Point Lookout Civic Ass'n v. Board of Zoning Appeals

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Point Lookout Civic Ass'n v. Board of Zoning Appeals

150 A.D.2d 579, 541 N.Y.S.2d 841, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6856

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedMay 15, 1989

StatusPublished

This text of 150 A.D.2d 579 (Point Lookout Civic Ass'n v. Board of Zoning Appeals) 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

Point Lookout Civic Ass'n v. Board of Zoning Appeals, 150 A.D.2d 579, 541 N.Y.S.2d 841, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6856 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondent Board of Zoning Appeals of the Town of Hempstead, dated December 1, 1987, which granted the applications of respondents Steven Pepe, Elvira Pepe, Arthur J. Ferro, and Patricia Ferro for area variances, the petitioners appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (DiNoto, J.), dated July 8, 1988, which dismissed the petition.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The respondent property owners submitted evidence establishing that if their applications were denied they would suffer substantial economic hardship (see, Matter of Cowan v Kern, 41 NY2d 591). Moreover, the expert presented by the respondent property owners and the petitioners’ expert who testified at the hearing were in agreement that the construction of an additional house would not adversely affect the public health, safety, morals or general welfare of the community (see, Matter of National Merritt v Weist, 41 NY2d 438). Thus, even [580]*580though the hardship suffered by the respondent property owners was self-imposed, the Board was justified in granting the variances (see, Matter of National Merritt v Weist, supra; Matter of Cowan v Kern, supra).

We have examined the petitioners’ remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Kunzeman, J. P., Rubin, Spatt and Balletta, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondent Board of Zoning Appeals of the Town of Hempstead, dated December 1, 1987, which granted the applications of respondents Steven Pepe, Elvira Pepe, Arthur J. Ferro, and Patricia Ferro for area variances, the petitioners appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (DiNoto, J.), dated July 8, 1988, which dismissed the petition.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The respondent property owners submitted evidence establishing that if their applications were denied they would suffer substantial economic hardship (see, Matter of Cowan v Kern, 41 NY2d 591). Moreover, the expert presented by the respondent property owners and the petitioners’ expert who testified at the hearing were in agreement that the construction of an additional house would not adversely affect the public health, safety, morals or general welfare of the community (see, Matter of National Merritt v Weist, 41 NY2d 438). Thus, even [580]*580though the hardship suffered by the respondent property owners was self-imposed, the Board was justified in granting the variances (see, Matter of National Merritt v Weist, supra; Matter of Cowan v Kern, supra).

We have examined the petitioners’ remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Kunzeman, J. P., Rubin, Spatt and Balletta, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

150 A.D.2d 579, 541 N.Y.S.2d 841, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6856, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/point-lookout-civic-assn-v-board-of-zoning-appeals-nyappdiv-1989.