Opinion
February 16, 1999
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Oshrin, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, with costs, the petition is denied, and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits.
The petitioner hired a contractor to install a pool and a deck on his property. When the job was completed, the petitioner discovered that due to the contractor's error, the pool was not located in the proper position and that it violated a 30-foot setback requirement of the Town of Shelter Island. The petitioner therefore sought a variance, asserting that he would sustain economic hardship if he was required to relocate the pool. The Town refused to grant a variance, but the Supreme Court, inter alia, annulled that determination. We reverse.
Under the circumstances of this case, the Zoning Board's determination to deny the variance was neither illegal, arbitrary, nor an abuse of discretion ( see, Matter of Seumenicht v. Zoning Bd. of Appeals, 217 A.D.2d 632; Matter of Carlucci v. Board of Zoning Appeals, 205 A.D.2d 688; Matter of Slakoff v. Hitchcock, 194 A.D.2d 613; Matter of Fendelman v. Zoning Bd. of Appeals, 178 A.D.2d 478; Matter of Nammack v. Krucklin, 149 A.D.2d 596).
O'Brien, J. P., Santucci, Joy and Goldstein, JJ., concur.