Opinion
Argued October 29, 1999
December 20, 1999
In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review determinations of the respondent Conservation Board of the Town of Southampton, dated February 5, 1997, and the respondent Town Board of the Town of Southampton, dated April 18, 1997, which denied the petitioner's application for a permit to construct a residence on property partially comprised of wetlands, the petitioner appeals from so much of an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Underwood, J.), dated September 21, 1998, as (a) denied the petitioner's cross motion, inter alia, pursuant to CPLR 7804(e) for a more accurate record and (b) denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.
Matthew M. Lupoli, Flushing, N.Y., for appellant.
Robert E. Marcincuk, Deputy Town Attorney, Southampton, N Y (John Shields of counsel), for respondents.
SONDRA MILLER, J.P., MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, ROBERT W. SCHMIDT NANCY E. SMITH, JJ.
DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the order and judgment is affirmed, with costs.
As the papers and pleadings submitted to the court failed to demonstrate the existence of an issue of fact, the petitioner's contention that the summary disposition by the Supreme Court was premature is without merit (see, Matter of Kellenberg Mem. High School v. Section VIII of N.Y. State Pub. High School Athletic Assn., 255 A.D.2d 320 ; Matter of Fisch v. Aiken, 252 A.D.2d 556 ;Matter of Bahar v. Schwartzreich, 204 A.D.2d 441 ). The challenged resolutions by the respondents Conservation Board of the Town of Southampton and the Town Board of the Town of Southampton were not arbitrary, capricious, illegal, or discriminatory, and the petition was properly denied (see, Matter of Pell v. Board of Educ., 34 N.Y.2d 222 ; Matter of Green v. Planning Bd. of Town of New Castle, 220 A.D.2d 415; Matter of Koncelik v. Planning Bd., 188 A.D.2d 469 ;Matter of Harwood v. Board of Trustees of Inc. Vil. of Southampton, 176 A.D.2d 291).
The petitioner's remaining contentions are without merit (see,Matter of Gazza v. New York State Dept. of Envtl. Conserv., 89 N.Y.2d 603, cert denied 522 U.S. 813; Matter of Brotherton v. Department of Envtl. Conservation of State of N.Y., 252 A.D.2d 498 ;Matter of Captain Kidd's, Inc. v. New York State Liq. Auth., 248 A.D.2d 791 ).
S. MILLER, J. P., ALTMAN, SCHMIDT, and SMITH, JJ., concur.