Posted by: Patricia Salkin | July 23, 2017

The petitioner commenced this Article 78 to review a determination of the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Yorktown, which determined that a variance was not required in order to park vehicles in the front yard of a property owned by the respondent Faith Bible Church. The Supreme Court denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding, and the petitioner appealed. The court first noted that the ZBA’s determination that parking vehicles in the front yard of the Church’s property was permitted as a “residential use” within the meaning of Section 300–183(B) of the Town of Yorktown Zoning Code, was largely fact-based. Since the court was required to give the ZBA’s determination appropriate deference, it rejected the contention that the ZBA’s determination of this issue was illegal, arbitrary and capricious, or an abuse of discretion.

The petitioner next contended in the petition that the ZBA’s determination should be annulled on the basis that the public notice of the Church’s application was defective. The record indicated, however, that during petitioner’s testimony at the administrative hearing held by the ZBA the petitioner stated that the application was properly noticed. Moreover, since the petitioner failed to raise his notice argument before the ZBA, the argument was improperly raised during the CPLR article 78 proceeding.

Bray v Town of Yorktown Zoning Board of Appeals, 151 A. 3d 7201 (2 Dept. 6/7/2017)

 


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 )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s

Categories

%d bloggers like this: