Court Sustains Recreation Impact Fee

In <i>Twin Lakes Development Corp. v. Town of Monroe</i> (NYLJ 11/21/03, p.19, col. 5), the New York Court of Appeals addressed an issue that has been unresolved in New York since the United States Supreme Court's 1994 opinion in <i>Dolan v. City of Tigard</i>, 512 US 374: Can a municipality collect a payment in lieu of parkland dedication as the price for approving a subdivision when the municipality has not made an individualized determination of the need for recreational facilities generated by the proposed subdivision? The court had little difficulty upholding the fee, raising two further questions: first, will the court's decision survive scrutiny by the United States Supreme Court, and second, what constitutional limits remain on a municipality's power to impose fees on developers?

12 minute read January 01, 2004 at 08:42 AM
By
Stewart E. Sterk
Court Sustains Recreation Impact Fee

In Twin Lakes Development Corp. v. Town of Monroe (NYLJ 11/21/03, p.19, col. 5), the New York Court of Appeals addressed an issue that has been unresolved in New York since the United States Supreme Court's 1994 opinion in Dolan v.

This premium content is locked for New York Real Estate Law Reporter subscribers only

ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN New York Real Estate Law Reporter

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

Already have an account? Sign In Now

For enterprise-wide or corporate access, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or call 1-877-256-2473.

NOT FOR REPRINT

© 2026 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.

Continue Reading

Most firms are aiming their newest tools at the work they already do — pouring their most powerful technology into running the same tasks a little faster. But when everyone automates the same tasks at once, no one pulls ahead. That reaches the future a little faster while leaving a firm’s largest opportunity untouched — and that opportunity isn’t doing more of the existing work, but transforming how the high-value work gets done.

June 01, 2026

Artificial intelligence is rapidly embedding itself into legal workflows, but much of the conversation treats all use cases as if they carry the same level of risk, even if they do not. The more useful question is not whether AI works, but where it can be safely applied and where it cannot.

June 01, 2026