RRI Realty Corp. v. Hattrick

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

RRI Realty Corp. v. Hattrick

132 A.D.2d 558, 517 N.Y.S.2d 284, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 49081

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

DecidedJuly 6, 1987

StatusPublished

Cited by8 cases

This text of 132 A.D.2d 558 (RRI Realty Corp. v. Hattrick) 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

RRI Realty Corp. v. Hattrick, 132 A.D.2d 558, 517 N.Y.S.2d 284, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 49081 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Village of Southampton, dated May 24, 1984, which denied, in part, the petitioner’s application for zoning variances, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Baisley, J.), dated September 14, 1985, which denied the petition.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The record demonstrates that the petitioner’s alleged economic hardship was created by its own disregard of the height limitations imposed by the Zoning Board when it previously granted a variance to the petitioner prior to the commencement of its reconstruction project on the dwelling on the subject parcel. Moreover, it is clear from the record that the denial of the present application for variances would not result in practical difficulties in the utilization of the structure on the parcel since the variances have been sought merely to accommodate a chosen aesthetic design (see, Matter of Fuhst v Foley, 45 NY2d 441, 445). Because the Zoning Board’s findings were based on substantial evidence in the record and had a rational basis, the determination should be upheld (see, Matter of Cowan v Kern, 41 NY2d 591, 599, rearg denied 42 NY2d 910; McGowan v Cohalan, 41 NY2d 434, 438). Thompson, J. P., Bracken, Brown and Eiber, 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 Zoning Board of Appeals of the Village of Southampton, dated May 24, 1984, which denied, in part, the petitioner’s application for zoning variances, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Baisley, J.), dated September 14, 1985, which denied the petition.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The record demonstrates that the petitioner’s alleged economic hardship was created by its own disregard of the height limitations imposed by the Zoning Board when it previously granted a variance to the petitioner prior to the commencement of its reconstruction project on the dwelling on the subject parcel. Moreover, it is clear from the record that the denial of the present application for variances would not result in practical difficulties in the utilization of the structure on the parcel since the variances have been sought merely to accommodate a chosen aesthetic design (see, Matter of Fuhst v Foley, 45 NY2d 441, 445). Because the Zoning Board’s findings were based on substantial evidence in the record and had a rational basis, the determination should be upheld (see, Matter of Cowan v Kern, 41 NY2d 591, 599, rearg denied 42 NY2d 910; McGowan v Cohalan, 41 NY2d 434, 438). Thompson, J. P., Bracken, Brown and Eiber, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

132 A.D.2d 558, 517 N.Y.S.2d 284, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 49081, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rri-realty-corp-v-hattrick-nyappdiv-1987.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack