Opinion
January 26, 1987
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Ferraro, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
The determination of the respondent Zoning Board of Appeals that the petitioner's three separate parcels, each with its own separate lot number and zoning classification, were not one lot under the zoning ordinance but three, was neither irrational nor unreasonable and must, therefore, be upheld (see, e.g., Matter of Albert v. Board of Stds. Appeals, 89 A.D.2d 960, 962, appeal dismissed 59 N.Y.2d 673). We note also that the petitioner failed to demonstrate that it suffered undue hardship so as to entitle it to the use variance it sought. Mollen, P.J., Thompson, Weinstein and Rubin, JJ., concur.