• Ongoing coronavirus / COVID-19 discussion: how is the pandemic affecting your community, workplace, and wellness? 🦠

    Working from home? So are we. Come join us! Cyburbia is a friendly big tent, where we share our experiences and thoughts about urban planning practice, planning adjacent topics, and whatever else comes to mind. No ads, no spam, no social distancing.

Enforcement Retroactive enforcement of new regulations

michaelskis

Cyburbian
Messages
20,706
Points
56
In NYC, a developer was issued a permit to build, and based on the article, the rules changed and a court determined that the developer needed to remove several of the floors of the new building. However, the case was overturned by a court of appeals.


I guess I am missing some of the details of the story because to me, if a permit is lawfully issued and it is determined that it conforms to the regulations in place at the time of issuance, then the project can proceed. In some States, once you submit a completed application and application fee, it locks in the regulations at that time. North Carolina went as far as establishing permit choice language into the State's enabling legislation that would give the developer the option of abiding by the new rules or the old rule if the rules changed after a complete application was submitted.

(I also love the Planning History where they mention the 1916 regulations)

But what are your thoughts and how would this be regulated in your state.
 

Faust_Motel

Cyburbian
Messages
836
Points
33
In NYC, a developer was issued a permit to build, and based on the article, the rules changed and a court determined that the developer needed to remove several of the floors of the new building. However, the case was overturned by a court of appeals.


I guess I am missing some of the details of the story because to me, if a permit is lawfully issued and it is determined that it conforms to the regulations in place at the time of issuance, then the project can proceed. In some States, once you submit a completed application and application fee, it locks in the regulations at that time. North Carolina went as far as establishing permit choice language into the State's enabling legislation that would give the developer the option of abiding by the new rules or the old rule if the rules changed after a complete application was submitted.

(I also love the Planning History where they mention the 1916 regulations)

But what are your thoughts and how would this be regulated in your state.
Seems straightforward enough- you get a permit, you're usually vested in that permit for some period of time. There must be some other procedural wrinkles in this one that mean it went all the way to the top in NY. In our state we are empowered at the municipal level to identify how and when vesting happens (for us, when you file a "complete application" of a certain type and how it gets broken (if you don't act on the permit and it expires or if you make a "substantial change" from what was permitted).

This will be a good one to watch for a writeup in Law of the Land. https://lawoftheland.wordpress.com/category/current-caselaw-new-york/
 
Top