From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Scharaga v. Board of Zoning Appeals

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 15, 1991
175 A.D.2d 209 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)

Opinion

July 15, 1991

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Roncallo, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

It is well settled that a zoning board is vested with great discretion, and its determination "will be sustained if it has a rational basis and is supported by substantial evidence" (Matter of Fuhst v Foley, 45 N.Y.2d 441, 444, 445-446; Matter of Cowan v Kern, 41 N.Y.2d 591, 599; McGowan v Cohalan, 41 N.Y.2d 434, 438; Matter of Wilcox v Zoning Bd. of Appeals, 17 N.Y.2d 249, 255; CPLR 7803). The zoning board's determination that the petitioners failed to establish that strict compliance with the fence height requirements of the zoning ordinance (Town of Hempstead Building Zone Ordinance § 74) will cause "practical difficulties" was rationally based upon the record and supported by substantial evidence and therefore properly sustained (Matter of Fuhst v Foley, supra; Matter of Cowan v Kern, supra; Matter of Faham v Bockman, 151 A.D.2d 665). Kunzeman, J.P., Sullivan, Harwood and Rosenblatt, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Matter of Scharaga v. Board of Zoning Appeals

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 15, 1991
175 A.D.2d 209 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
Case details for

Matter of Scharaga v. Board of Zoning Appeals

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of IRA M. SCHARAGA et al., Appellants, v. BOARD OF ZONING…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Jul 15, 1991

Citations

175 A.D.2d 209 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
573 N.Y.S.2d 905