null and void based on town law; the Weidens opposed that point. Meddaugh ruled the ZBA did act improperly in its second vote, and so its vote to review the appeal was null and void. 

The second point concerned the validity of the Weidens’ certificate of occupancy appeal. They had a 60-day window to appeal the certificate of occupancy; they appealed it in February, months past the deadline, but they argued that the clock only started when they found out about it in December, after the town delayed in providing it. 

Meddaugh ruled that the Weidens were right, and their appeal was timely. 

The doctrine of laches

The substance of the case came with the judge’s deliberation on the third point: the appeal itself. 

Twomey argued that the Weidens were trying to challenge Bar Veloce’s entire presence as allowed by a special use permit. In addition, he argued that the Weidens didn’t appeal earlier in the building construction though they knew it was going on, and that they couldn’t now appeal it because of the doctrine of laches. 

The doctrine of laches, according to an overview from pivotallawgroup.com, applies if a plaintiff delayed in taking legal action while having the knowledge and opportunity to do so, and if that delay would cause harm to the defendant. 

Meddaugh agreed with both of Twomey’s points. 

“The substance of the Weidens’ appeal concerns issues of on-site parking, access to the parking at the rear lower level of the premises 174 Bridge Street, pedestrian access, off-street loading and unloading, and traffic conditions, which were all issues required to be addressed during the hearing on the petitioner’s special use application… Therefore, the Court finds that it was the issuance of the special use permit on August 26, 2020, that controls for statute of limitations purposes for many of the issues raised by the Weidens’ appeal, and that the respondent’s appeal was untimely,” wrote Meddaugh. 

Even those points of the Weidens’ appeal that did address the certificate of occupancy—i.e. discrepencies between the square footage in the planning board’s approval, in the certificate of occupancy and in the amount built—were banned by the doctrine of laches. 

Meddaugh found the Weidens had delayed in taking action against Bar Veloce. The construction of Bar Veloce’s Narrowsburg location was fully visible to the community, and the Weidens were aware of the building proceeding to completion throughout 2021. 

Takeaways

Meddaugh ordered that the zoning board of appeals’ decision to hear the appeal was annulled, and that its earlier decision to dismiss the appeal still held. He ordered as well that the Weidens’ appeal before that board was barred by the doctrine of laches. 

In a statement following the decision, Twomey said, “We are very happy that Judge Meddaugh took the position on the matter that he did. We can’t wait to restart again and put this behind us.”

Several members of the zoning board of appeals commented their disappointment with the judge’s decision, stating that it did not account for the nuances of the case and of Tusten. 

The Weidens did not respond to a request for comment. In a letter to the editor published in the River Reporter on July 14, before the decision was issued, the Weidens stated that they did not have a vendetta against Twomey, and that their appeal to the zoning board of appeals in substance demanded that the town enforce its own zoning laws. 

bar veloce, appeal, court, code violation

Comments

No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here