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: Jada Developers, LLC, appellant, v. Zoning Board of Appeals of Town of Wallkill, respondent.
Submitted-February 18, 2011
DECISION & ORDER
In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Wallkill dated December 8, 2008, which, after a hearing, denied the petitioner's application for certain area variances, the petitioner appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Orange County (Lubell, J.), dated December 4, 2009, as, upon reargument, adhered to the original determination in a judgment dated June 30, 2009, denying the petition and dismissing the proceeding.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
The petitioner applied to the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Wallkill (hereinafter the ZBA) for certain area variances that would enable it to construct a single-family home. After a hearing, the ZBA denied the petitioner's application, and the petitioner commenced this proceeding to review the determination. In a judgment dated June 30, 2009, the Supreme Court denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding. The petitioner then moved for leave to reargue contending, inter alia, that the Supreme Court failed to make a determination as to whether the ZBA properly applied the balancing test set forth in Town Law § 267-b(3)(b).
Upon reargument, the Supreme Court properly adhered to its original determination denying the petition and dismissing the proceeding. Contrary to the petitioner's contention, the ZBA engaged in the required balancing test and considered the relevant statutory factors (see Town Law § 267-b[3][b] ). Moreover, the ZBA's determination had a rational basis and was not arbitrary or capricious (see Matter of Pecoraro v Board of Appeals of Town of Hempstead, 2 NY3d 608, 613-615; Matter of Salzano v Zoning Bd. of Town of Wallkill, 63 AD3d 850, 851; Matter of Fowlkes v Board of Zoning Appeals of Town of N. Hempstead, 52 AD3d 711, 712-713).
RIVERA, J.P., DICKERSON, ENG and LOTT, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
Matthew G. Kiernan
Clerk of 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.
Docket No: 2010-00785 (Index No. 7450 /09)
Decided: March 08, 2011
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)