| Matter of Salzano v Zoning Bd. of Town of Wallkill |
| 2009 NY Slip Op 04913 [63 AD3d 850] |
| June 9, 2009 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| In the Matter of Benjamin Salzano et al.,Appellants, v Zoning Board of Town of Wallkill,Respondent. |
—[*1] Patrick S. Owen, Goshen, N.Y., for respondent.
In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the Zoning Boardof Appeals of the Town of Wallkill dated August 13, 2007, which, after a hearing, denied thepetitioners' application for an area variance, the petitioners appeal from so much of an order andjudgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Orange County (Slobod, J.), dated December 26,2007, as denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.
Ordered that the order and judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
"Local zoning boards have broad discretion in considering applications for variances, andjudicial review is limited to determining whether the action taken by the board was illegal,arbitrary or an abuse of discretion" (Matter of Ifrah v Utschig, 98 NY2d 304, 308[2002]). Thus, the determination of a zoning board should be sustained if it has a rational basisand is not arbitrary and capricious (see Matter of Sasso v Osgood, 86 NY2d 374, 384[1995]; Matter of Enisman v Town ofPoughkeepsie Zoning Bd. of Appeals, 50 AD3d 793, 794 [2008]).
Here, the record reveals that the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Wallkill weighedthe relevant statutory factors (see Town Law § 267-b [3] [b]) and that itsdetermination, including its findings that the requested variance would produce an undesirablechange in the character of the neighborhood, that the requested variance was substantial, and thatthe petitioners' alleged difficulty was self-created, had a rational basis and was not arbitrary andcapricious (see Matter of Pecoraro vBoard of Appeals of Town of Hempstead, 2 NY3d 608, 614-615 [2004]; Matter of Bull Run Props., LLC v Town ofCornwall Zoning Bd. of Appeals, 50 AD3d 683, 685 [2008]; Matter of Pietrzak & Pfau Assoc., LLC vZoning Bd. of Appeals of Town of Wallkill, 34 AD3d 818, 819 [2006]). Accordingly,the Supreme Court properly denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding. Spolzino, J.P.,Covello, Angiolillo and Dickerson, JJ., concur.