Opinion
February 29, 1988
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Nicolai, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs to the intervenor.
The petitioners contend that the North Salem Planning Board (hereinafter the Board) failed to comply with the substantive and procedural requirements of the State Environmental Quality Review Act (ECL art 8 [SEQRA]), in issuing a wetlands permit to the intervenor. The record, however, reveals that the Board "identified the relevant areas of environmental concern, took a `hard look' at them, and made a `reasoned elaboration' of the basis for [its] determination" (Chinese Staff Workers Assn. v City of New York, 68 N.Y.2d 359, 363-364; quoting from H.O.M.E.S. v New York State Urban Dev. Corp., 69 A.D.2d 222, 232; Aldrich v Pattison, 107 A.D.2d 258, 261). In this regard, the Board's conditional negative declaration was rendered after thoroughly investigating all of the environmental problems with the proposed activity and the wetlands permit was granted as a proper exercise of discretion (see, Chinese Staff Workers Assn. v City of New York, supra, at 364; Matter of Cohalan v Carey, 88 A.D.2d 77, 79, lv dismissed 57 N.Y.2d 672). Thus, the Supreme Court correctly dismissed the instant petition.
We have examined the petitioner's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Mollen, P.J., Kunzeman, Rubin and Balletta, JJ., concur.