Opinion
May 10, 1993
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Kutner, J.).
Ordered that the appellants' notice of appeal is treated as an application for leave to appeal, and the application is granted; and it is further,
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with one bill of costs to the respondents appealing separately and filing separate briefs.
The petitioners contend that their application seeking revocation of Certificate of Occupancy No. 4183, dated July 29, 1987, and the issuance of the annual swimming pool use permit was timely filed. Absent a definitive time limitation prescribed by the Zoning Board of Appeals, the reviewing court must determine the reasonableness of the time it took the petitioners to file such an appeal (see, Matter of Cave v Zoning Bd. of Appeals, 49 A.D.2d 228; Matter of Ehrenberg v Persons, 8 A.D.2d 18; Maroney v Friere, 74 Misc.2d 339). The petitioners did not seek a hearing before the Board of Appeals of the Incorporated Village of East Hills until August 2, 1988, approximately one year after they discovered the issuance thereof. Such a long delayed request was untimely. Therefore, those branches of the petition regarding Certificate of Occupancy No. 4183 and the issuance of the annual swimming pool use permit were properly dismissed.
Contrary to the petitioners' contentions, their claims regarding Building Permit No. 4492 and Certificate of Occupancy No. 4302 were properly remitted to the Board of Appeals of the Incorporated Village of East Hills for a hearing (see, Matter of Cowan v Kern, 41 N.Y.2d 591; see also, Haddad v Salzman, 188 A.D.2d 515; Matter of Rostlee Assocs. v Amelkin, 121 A.D.2d 725).
We find the petitioners' remaining contentions to be meritless. Sullivan, J.P., Lawrence, Copertino and Santucci, JJ., concur.