Casserino v. City of Rochester (267 A.D.2d 967, 1999)

—Judgment unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: We affirm for reasons stated in the decision at Supreme Court (Fisher, J.). We add only that, because petitioners did not seek a use variance in their administrative appeal to respondent City of Rochester Zoning Board of Appeals, they failed to

exhaust their administrative remedies with respect to their contention that they were entitled to a use variance, and this Court has no discretionary power to reach it (see, Matter of Nelson v Coughlin, 188 AD2d 1071, appeal dismissed 81 NY2d 834). (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Fisher, J. — CPLR art 78.) Present — Denman, P. J., Green, Pigott, Jr., Hurlbutt and Balio, JJ.