September 11, 2012

A Public Hearing was held in the Town Hall, and was called to order at 7:30 PM.

The purpose was to allow for resident questions or concerns and discussion regarding the following application:

"William J. Baker, residing at 6275 Stokes-Westernville Rd., seeks to appeal from Section 110, Nonconforming Structures, Lots and Uses, Paragraph "E" for a Special Use Permit to demolish the existing residence located at 6297 Stokes-Westernville Rd., located on Tax Map Parcel No. 171.001-1-36, and construct a new residence thereon."

Present were:  Supervisor John Urtz, Councilmen Kevin Gallagher, Alan Trombley, and Patrick Hetherington.

Also present:  Highway Superintendant Bill Baker and Town Attorney, David Rapke.

Unable to attend:  Councilman Karl Matt

The meeting opened with the pledge of allegiance and also a moment of silence in commemoration of 9/11.

Bill Baker provided the Board with a map of what he intends to do with his property which would be to demolish two buildings (6297 Stokes-Westernville Rd. and a pole barn) and build one home.  6299 Stokes-Westernville Rd. will remain.                                      

A letter was received from Diane Baker, 6307 Stokes-Westernville Rd. stating that she had no objections to Mr. Baker's proposal.

No other public comments were made.

Town Attorney Dave Rapke explained that the reason this application is in front of the Town Board, is that although it is a permitted use, the fact that there are two residences on one property had made it previously a non-conforming use.

Councilman Patrick Hetherington stated there are four criteria by which to evaluate a special use permit:

a. That the use is so designed, located and proposed to be operated that the public health, safety, welfare and convenience will be protected;

b. That the use will not cause substantial injury to the value of other property in the neighborhood where it is located;

c. That off-street parking and loading facilities and the design and location of all points of ingress and egress are adequate and will not adversely affect traffic circulation in the immediate area.

d. That specific provisions of this Ordinance which apply are adhered to.

Mr. Hetherington states that he believes the proposal meets the criteria.

There were no further questions.

A motion was made by Alan Trombley, seconded by Patrick Hetherington and CARRIED to adjourn. The Public Hearing adjourned at 7:40 PM.