Ordered that leave to appeal to this court is hereby granted by Justice Weinstein; and it is further,
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The court properly granted the petition and annulled the Zoning Board's determination that the nonconforming use of the subject property had been abandoned. Since the zoning ordinance in this case fails to provide that the mere discontinuation of a nonconforming use of the property for a specified period of time constitutes an abandonment, an intention to abandon the nonconforming use of the property must be established (see, Matter of Prudco Realty Corp. v Palermo, 93 A.D.2d 837, affd 60 N.Y.2d 656; Matter of Concerned Citizens v Lester, 62 A.D.2d 171; City of Binghamton v Gartell, 275 App. Div. 457). The evidence adduced before the Zoning Board, however, belied any intention to abandon the nonconforming use of the property (see, Matter of Daggett v Putnam, 40 A.D.2d 567; Baml Realty v State of New York, 35 A.D.2d 857; Gauthier v Village of Larchmont, 30 A.D.2d 303; City of Binghamton v Gartell, supra). Thompson, J.P., Weinstein, Lawrence and Eiber, JJ., concur.