N.Y. Laws » CHAPTER Town / ARTICLE Zoning and Planning
New York Consolidated Laws

N.Y. Town Law § 265 (2026)

Changes

✓ text as retrieved May 2026 (this copy records no edition or section history)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NY-LEGnysenate.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar 
§ 265. Changes. 1. Such regulations, restrictions and boundaries may
from time to time be amended. Such amendment shall be effected by a
simple majority vote of the town board, except that any such amendment
shall require the approval of at least three-fourths of the members of
the town board in the event such amendment is the subject of a written
protest, presented to the town board and signed by:
  (a) the owners of twenty percent or more of the area of land included
in such proposed change; or
  (b) the owners of twenty percent or more of the area of land
immediately adjacent to that land included in such proposed change,
extending one hundred feet therefrom; or
  (c) the owners of twenty percent or more of the area of land directly
opposite thereto, extending one hundred feet from the street frontage of
such opposite land.
  The provisions of the previous section relative to public hearings and
official notice shall apply equally to all proposed amendments.
  2. Amendments made to any zoning ordinance (excluding any map
incorporated therein) adopted pursuant to the provisions of this chapter
shall be entered in the minutes of the town board; such minutes shall
describe and refer to any map adopted in connection with such change,
amendment or supplement and a copy, summary or abstract thereof
(exclusive of any map incorporated therein) shall be published once in a
newspaper published in the town, if any, or in such newspaper published
in the county in which such town may be located having a circulation in
such town, as the town board may designate, and affidavits of the
publication thereof shall be filed with the town clerk. Such ordinance
shall take effect upon filing in the office of the town clerk. Every
town clerk shall maintain every map adopted in connection with a zoning
ordinance or amendment.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 28 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1986–2026 · leading case: Dodson v. Town Bd. of the Town of Rotterdam, 182 A.D.3d 109 (N.Y. App. Div. 3d Dep't 2020).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Dodson v. Town Bd. of the Town of Rotterdam, 182 A.D.3d 109 (N.Y. App. Div. 3d Dep't 2020). · cites it 11× “7, plaintiffs brought this action seeking an injunction and a declaratory judgment that the zoning change was invalid because it constituted impermissible spot zoning and also because their protest petitions triggered a requirement pursuant to Town Law § 265 that the rezoning…”
Eadie v. Town Bd., 854 N.E.2d 464 (N.Y. 2006). · cites it 7× “Did the rezoning require a three-fourths majority vote of the Town Board under Town Law § 265 (1)? We hold that it did not, because the petition that sought to require a supermajority vote was not signed, as section 265 (1) requires, by the owners of 20% of the land within 100…”
Ryan Homes, Inc. v. Town Bd. of Mendon, 7 Misc. 3d 709 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2005). · cites it 17× “By letter dated October 27, 2004, counsel retained by the Town Board expressed the opinion that, although it was “technically true” that the properties owned by the neighbors were located more than 100 feet from the property to be rezoned, pursuant to Town Law § 265, the…”
Rocky Point Drive-In, L.P. v. Town of Brookhaven, 999 N.E.2d 1164 (N.Y. 2013). · cites it 2× “Sans Argent, aware of the impending vote, and seeking to avoid the rezoning, submitted a protest, triggering Town Law § 265 and its requirement that the zoning change pass by a supermajority vote.”
Van Patten v. La Porta, 148 A.D.2d 858 (N.Y. App. Div. 3d Dep't 1989). · cites it 3× “293-1987, introduced to change the zoning designation, received a 3-to-2 vote in favor, but was declared defeated due to the three-fourths majority voting requirement provided in Town Law § 265. Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding against respondents, the five…”
Eadie v. Town Bd. of North Greenbush, 22 A.D.3d 1025 (N.Y. App. Div. 3d Dep't 2005). · cites it 5× “At that hearing, the Town Board received a protest petition pursuant to Town Law § 265 (1) (b) seeking to require that any action with respect to the rezoning of the Gallogly property be approved by three fourths of its members (four votes) rather than a simple majority (three…”
McGrath v. Town Bd. of Town of North Greenbush, 254 A.D.2d 614 (N.Y. App. Div. 3d Dep't 1998). “Finally, we address McGrath’s claim that shopping centers are not a permitted use in the BG zone.”
Eadie v. Town Bd., 9 Misc. 3d 599 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2005). · cites it 30× “5, the means by which North Greenbush rejected DANA’s Town Law § 265 (1) supermajority protest is the most momentous because, if approved, it would nearly invalidate the statute in situations like this where large tracts of land are being rezoned.”
Ferraro v. Town Bd. of Town of Amherst, 79 A.D.3d 1691 (N.Y. App. Div. 4th Dep't 2010). · cites it 2× “Petitioners contend that reversal is required because the owners of more than 20% of the property lying directly opposite the Benderson property had protested the rezoning and thus the petition for rezoning required the approval of at least three-fourths of the Town Board…”
Wolff v. Town/Vill. of Harrison, 30 A.D.3d 432 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2006). “v McBarnette, 84 NY2d 194, 203-204 [1994]), and the applicable statute vests in the Town Board broad legislative power, in its discretion, to amend its zoning ordinance, and does not require it to consider and vote upon every application for a zoning change (see Town Law § 265;…”
Duke & Benedict, Inc. v. Town of Se., 253 A.D.2d 877 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 1998). “Similarly, D&B failed to present evidence to support its contentions that the Town Zoning Code was amended in violation of the procedures in Town Law § 265 and that the Local Law was enacted in violation of procedures in Municipal Home Rule Law § 20.”
Rocky Point Drive-in, L.P. v. Town of Brookhaven, 37 A.D.3d 805 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2007). · cites it 2× “As a result of the Town Board’s adoption of the resolution to rezone the plaintiffs property, Sans Argent submitted a protest to the Town Board pursuant to Town Law § 265, which triggered a requirement for a supermajority vote to approve the *807 rezoning, i.”
Show all 28 citing cases →
N.Y. Town Law § 265(1)(b): 1 case
Matter of Flatley v. Town of Southold, 247 A.D.3d 893 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2026).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.