## Facts

- Vernon Park Realty, Inc. bought an 86,000-square-foot open parcel (“the Plaza”) next to the Mount Vernon railroad station, surrounded by a developed business area.
- The Plaza had long been used for parking by railroad patrons and others.
- The city’s 1922 zoning placed the Plaza in a Business “B” district; a 1927 ordinance rezoned it to a Residence “B” district, leaving parking as a lawful nonconforming use.
- In 1932, the city granted a variance permitting installation of a gasoline filling station on the premises.
- After purchasing the Plaza in 1951, Vernon Park sought a variance to build a retail shopping center; the request was denied because the use was prohibited under existing zoning.
- Vernon Park filed suit seeking a declaration that the 1927 residential zoning (as later amended) was unconstitutional as applied and sought injunctive relief.
- While litigation was pending, the city amended its ordinance in 1952 to create a “Designed Parking District” limiting the Plaza essentially to parking/storage of automobiles, a service station within the parking area, and continuation of prior nonconforming uses.
- Vernon Park amended its complaint to challenge both the residential zoning classification and the 1952 Designed Parking District amendment, alleging undue hardship, destruction of value, discrimination, and an uncompensated taking.
- The city justified the restrictions as necessary to address severe traffic congestion and parking shortages.

## Issues

1. Whether the zoning restrictions, as applied to the Plaza, were an unreasonable and confiscatory exercise of the police power that violated due process by effectively taking property without just compensation.
2. Whether the restrictions were unlawfully discriminatory as applied, by singling out an “island” parcel amid a business district to bear a disproportionate burden for citywide traffic and parking needs.

## Decision

- The New York Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment declaring the challenged zoning provisions invalid and void as applied to the Plaza.
- The court held the restrictions exceeded reasonable regulation and were confiscatory in operation on this parcel.
- The court concluded the city could not address a general traffic and parking problem by imposing an undue, uncompensated burden on a single owner through extreme use limitations.

## Legal Principles

- Zoning enacted under the police power must be reasonable and nonarbitrary; it cannot constitutionally be applied so as to preclude all reasonable uses for which property is adapted.
- A zoning restriction that destroys the greater part of a parcel’s value or eliminates economically viable, reasonable uses may be invalid as confiscatory when applied to that property.
- Even if a regulation serves a public purpose, a municipality may not force one parcel to function as a solution to a broader public problem without compensation.
- A zoning ordinance valid when adopted may become invalid as applied if changed conditions render its later operation confiscatory.

## Conclusion

The court held that restricting the Plaza—an isolated parcel within a business area—to essentially permanent parking-related uses imposed a disproportionate public burden on a single owner and operated as an unconstitutional, confiscatory regulation; the zoning provisions were therefore invalid as applied.


Vernon Park Realty, Inc. v. City of Mount Vernon, 307 N.Y. 493, 121 N.E.2d 517 (N.Y. 1954)