Case Name: In the Matter of Eugene D. Tarolli et al., Appellants, v. Arthur W. Howe et al., Constituting the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Geddes, Respondents
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1975-10-21
Citations: 37 N.Y.2d 865
Docket Number: 
Parties: In the Matter of Eugene D. Tarolli et al., Appellants, v Arthur W. Howe et al., Constituting the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Geddes, Respondents.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 37
Pages: 865–867

Head Matter:
In the Matter of Eugene D. Tarolli et al., Appellants, v Arthur W. Howe et al., Constituting the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Geddes, Respondents.
Argued September 4, 1975;
decided October 21, 1975
John W Brenizer and Eugene D. Tarolli for appellants.
William L. Allen, Jr., and Nicholas J. Pastushan for respondents.

Opinion:
Memorandum. The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.
We agree with the Appellate Division's construction of subdivision (b) of section 7 of respondent Town of Geddes' Zoning Ordinance and its conclusion that "the obvious intent of the section was to restrict development of private profit-making enterprises in a residential district". Moreover, we find the regulation constitutional and a permissible exercise of the police power conferred on respondent by the Legislature (see Town Law, § 261). As was stated in Matter of Wulfsohn v Burden (241 NY 288, 300-301), "[t]he primary purpose of [a residential] district is safe, healthful and comfortable family life rather than the development of commercial instincts and the pursuit of pecuniary profits." Indeed, almost 40 years ago, in a case upholding the exclusion of boarding houses operated for profit in a residential district, we noted that "[provisions for the exclusion of business enterprises from residential zones are now generally found in zoning ordinances" (Baddour v City of Long Beach, 279 NY 167, 174, app dsmd 308 US 503; cf. McCarter v Beckwith, 247 App Div 289, 292, affd 272 NY 488, cert den 299 US 601; see, also, 1 Anderson, New York Zoning Law and Practice [2d ed], § 9.36).
Chief Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Cooke concur in memorandum.
Order affirmed.