Posted by: Patricia Salkin | October 29, 2012

NY Appellate Court Upholds Variance Denials Finding Rational Basis

DAG laundry applied for and was denied use and area variances from the Board of Zoning Appeals of North Hempstead (hereinafter “BZA”).  DAG initiated an Article 78 proceeding in Supreme Court, which was transferred up to the Appellate Division, Second Department.  The Appellate division stated that although the proceeding was wrongly transferred, it would decide the matter in the interests of judicial economy, affirming the determinations of the BZA.

The Second Department provided that variance determinations will be upheld where they have a rational basis, and will be overturned only where the zoning board “acted illegally, arbitrarily, abused its discretion, or succumbed to generalized community opposition.”  The court upheld the denial, as the court found the BZA had a rational basis and did not act in a manner requiring reversal.  Given that the denial of the use variance was upheld, the court determined it was unnecessary to address the denial of the area variance.

DAG Laundry Corp v. Bd. of Zoning Appeals of North Hempstead, 98 A.D.3d 740 (2nd Dep’t, Aug. 29, 2012)

The opinion can be accessed here.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 819 other followers

%d bloggers like this: