“Before the Board may ... grant a variance upon the ground of unnecessary hardship, the record must show that ... the land in question cannot yield a reasonable return if used only for a purpose allowed in that zone.... ”
How later courts described this case
- “Before the Board may ... grant a variance upon the ground of unnecessary hardship, the record must show that ... the land in question cannot yield a reasonable return if used only for a purpose allowed in that zone.... ”
Written by the judges who cited it.
Distinguished
Distinguished by Overhill Building Co. v. Delany, 28 N.Y.2d 449 (1971)
However, since it is governed by an off-street parking requirement, a limitation on floor area, cases such as Matter of Otto v. Steinhilber (282 N. Y. 71, supra), are inapposite and the instant controversy must be resolved according to the law of area variances.
The opinion
Lehman, J.
(dissenting). Where the major part of a
large parcel of land lies in a residence district but has access only to a street in a business district, the unnecessary hardship and practical difficulties of strict enforcement of the zoning ordinance seem to me obvious.
Crane, Ch. J., Hubbs, Loughran and Rippey, JJ., concur with Finch, J.; Lehman, J., dissents in memorandum; O’Brien, J., taking no part.
Ordered accordingly. (See 282 N. Y. 681 .)