Majority
Headnote
1. Municipal Corporations (§ 650[2] )—Petition to Open Street—Map—Inaccuracies in Map.Plaintiff is in possession of certain premises at Coney Island, situated upon the ocean front, upon which he has erected valuable buildings. Defendants claim that such buildings are within the lines of a street known as West Twenty-Third street, which had been legally opened from Surf avenue to the high-water mark on the shore of the Atlantic Ocean, and attempted to remove them. This action was thereupon brought to restrain interference therewith, and the learned trial court has found that, although the structures would be within the lines of West Twenty-Third street if extended, the southerly line of West Twenty-Third street as opened is northerly of that portion of the premises upon which the structures complained of have been erected. From the judgment entered on such decision, this appeal is taken.
In 1869 the Legislature passed an act appointing commissioners to lay out a plan for roads and streets in the towns of Kings county. Laws 1869, c. 670. By that act it was, among other things, provided that:
“After the establishment or adoption of such permanent plan, no street or .avenue shall 'be laid out in said towns, or either of them, except in accordance with said plan so adopted, and all streets or avenues afterwards opened, widened or- improved, shall, be made to conform to such permanent plan and the lines thereof.”
This act was amended or supplemented in subsequent years, but not in respect to matters which are of importance here. Laws 1870, •c. 609; Laws 1872, c. 331; Laws 1874, c. 581. In 1874 the official map or plan of streets in the town of Gravesend was filed, on which West Twenty-Third street was shown as extending from Canal av■enue to Surf avenue. It did not extend southerly from Surf avenue toward the ocean. In 1875 an act was passed to confer on boards of supervisors further powers of local legislation and administration. Laws 1875, c. 482. By this act, as amended in 1881 (Laws 1881, c. 554), boards of supervisors in any county containing an incorporated •city of 100,000 inhabitants or upward, when any territory within such ■county and beyond the limits of such city has been mapped out into streets and avenues in pursuance of law, were authorized to establish “a plan for the grades of such streets and avenues, the laying out, •opening, grading, construction, closing and change of line of'any one ■or more of them.” . • ....
“Section 1. The map filed in the office of the register of the county of Kings, and the office of the town clerk of the town of Gravesend, by the commissioners appointed to lay out a plan for roads and streets in the towns of Kings county, is hereby changed and altered so far as the same relates to * * * West Twenty-Third street. * * * Said changes and alterations shall conform to the changes and alterations shown on the accompanying map, entitled, ‘Map showing the proposed change of lines, etc., of certain streets and avenues on Coney Island, in the town of Gravesend,’ which map is hereto annexed and forms part of this resolution.”
That map showed a change in the easterly and westerly lines of Twenty-Third street, by which the street was moved a short distance further to the east, and it also showed a continuation of the lines of that street south of Surf avenue to a point in a line nearly parallel with Surf avenue and distant 300 feet southerly therefrom. It clearly appeared from this map that the mean high-water line of the Atlantic Ocean was some distance to the south of the southerly line of the street as laid down on the said map, and the evidence in the case justifies the finding of the learned trial court that at this time the mean high-water mark of the Atlantic Ocean at West Twenty-Third street was not less than 600 feet south from the southerly line of Surf avenue.
In view of the prohibition contained in the act of 1869, above referred to, and in view of the fact that Surf avenue had not been' laid down upon any map, either in accordance with the provisions of that act or by authority of the board of supervisors under the act of 1881 referred to, we think that the court had no jurisdiction to open Surf
Inasmuch as the structures complained of are entirely south of the southerly line of Surf avenue as measured on the street opening map, we think the city had no right to interfere with plaintiff’s possession or occupation of this land, and that the judgment appealed from must be affirmed, with costs. All concur.
Cases cited
- Dean v. Mayor of New York 167 N. Y. 13 at 60 p. 64