ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
Contrary to the petitioner's contentions, the Supreme Court properly denied its petition and dismissed the instant proceeding, since the petitioner "failed to carry [its] burden of showing that [its] contemplated use of the subject property `conforms with the standards imposed by the zoning ordinance'" (Matter of Wal-Mart Stores v. Planning Bd. of Town of N. Elba, 238 A.D.2d 93, 99, quoting Matter of Munro Muffler/Brake v. Town Bd. of the Town of Perinton, 222 A.D.2d 1069; see Matter of Schadow v. Wilson, 191 A.D.2d 53, 57).
The petitioner's remaining contentions are without merit.
RITTER, J.P., FLORIO, FRIEDMANN and COZIER, JJ., concur.