FARRELL v. Sygnet Communications, Inc., Intervenor-Appellant. (1999)

 Supreme Court erred in granting the petition and annulling the determination of respondent Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Kiantone (ZBA), which granted intervenor's application for use and area variances to permit the construction of a cellular telephone cell site.   The determination of the ZBA is entitled to great deference and must be sustained where, as here, it has a rational basis and is supported by substantial evidence (see, Matter of Village of Honeoye Falls v. Town of Mendon Zoning Bd. of Appeals, 237 A.D.2d 929, 654 N.Y.S.2d 534;  Matter of Geampa v. Walck [appeal No. 2], 222 A.D.2d 1072, 636 N.Y.S.2d 515).   Intervenor presented evidence that the proposed construction would not interfere with electrical appliances or devices, diminish property values or create health risks.   In addition, intervenor “established that the erection of the cell site would enable it to remedy gaps in its service area that currently prevent it from providing adequate service to its customers in the [Kiantone] area” (Matter of Cellular Tel. Co. v. Rosenberg, 82 N.Y.2d 364, 373-374, 604 N.Y.S.2d 895, 624 N.E.2d 990).

 The court also erred in directing the ZBA to make a new determination of significance pursuant to article 8 of the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) (ECL art 8).   The petition does not challenge the sufficiency of the ZBA's environmental review pursuant to SEQRA or the ZBA's action in issuing a negative declaration (see, 6 NYCRR 617.7[c][1] ).   The court erred, therefore, in addressing the issue of the ZBA's compliance with SEQRA (see generally, Matter of Crawford v. Kelly, 124 A.D.2d 1018, 508 N.Y.S.2d 961).

Judgment unanimously reversed on the law without costs and petition dismissed.

MEMORANDUM: