Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
It is well settled that local zoning boards have discretion in considering applications for variances and that the judicial function is a limited one (see, Matter of Fuhst v. Foley, 45 N.Y.2d 441; Matter of Consolidated Edison Co. v. Hoffman, 43 N.Y.2d 598; Conley v. Town of Brookhaven Zoning Bd. of Appeals, 40 N.Y.2d 309). Inasmuch as the Zoning Board's determination denying the petitioner an area variance has a rational basis and is supported by substantial evidence, it should be sustained (see, Matter of Fuhst v. Foley, supra; Matter of Cowan v. Kern, 41 N.Y.2d 591).
We have examined the remaining contentions raised by the petitioner and find that they are without merit. Thompson, J.P., Lawrence, Eiber and Spatt, JJ., concur.