Lindstrom v. Zoning Board of Appeals
Opinion of the Court
The appeal from the intermediate order is dismissed because no appeal lies of right from an intermediate order in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (see, CPLR 5701 [b]). The issues raised on the appeal from the order are brought up for review and have been considered on the appeal from the judgment (see, CPLR 5501 [a] [1]).
The respondent Yung Sam Ski, Ltd. (hereinafter Yung Sam), purchased a ski area in the early 1970’s. Subsequently, the ski area was rezoned from commercial amusement use to residential use. Accordingly, the ski use constituted a nonconforming use. In recent years, Yung Sam used the property during non-winter months for various activities, including bicycle races, outdoor craft fairs, and flea markets. The Building Inspector
The "right to continue a nonconforming use does not include the right to extend or enlarge such a use” (Matter of Smith v Board of Appeals, 202 AD2d 674, 676). Here, Yung Sam extended and enlarged the use of the land used as a winter ski area to include summer recreational activities. The particular summertime activities at issue here are not customarily incidental to the use of the property as a skiing area (see, Matter of Campbell v Rose, 221 AD2d 527; Matter of Del Vecchio v Lalla, 136 AD2d 820). Rosenblatt, J. P., Ritter, Copertino and Goldstein, JJ., concur.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.