Opinion
2011-10-25
In the Matter of Vincent ANZISI, appellant,v.INCORPORATED VILLAGE OF LINDENHURST, et al., respondents.
Rod Kovel, Merrick, N.Y., for appellant.Glass & Glass, Babylon, N.Y. (Gerard Glass of counsel), for respondents.
In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the Planning Board of the Incorporated Village of Lindenhurst, dated January 7, 2010, which, after a hearing, denied the petitioner's application for subdivision approval, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Molia, J.), dated June 18, 2010, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
A local planning board has broad discretion in reaching its determination on applications for subdividing property, and judicial review is limited to determining whether the action taken by the board was illegal, arbitrary, or an abuse of discretion ( see Matter of Kearney v. Kita, 62 A.D.3d 1000, 879 N.Y.S.2d 584; Matter of Davies Farm, LLC v. Planning Bd. of Town of Clarkstown, 54 A.D.3d 757, 758, 864 N.Y.S.2d 84; see generally Matter of Ifrah v. Utschig, 98 N.Y.2d 304, 308, 746 N.Y.S.2d 667, 774 N.E.2d 732). Here, contrary to the petitioner's contention, the determination of the Planning Board of the Incorporated Village of Lindenhurst to deny his application for subdivision approval had a rational basis, was not arbitrary or capricious, and was not illegal ( see Matter of Kearney v. Kita, 62 A.D.3d at 1001–1002, 879 N.Y.S.2d 584).
ANGIOLILLO, J.P., LEVENTHAL, AUSTIN and ROMAN, JJ., concur.