From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lakeshore Assembly of God Ch. v. Village Bd.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Nov 10, 1986
124 A.D.2d 972 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)

Summary

In Lakeshore Assembly the court determined that there was no free exercise violation where a city sought to limit the size of a sign a church sought to erect on its property.

Summary of this case from St. John's Ev. Lutheran Ch. v. Ellisville

Opinion

November 10, 1986

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Chautauqua County, Adams, J.

Present — Dillon, P.J., Denman, Green, Pine and Balio, JJ.


Judgment unanimously reversed on the law, without costs, and petition dismissed. Memorandum: Special Term erred in annulling the determination of the Zoning Board of Appeals and substituting its discretion for that of the Board. Courts should not disturb the determination of zoning authorities unless they are illegal, arbitrary and capricious, or an abuse of discretion (see, Matter of Fuhst v Foley, 45 N.Y.2d 441, 444; Conley v Town of Brookhaven Zoning Bd. of Appeals, 40 N.Y.2d 309, 314). Petitioner's argument that the Board's determination is in violation of its 1st Amendment right to the free exercise of its religion is without merit. Petitioner is not prevented from religious use of its property, only limited in the size of the sign which it seeks to erect. It is wholly appropriate to impose limitations on a church property and its accessory uses when reasonably related to the general welfare of the community, including the community's interest in preserving its appearance (see, Jewish Reconstructionist Synagogue v Incorporated Vil. of Roslyn Harbor, 38 N.Y.2d 283, 288-289, cert denied 426 U.S. 950; Matter of Diocese of Rochester v Planning Bd., 1 N.Y.2d 508, 526). The absence of specific guidelines governing erection of signs ancillary to a church use in a residential zone does not deprive the Board of discretion to impose reasonable restrictions. The Board's general authority to interpret the regulations to achieve the overall intent of the ordinance implies the power to impose reasonable regulations upon a special use. Finally, the restrictions imposed were not arbitrary and capricious. The Board merely limited the size of petitioner's sign to 20 square feet and approved it in all other respects. Such determination reflects a reasonable accommodation of the church's request with the concerns of the neighbors as to aesthetic and safety considerations. As such, it was a reasonable exercise of the Board's discretion.


Summaries of

Lakeshore Assembly of God Ch. v. Village Bd.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Nov 10, 1986
124 A.D.2d 972 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)

In Lakeshore Assembly the court determined that there was no free exercise violation where a city sought to limit the size of a sign a church sought to erect on its property.

Summary of this case from St. John's Ev. Lutheran Ch. v. Ellisville
Case details for

Lakeshore Assembly of God Ch. v. Village Bd.

Case Details

Full title:LAKESHORE ASSEMBLY OF GOD CHURCH, Respondent, v. VILLAGE BOARD OF THE…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: Nov 10, 1986

Citations

124 A.D.2d 972 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)

Citing Cases

St. John's Ev. Lutheran Ch. v. Ellisville

Many court "decisions have acknowledged that municipalities, in the exercise of their police powers, may…

Wellspring Zendo v. Trippe

Accordingly, the heavier burden relied upon by petitioner is inapplicable (see, Church of St. Paul St. Andrew…