Opinion
2004-02311.
June 6, 2005.
In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the Incorporated Village of Kensington Board of Appeals, dated April 14, 2003, which, after a hearing, denied the petitioner's applications for area and use variances, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (DeMaro, J.), dated February 4, 2004, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.
William A. DiConza, Oyster Bay, N.Y., for appellant.
Forchelli, Curto, Schwartz, Mineo, Carlino Cohn, LLP, Mineola, N.Y. (Peter R. Mineo and James A. Boglioli of counsel; Lisa A. Perillo on the brief), for respondents.
Before: Schmidt, J.P., S. Miller, Santucci and Mastro, JJ., concur.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
A local zoning board has broad discretion in considering variance applications, and the determination of a zoning board should be sustained upon judicial review if it has a rational basis and is supported by substantial evidence ( see Matter of Ifrah v. Utschig, 98 NY2d 304, 308; Matter of Sasso v. Osgood, 86 NY2d 374, 384).
We agree with the Supreme Court's determination that the denial of the petitioner's application for variances by the Incorporated Village of Kensington Board of Appeals had a rational basis, and was supported by substantial evidence ( see Matter of Ifrah v. Utschig, supra; Matter of Sasso v. Osgood, supra).