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: Michael GRIGORAKI, appellant, v. BOARD OF APPEALS OF the TOWN OF HEMPSTEAD, respondent.
In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the Board of Appeals of the Town of Hempstead dated November 17, 2006, which, after a hearing, denied the petitioner's applications for certain area variances in connection with a proposed subdivision of real property, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Feinman, J.), entered April 20, 2007, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
“Courts may set aside a zoning board determination only where the record reveals that the board acted illegally or arbitrarily, or abused its discretion, or that it merely succumbed to generalized community pressure” (Matter of Pecoraro v. Board of Appeals of the Town of Hempstead, 2 N.Y.3d 608, 613, 781 N.Y.S.2d 234, 814 N.E.2d 404; see Matter of Ifrah v. Utschig, 98 N.Y.2d 304, 308, 746 N.Y.S.2d 667, 774 N.E.2d 732; Matter of Josato, Inc. v. Wright, 35 A.D.3d 470, 471, 826 N.Y.S.2d 381). Contrary to the petitioner's contentions, the respondent was entitled to consider evidence presented showing that all residences within the 200-foot radius immediately surrounding the subject property were in conformity with the area requirements for that district, that the subdivision will reduce open space and create overcrowding, and that the harm to the petitioner was self-created (see Matter of Inguant v. Board of Zoning Appeals of Town of Brookhaven, 304 A.D.2d 831, 757 N.Y.S.2d 860; Matter of Rod Staten Corp. v. Trotta, 278 A.D.2d 328, 718 N.Y.S.2d 201; Matter of Weisman v. Zoning Bd. of Appeals of Vil. of Kensington, 260 A.D.2d 487, 688 N.Y.S.2d 215). The petitioner's remaining contentions are without merit (see 41 Kew Gardens Rd. Assoc. v. Tyburski, 70 N.Y.2d 325, 333, 520 N.Y.S.2d 544, 514 N.E.2d 1114; Robert E. Kurzius, Inc. v. Incorporated Vil. of Upper Brookville, 51 N.Y.2d 338, 343, 434 N.Y.S.2d 180, 414 N.E.2d 680). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.
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: June 24, 2008
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)