Update: Developer Appeals Dismissal Of NY Fishkill Storage Lawsuit

A developer is appealing a New York judge's decision to dismiss a lawsuit against the Town of Fishkill after officials rejected plans for a 51,500-square-foot self-storage facility near Beacon.

1292 Realty LLC filed the appeal on Oct. 26, challenging an Oct. 8 ruling that upheld the Fishkill Planning Board's denial of the proposed development at 1292 Route 9D. The project, situated on a 4.7-acre parcel near Interstate 84, would have included a two-story building with 333 storage units.The developer first submitted plans in 2022, but the property was located in a restricted business zone where self-storage facilities are not permitted without special approval.

Following three years of reviews, environmental studies, and public hearings, the Planning Board unanimously rejected the application in October 2025, determining that the proposed use was inconsistent with the area's zoning requirements.

1292 Realty subsequently sued, arguing that a self-storage facility would generate fewer disruptions than other permitted uses, including hotels, restaurants, and offices. The company also challenged approximately $155,000 in fees assessed during the review process, claiming the town had exceeded limits established under state environmental review law.

State Supreme Court Justice Michael Hayes dismissed both claims, finding that the Planning Board had a rational basis for denying the project. The board had cited inconsistencies with the town's comprehensive plan, potential impacts on surrounding neighborhoods, and concerns that self-storage facilities could discourage activity along a commercial corridor.

Hayes also upheld the town's authority to recover consulting expenses associated with reviewing development applications. While the developer argued that environmental review fees should have been capped at approximately $11,000, the judge determined that state law permits municipalities to recover reasonable and necessary consulting costs beyond those associated specifically with environmental impact statements.

The developer's appeal seeks to overturn the ruling, leaving the project's future uncertain. Source: Jeff Simms, The Current, Oct. 28, 2026.

CLICK BELOW TO READ THE PREVIOUS STORY