Matter of 1086 OCR, LLC v Town of Riverhead Zoning Board of Appeals
Categories
Attorneys and Parties
Brief Summary
The case concerns local zoning limits on an adult-use cannabis retail dispensary, specifically whether the Town of Riverhead could require a dispensary to be 1,000 feet from a school when Cannabis Law § 72 [state law prohibiting a cannabis retail dispensary from locating within 500 feet of a school, measured from nearest entrances] sets a 500-foot school-distance rule, and whether related local cannabis zoning provisions violate Town Law § 262 [requiring zoning regulations to be uniform within districts].
The Supreme Court annulled the zoning board's denial of an area variance, held that the Town's 1,000-foot school setback was preempted by state law, and further declared Town Code § 301-283.20(A)(1), (4), and (5) invalid for violating Town Law § 262.
The Appellate Division reversed only the portion of the judgment declaring Town Code § 301-283.20(A)(1), (4), and (5) invalid under Town Law § 262, and directed entry of a declaration that those provisions do not violate Town Law § 262.
The court held that Cannabis Law § 131(2) [expressly preempting local laws pertaining to the operation or licensure of adult-use cannabis licenses, while allowing local time, place, and manner regulations that do not make operation unreasonably impracticable] preempts the Town's attempt to replace the state's 500-foot school setback with a stricter 1,000-foot property-line rule. However, the court found that the challenged Town Code provisions themselves comply with the zoning uniformity requirement of Town Law § 262.
Background
Brian Stark Enterprises, LLC held a conditional retail dispensary license to operate a cannabis dispensary at property owned by 1086 OCR, LLC in the Town of Riverhead. The property was about 733 feet from Riverhead High School. Under Cannabis Law § 72, that distance was sufficient because the state requires only 500 feet, measured from the center of the nearest entrance of the dispensary premises to the center of the nearest entrance of the school. But Town Code § 301-283.20(A)(1) required 1,000 feet, measured from property lines. The Town Planning Department denied a building and use permit, and the applicants sought an area variance from the Town of Riverhead Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA), which denied the request. The applicants then brought a hybrid CPLR article 78 proceeding and declaratory judgment action challenging both the variance denial and the validity of the Town Code provisions.
Lower Court Decision
The Supreme Court, Suffolk County, granted the petition, annulled the ZBA determination, declared that the 1,000-foot school setback portion of Town Code § 301-283.20(A)(1) was preempted by state law, and also declared Town Code § 301-283.20(A)(1), (4), and (5) invalid and void as violative of Town Law § 262. Because of those rulings, the court concluded that no variance was needed for the dispensary to operate at the property.
Appellate Division Reversal
The Appellate Division modified the judgment by deleting the declaration that Town Code § 301-283.20(A)(1), (4), and (5) violate Town Law § 262. It held that the Town's 1,000-foot school setback is preempted because state cannabis law expressly occupies that subject and sets both the allowable distance and the method of measurement. But it also held that Town Code § 301-283.20(A)(1), (4), and (5) do not violate Town Law § 262. The remainder of the judgment was affirmed, including the annulment of the ZBA denial and the conclusion that the petitioners did not need a variance to operate at the site.
Legal Significance
This decision clarifies the boundary between state cannabis regulation and municipal zoning authority in New York. Municipalities may adopt local time, place, and manner regulations for cannabis dispensaries, but they cannot impose additional restrictions in an area the Legislature has specifically regulated, such as school setbacks under Cannabis Law § 72. At the same time, local cannabis zoning provisions addressing spacing between establishments and proximity to residences may still survive a Town Law § 262 uniformity challenge if they are structured consistently within the zoning scheme.
New York towns cannot override the state's specific school-distance rule for licensed adult-use cannabis dispensaries, but they may still enact other zoning controls that satisfy uniformity requirements and do not conflict with the Cannabis Law.