Incorporated Village of Atlantic Beach v. Zoning Board of Appeals of Hempstead

724 N.E.2d 365, 94 N.Y.2d 842, 702 N.Y.S.2d 573, 1999 N.Y. LEXIS 3922
New York Court of Appeals·Decided December 16, 1999·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.

The Zoning Board of Appeals held that the caretaker’s apartment was a permitted accessory use, given the size of the beach [844] club and the propensity for vandalism in an area that was deserted when the club was not in use. That determination was neither irrational, unreasonable nor inconsistent with the governing statute (Matter of New York Botanical Garden v Board of Stds. & Appeals, 91 NY2d 413, 419). The lodging and sleeping prohibitions of the Town ordinance apply only to the beach club, not to its permitted accessory uses.

Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Bellacosa, Smith, Levine, Ciparick, Wesley and Rosenblatt concur.

Order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Incorporated Village of Atlantic Beach v. Zoning Board of Appeals of Hempstead, 724 N.E.2d 365, 94 N.Y.2d 842, 702 N.Y.S.2d 573, 1999 N.Y. LEXIS 3922 (N.Y. 1999).

724 N.E.2d 365 (Incorporated Village of Atlantic Beach v. Zoning Board of Appeals of Hempstead) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Matter of Lavender v. Zoning Board of Appeals of theTown of Bolton
141 A.D.3d 970 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)
East Hampton Indoor Tennis Club, LLC v. Zoning Board of Appeals
83 A.D.3d 935 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)