Koster Keunen, Inc. v. Scheyer
| Decision Date | 18 December 1989 |
| Citation | 549 N.Y.S.2d 72,156 A.D.2d 563 |
| Parties | In the Matter of KOSTER KEUNEN, INC., Appellant, v. Richard I. SCHEYER, etc., et al., Respondents. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Eugene L. DeNicola, Sayville (Jane E. Conway, on the brief), for appellant.
Robert J. Cimino, Town Atty., Islip (Doris E. Roth, on the brief), for respondents.
Before MANGANO, J.P., and BROWN, RUBIN and KOOPER, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondents members of the Board of Zoning Appeals of the Town of Islip dated December 16, 1986, which denied the petitioner's application for area variances, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Tanenbaum, J.) dated April 8, 1987, which dismissed the proceeding.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
The provisions of the Islip zoning ordinance pursuant to which the petitioner seeks single and separate ownership treatment for its parcel of land, require "compliance with all zoning requirements other than the one for which the single and separate dispensation is conferred" (Matter of Dittmer v. Scheyer, 74 A.D.2d 828, 425 N.Y.S.2d 175). The petitioner's parcel fails to comply with that aforesaid provision, in that there are many nonconformities with respect to requirements other than the one for which the petitioner may receive a "single and separate dispensation". Accordingly, the court properly determined that the petitioner was not entitled to the variances sought as a matter of right (see, Matter of Pellati v. Scheyer, 115 A.D.2d 606, 496 N.Y.S.2d 268; Matter of Lakeland Park Estates v. Scheyer, 142 A.D.2d 582, 530 N.Y.S.2d 240).
Nor is the petitioner entitled to the variances on the ground that it has established either significant economic hardship or practical difficulty (see, Matter of Cowan v. Kern, 41 N.Y.2d 591, 596, 394 N.Y.S.2d 579, 363 N.E.2d 305). "The mere fact that the land could be used more profitably if a variance were granted is insufficient to warrant granting the petitioner's application" (Matter of Iannucci v. Casey, 140 A.D.2d 343, 344, 527 N.Y.S.2d 834). Moreover, economic injury was not established on this record where it appeared that the petitioner paid $2 for the property and the petitioner's own expert testified that even without the variances the property was worth about $1,000.
While denial of the variances will unquestionably result in...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Kransteuber v. Scheyer
...Merritt v. Weist, 41 N.Y.2d 438, 442, 393 N.Y.S.2d 379, 361 N.E.2d 1028; Matter of Cowan v. Kern, supra; Matter of Koster Keunen, Inc., v. Scheyer, 156 A.D.2d 563, 564, 549 N.Y.S.2d 72; Matter of 113 Hillside Ave. Corp. v. Zaino, 27 N.Y.2d 258, 317 N.Y.S.2d 305, 265 N.E.2d 733; Matter of La......
-
Sakrel, Ltd. v. Roth
...Babylon Code does not provide blanket single and separate dispensations excusing all area deficiencies (see, Matter of Koster Keunen v. Scheyer, 156 A.D.2d 563, 549 N.Y.S.2d 72; Matter of Lakeland Park Estates v. Scheyer, supra; Matter of Kast v. Casey, 129 A.D.2d 641, 514 N.Y.S.2d 119). Ac......
-
Hansen v. Zoning Bd. of Appeals of Town of Islip
...dispensation is conferred" (Matter of Dittmer v. Scheyer, 74 A.D.2d 828, 425 N.Y.S.2d 175; see also, Matter of Koster Keunen, Inc. v. Scheyer, 156 A.D.2d 563, 549 N.Y.S.2d 72; Matter of Snyder v. Scheyer, 153 A.D.2d 630, 544 N.Y.S.2d 853; Matter of Siciliano v. Scheyer, 150 A.D.2d 460, 541 ......
-
Soundside Estates, Inc. v. Board of Zoning Appeals of City of Glen Cove
...911; Matter of Cowan v. Kern, supra; Matter of Giannattasio v. Ganser, 174 A.D.2d 567, 570 N.Y.S.2d 680; Matter of Koster Keunen v. Scheyer, 156 A.D.2d 563, 549 N.Y.S.2d 72). Furthermore, the petitioner failed to show that a literal application of the zoning regulations to its property woul......