Development

In landowner's hybrid article 78 proceeding and declaratory judgment action, landowner appealed from Supreme Court's denial of the petition and complaint alleging that the city's Department of Parks lacked authority to impose constraints on removal of trees on privately owned streets. The Appellate Division affirmed, holding that the city had the requisite authority and that the constraints did not amount to an unconstitutional taking.

Landowners submitted applications for permits and certificates of occupancy for improvement to parcels on Staten Island. The Department of Buildings would not approve the permits without approval of tree removals by the Department of Parks. The Parks Department would not approve the tree removals unless landowner paid restitution or planted trees to make up for the tree removals. Landowners contended that the Parks Department did not have jurisdiction over the trees because the trees were located in streets the city did not own. Landowners sought to compel approval of their applications and to compel the Department of Parks to return moneys that landowners had wrongfully paid in restitution.  Supreme Court denied the petition with respect to one particular parcel, and directed a trial with respect to other parcels. Landowner's appeal was with respect to the parcel for which the petition was denied.