The Pioneer pot has been stirred once again, and the brew thickens. The Sennett Town Board voted 4-1 on Tuesday night to file an appeal against its own Zoning Board of Appeals decision made Tuesday, March 25. At that time the Sennett ZBA decided to accept half of the appeals submitted by RyBach & Rig Properties, LLC. in its bid to continue the renovation of the former Pioneer Restaurant.
The issue was not publicly presented Tuesday night, but the board went into executive session to discuss it and voted to appeal the ZBA decision 4-1, Jeffrey Herrick dissenting. The board announced the decision when it came out of executive session, but no public explanation was given.The amended agenda listing the ZBA issue was not published before the meeting, so the town hall was nearly empty.
April 27 is the deadline to submit the appeal of the ZBA decision to Cayuga County Court.
David Sikora, town supervisor, was unavailable for comment.
Town attorney Tom Blair said that the town had not yet asked his firm to represent them with this appeal or to file any motion. He said the town would have to look at the decisions the ZBA made and decide which specific points to appeal based on whether facts were distorted or the law was somehow misinterpreted, then file an Article 78 in county court to sue a government actor under civil procedure.
If the town chooses to have Blair & Cheney represent them, there would be no additional expense to taxpayers because of a cap on their expenses covered by insurance.
As a legislative body, Blair said, the town could accept the ZBA decision, or establish a new policy for commercial use and add other uses, or consider that people living in the residential area did not expect drive-throughs and increased traffic in that neighborhood.
It remains to be seen whether the town will actually follow suit and file for an appeal in court based on the board's examination of the ZBA decision.
"There were some things that weren't followed just as they should have been," Kenneth Champlin, town councilor, said. He voted to appeal the ZBA decision because the new owners wanted to use the building in ways that had never been used before, namely the outside seating and the drive-through window.
"You can't let some things slide by," Champlain said, indicating that what Rybach & Rig wanted was an impermissible use. He also said it would open up the way for others to do the same thing, setting a precedent.
"Neighbors weren't real happy with the decision," Champlain said, "especially the neighbors who live behind." Champlain regretted the legal costs of this new decision to taxpayers.
"We felt that we needed a second opinion, and we'll go from there," town councilor Sylvia Wilson said. "There were several residents that were unhappy." She said that town lawyers Blair & Cheney left it up to the town to decide whether or not they would go ahead with the appeal.
"I put a lot of faith in that zoning board," Jeffrey Herrick said. "They did a lot of work. Very rarely do they get appealed to a higher court."
Read the full report in Thursday's edition of The Citizen.
April 27 is the deadline to submit the appeal of the ZBA decision to Cayuga County Court.
David Sikora, town supervisor, was unavailable for comment.
Town attorney Tom Blair said that the town had not yet asked his firm to represent them with this appeal or to file any motion. He said the town would have to look at the decisions the ZBA made and decide which specific points to appeal based on whether facts were distorted or the law was somehow misinterpreted, then file an Article 78 in county court to sue a government actor under civil procedure.
If the town chooses to have Blair & Cheney represent them, there would be no additional expense to taxpayers because of a cap on their expenses covered by insurance.
As a legislative body, Blair said, the town could accept the ZBA decision, or establish a new policy for commercial use and add other uses, or consider that people living in the residential area did not expect drive-throughs and increased traffic in that neighborhood.
It remains to be seen whether the town will actually follow suit and file for an appeal in court based on the board's examination of the ZBA decision.
"There were some things that weren't followed just as they should have been," Kenneth Champlin, town councilor, said. He voted to appeal the ZBA decision because the new owners wanted to use the building in ways that had never been used before, namely the outside seating and the drive-through window.
"You can't let some things slide by," Champlain said, indicating that what Rybach & Rig wanted was an impermissible use. He also said it would open up the way for others to do the same thing, setting a precedent.
"Neighbors weren't real happy with the decision," Champlain said, "especially the neighbors who live behind." Champlain regretted the legal costs of this new decision to taxpayers.
"We felt that we needed a second opinion, and we'll go from there," town councilor Sylvia Wilson said. "There were several residents that were unhappy." She said that town lawyers Blair & Cheney left it up to the town to decide whether or not they would go ahead with the appeal.
"I put a lot of faith in that zoning board," Jeffrey Herrick said. "They did a lot of work. Very rarely do they get appealed to a higher court."
Read the full report in Thursday's edition of The Citizen.
The Citizens' Say
There are 4 comment(s)
movedsouth wrote on Apr 17, 2008 1:33 PM:
sue123 wrote on Apr 17, 2008 8:45 AM:
movedsouth wrote on Apr 17, 2008 7:54 AM:
brew1234 wrote on Apr 17, 2008 12:34 AM: