Opinion
January 22, 1996
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Feuerstein, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
Contrary to the appellants' contentions, the findings of the Hempstead Board of Zoning Appeals (hereinafter the Board) were not supported by substantial evidence and were, therefore, insufficient to sustain a denial of the special exception permit (see, Matter of Carrol's Dev. Corp. v Gibson, 53 N.Y.2d 813; Matter of Orange Rockland Utils. v Town Bd., 214 A.D.2d 573; Matter of C A Carbone v Holbrook, 188 A.D.2d 599; Matter of Texaco Ref. Mktg. v Valente, 174 A.D.2d 674). The petitioner demonstrated that his proposed use of the premises would be in conformance with the special exception conditions imposed by the applicable statute, section 267 D (2) (a) and (b) of the Building Zone Ordinance of the Town of Hempstead. Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly held that the Board is to issue the requested special permit, subject to the imposition of reasonable conditions. Bracken, J.P., Ritter, Altman and Goldstein, JJ., concur.