MAY 23, 1985 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I . . be the intent of the legislative body when that provision was enacted. The Board decided to discuss that matter at a later point in this meeting. Charles Swisher said he was concerned with whether the proposed rezoning fits within the Master Plan. He was not sure that it did. Helen Knight said her only concern was with the possible increased traffic. Ron Alexander felt that the multiple family dwelling classification was congruent with local business. Dave Lawson responded that by law a property owner can use his property to its highest and best use. The remonstrators asked what kind of assurances there would be that the businesses presently in that area would not be affected. Bill Abbott said that the development plan proposed by the petitioners must be approved by the Board. Ron Alexander moved to accept the proposal and recommend to the Town Board '- that the petitiole~ property be rezoned from Local Business to Multiple Family Dwelling. The motion was seconded by Bill Abbott. Vote was taken and Attorney Ksenak asked Chairman Barry to poll the Board for clarification on the vote. It was determined that 5 members were for the motion with 4 members being against and no abstentions. The motion carried by a majority. The Board then moved on to old business and noted that the Hatmaker complaint was still at issue. Attorney Ksenak informed the Board that an action had be filed with the court against Mr. Hatmaker. The next item on the agenda consisted of the Building Inspector's report. Inspector Beikman stated that he had issued 12 permits, 2 red tags and had performed 21 inspections. The Board then moved to interpret the provisions of Section 4.4. Chairman Barry polled the Board on his belief that Section 4.4 was meant not to allow uses to move next to A and B districts but not vice versa. The Board being polled 9 members '- -11-