Sun Beach Real Estate Development Corp. v. Anderson
98 A.D.2d 367, 469 N.Y.S.2d 964, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 20876 (1983)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
When a planning board determines that a proposed subdivision may significantly affect the environment, an application for preliminary plat approval is not considered complete, and thus the 45-day statutory time limit for the board to act does not begin to run, until a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) has been filed and accepted by the board.
Facts:
- On July 29, 1982, Sun Beach Real Estate Development Corp. applied to the East Hampton Planning Board for preliminary approval of a subdivision plat for a 777-acre tract, proposing 188 one-family residences and 143 condominium units, and included an environmental assessment form (EAF).
- On September 7, 1982, the planning board informed Sun Beach that its application would not be processed as complete until the board either determined there was no environmental significance or accepted a DEIS if environmental significance was found.
- In mid-September 1982, Sun Beach submitted a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) to the planning board.
- On October 15, 1982, Sun Beach demanded a certificate of preliminary plat approval from the town clerk, contending the planning board had failed to hold a hearing on the plat within the 45-day period stipulated by Town Law § 276(3).
- On October 27, 1982, 90 days after the initial application, the planning board determined that the subdivision might significantly affect the environment and accepted Sun Beach's DEIS as satisfactory.
- A hearing was subsequently scheduled for December 8, 1982, to consider both the accepted DEIS and the preliminary plat approval application.
Procedural Posture:
- Sun Beach Real Estate Development Corp. initiated a proceeding pursuant to CPLR Article 78 against the Town of East Hampton, the town clerk, and the planning board in the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Special Term), seeking judgment directing issuance of a certificate of preliminary plat approval.
- Special Term granted Sun Beach's petition and directed the town clerk to issue the certificate.
- The Town of East Hampton, the town clerk, and the planning board appealed the Special Term's judgment to the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court, Second Judicial Department.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does the 45-day statutory period for a planning board to act on a preliminary subdivision plat application begin to run before the board has accepted a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) when the proposed subdivision is determined to have potential significant environmental effects under the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA)?
Opinions:
Majority - Lazer, J.
No, the 45-day statutory period for a planning board to act on a preliminary subdivision plat application does not begin to run until the board has accepted a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) if the proposed subdivision is determined to have potential significant environmental effects under the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA). The court held that the rigorous mandate for prompt action under Town Law § 276(3) must be harmonized with the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA), which requires early and meaningful consideration of environmental consequences. SEQRA mandates that an application is not complete until a DEIS has been accepted by the lead agency (ECL 8-0109(5)). Preliminary plat approval determines important design features of a subdivision, making it a critical stage for environmental review to influence the project's basic design. The court emphasized that environmental factors must be considered 'as early as possible in the formulation of a proposal for an action' (ECL 8-0109(4)), before 'bureaucratic momentum strips [it] of any real influence on decision-making.' Therefore, if a DEIS is necessary, the preliminary plat application is not complete, and the 45-day Town Law time limit does not commence, until the DEIS is accepted. The court accorded priority to SEQRA due to its overarching purpose of protecting the environment for present and future generations, which 'far overshadows the rights of developers to obtain prompt action on their proposals.' The planning board acted timely by holding a hearing within 45 days of accepting the DEIS.
Analysis:
This case establishes a critical precedent for balancing development timelines with environmental protection requirements in New York. It reinforces the paramount importance of SEQRA by effectively pausing other statutory deadlines until environmental review is adequately addressed. The ruling shifts the risk of delay in DEIS acceptance to developers, who must ensure timely and satisfactory submission. Future cases will likely cite this decision to interpret the 'completeness' of applications under SEQRA in conjunction with other state and local permitting statutes, particularly where statutory default provisions are involved, emphasizing substantive environmental review over procedural expediency.
