Applebaum v. Vill. of Great Neck Bd. of Appeals

• Decision Date: 13 April 2016
• Citation: 138 A.D.3d 830,28 N.Y.S.3d 459
• Parties: In the Matter of Rachel APPLEBAUM, et al., appellants, v. VILLAGE OF GREAT NECK BOARD OF APPEALS, et al., respondents.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

138 A.D.3d 830
28 N.Y.S.3d 459

In the Matter of Rachel APPLEBAUM, et al., appellants,
v.
VILLAGE OF GREAT NECK BOARD OF APPEALS, et al., respondents.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

April 13, 2016.

28 N.Y.S.3d 460

Michael S. Winokur, Flushing, N.Y., for appellant Rachel Applebaum.

Ackerman, Levine, Cullen, Brickman & Limmer, LLP, Great Neck, N.Y. (Stephen G. Limmer and Andrew J. Luskin of counsel), for respondent Village of Great Neck Board of Appeals.

Harras Bloom & Archer, LLP, Melville, N.Y. (Kenneth A. Brown of counsel), for respondent Old Mill II, LLC.

L. PRISCILLA HALL, J.P., SHERI S. ROMAN, HECTOR D. LaSALLE, and BETSY BARROS, JJ.

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondent Village of Great Neck Board of Appeals dated March 7, 2013, which, after a hearing, granted the application of the respondent Old Mill II, LLC, for variances and site plan approval, the petitioners appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Diamond, J.), entered December 4, 2013, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

ORDERED that the appeal by the petitioner Rebecca Rosenblatt Gilliar is dismissed as abandoned; and it is further,

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed on the appeal by Rachel Applebaum; and it is further,

ORDERED that one bill of costs is awarded to the respondents.

"Local zoning boards have broad discretion in considering applications for variances, and judicial review is limited to determining whether the action taken by the board was illegal, arbitrary, or an abuse of discretion" (Matter of Matejko v. Board of Zoning Appeals of Town of Brookhaven, 77 A.D.3d 949, 949, 910 N.Y.S.2d 123 ; see Matter of Ifrah v. Utschig, 98 N.Y.2d 304, 308, 746 N.Y.S.2d 667, 774 N.E.2d 732 ; Matter of Halperin v. City of New Rochelle, 24 A.D.3d 768, 771, 809 N.Y.S.2d 98 ). "Thus, the determination of a zoning board should be sustained upon judicial review if it is not illegal, has a rational basis, and is not arbitrary and...