March 6, 1995
Appeal from the Family Court, Westchester County (Tolbert, J.).
Ordered that the order entered November 4, 1993, is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
Generally, a custodial parent will not be permitted to relocate if it deprives the noncustodial parent of meaningful access to the parties' child absent a showing of exceptional circumstances warranting the relocation and that the relocation is in the best interest of the child (see, Bostinto v. Bostinto, 207 A.D.2d 471; Amato v. Amato, 202 A.D.2d 458; Matter of Radford v. Propper, 190 A.D.2d 93). Here, however, the father was not deprived of meaningful access to the child. Although the mother's 130-mile relocation deprived the father of his Wednesday visit with the child, the new visitation schedule established by the court granted him enhanced visitation in other respects and directed the mother to pick up and deliver the child for these visits. Since the relocation did not deprive the father of regular and meaningful access to the child, the mother is not required to show exceptional circumstances to justify relocation (see, Matter of Cassidy v. Kapur, 164 A.D.2d 513, 516; Matter of Schouten v. Schouten, 155 A.D.2d 461, 462; Blundell v. Blundell, 150 A.D.2d 321, 324; Zaleski v. Zaleski, 128 A.D.2d 865, 866). Miller, J.P., Thompson, Santucci and Joy, JJ., concur.