What is the test for standing to challenge an ordinance that prohibits the possession and use of a person's property for certain purposes?

[21 N.Y.2d 35] To state the matter more precisely: until it is demonstrated that some legitimate purpose will be served by restricting the use of the petitioner's property, he has sufficient standing to challenge the ordinance. Once it is demonstrated that some legitimate public interest will be served by the restriction, then, before the property owner can succeed in an attack upon the ordinance as applied, he must demonstrate that the hardship caused is such as to deprive him of any use of the property to which it is reasonably adapted, and that, as a result, the ordinance amounts to a taking of his property. [233 N.E.2d 275] (Stevens v. Town of Huntington, supra.)