Lanzilotta & Teramo Development Corp. v. Lazarus

127 A.D.2d 767, 512 N.Y.S.2d 160, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 43247
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedFebruary 17, 1987
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 127 A.D.2d 767 (Lanzilotta & Teramo Development Corp. v. Lazarus) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Lanzilotta & Teramo Development Corp. v. Lazarus, 127 A.D.2d 767, 512 N.Y.S.2d 160, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 43247 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1987).

Opinion

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the Board of Zoning Appeals of the Village of Lawrence, dated November 9, 1984, denying the petitioner’s application for a variance, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Levitt, J.), entered August 29, 1985, which granted the petition and directed the board to issue an appropriate variance.

Ordered, that the judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The record demonstrated that the petitioner could not build a dwelling on the property " 'without coming into conflict with certain of the [zoning] restrictions’ ” and that the restrictions would create practical difficulties (see, Human Dev. Servs. v Zoning Bd. of Appeals, 110 AD2d 135, 139, affd 67 NY2d 702, quoting from Matter of Fuhst v Foley, 45 NY2d 441, 445). The impact of the desired area variance would have been minimal. The appellants’ contentions that the proposed dwelling would create crowding, visual limitations or other out-of-character consequences for the neighborhood are all belied by the record. We have considered all the other contentions raised by the appellants and find them to be without merit. Mangano, J. P., Bracken, Niehoff and Eiber, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Pottick v. Duncan
251 A.D.2d 333 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1998)
Frank v. Scheyer
227 A.D.2d 558 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1996)
Sakrel, Ltd. v. Roth
176 A.D.2d 732 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1991)
Hofstein v. Board of Zoning & Appeals of Hempstead
159 A.D.2d 503 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1990)
Cange v. Scheyer
146 A.D.2d 594 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1989)
Townwide Properties, Inc. v. Zoning Board of Appeals
143 A.D.2d 757 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1988)
Iannucci v. Casey
140 A.D.2d 343 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1988)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
127 A.D.2d 767, 512 N.Y.S.2d 160, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 43247, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lanzilotta-teramo-development-corp-v-lazarus-nyappdiv-1987.