Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
IN RE: Diana RIKLIS, Petitioner, v. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS OF TOWN OF HEMPSTEAD, Respondent; Gerald Kestenbaum, Intervenor.
Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the Board of Zoning Appeals of the Town of Hempstead, dated March 29, 1995, which granted the intervenor's application for a variance.
ADJUDGED that the determination is confirmed, and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, with costs.
We note there was no hearing held pursuant to Town Law § 267-c(4) and CPLR article 78, and therefore this proceeding was improperly transferred here by the Supreme Court, Nassau County. In the interest of judicial economy, we will nonetheless determine the question presented (see, Town Law § 267-c [4]; CPLR 7803[4]; Matter of Simmons v. New York State Div. of Human Rights, 188 A.D.2d 475, 592 N.Y.S.2d 597).
Contrary to the petitioner's contention, the record demonstrates that the respondent Board of Zoning Appeals of the Town of Hempstead properly balanced the benefits to the applicant against the detriment to the health, safety, and welfare of the neighborhood or community (see, Town Law § 267-b [3]; Matter of Sasso v. Osgood, 86 N.Y.2d 374, 633 N.Y.S.2d 259, 657 N.E.2d 254; Matter of Malin v. Leibowitz, 229 A.D.2d 580, 645 N.Y.S.2d 99) in granting the intervenor's application for a front-yard setback. The request for a 15.14-foot setback where a 25-foot setback was required was not a substantial variance considering that setbacks in the area, and on the avenue in question, were between 12 feet and 13.4 feet.
The petitioner's remaining contentions are without merit.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: October 06, 1997
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)