Resident files appeal to halt apartment construction

   Dr. Laurence Schweichler filed a case in State Supreme Court, the Appellate Division, in April, arguing the actions of the Village of Caledonia Board of Trustees and the Planning Board regarding Hardwood Properties’ plans to construct a three-story 21 – unit apartment building at 261 North Street in Caledonia. Schweichler’s dental practice is located at 3144 Church Street, Caledonia, next to the proposed Hardwood Manor apartment complex.

   Schweichler filed an unsuccessful Article 78 proceeding against the Village of Caledonia and Hardwood Properties a year ago. A Livingston County Court Judge dismissed Schweichler’s arguments and upheld the actions of the village and Hardwood Properties as completely lawful. The village spent nearly $17,000 of taxpayers’ money to defend itself in this case. Now Schweichler hopes a judge will accept the evidence put forth in his appeal by his environmental attorney, Alan J. Knauf of Rochester, and overturn the county court decision. The case will be heard in September, State Supreme Court in Rochester, Appellate Division.

   Hardwood Properties owner James Sickles has maintained for several years that he just wants to complete the plans he had for this property when he originally purchased it. At that time it was zoned R-3 (multi-family buildings permitted) and he planned to construct additional apartments to blend in with the existing rental units he owns at the adjacent Hamilton House at 260 North Street. A village-wide rezoning plan in the late 1990’s changed the zoning on those properties to R-2, a code that does not permit multi-family apartment buildings.

   Since that time, Sickles has petitioned the Village of Caledonia to return the zoning on his property to R-3 and in March 2006, the Village Board approved his request and on recommendation of the Village of Caledonia Planning Board, rezoned the property at 261 North Street, Caledonia to R-2.

   "The Village of Caledonia Planning Board is made up of strong, respectable and knowledgeable people who very thoroughly considered this project," Sickles said.

   The appeal argues that the Village’s rezoning of the property constitutes illegal spot zoning, that the village’s environmental review, site plan review and resubdivision prior to the rezoning violated SEQR (State Environmental Quality Review) and that the planning board approvals were arbitrary and capricious. He further contended that some of the planning board members who acted on the project should have recused themselves from the May 2006 vote due to their prior personal associations with Sickles.

   Citing documented court cases, Knauf argues that the test for spot zoning is "whether the change will serve the general welfare of the community or just an individual or special interest." He and his client believe that the rezoning of this property does not benefit the entire community.

   The case further argues that the village didn’t comply with the SEQR process when, as lead agency in the matter, it issued a negative declaration on the project. A negative declaration means that the proposed project would not have a negative environmental impact. The appeal contends that the village did not include all involved agencies nor did it substantiate the grounds for the negative declaration. It raises concerns with the septic system on the municipal water system, set backs and the number and size of the project’s parking spots.

   The appeal contends that the actions of the planning board were arbitrary and capricious, meaning that they were not substantiated by facts or evidence.

   Sickles called the dismissal of Schweichler’s Article 78 proceeding in September 2006 a "victory for the residents of Caledonia who have supported this project from the beginning." Site work and construction on Hardwood Manor is expected to begin very soon.

Judge rules Village acted properly in Hardwood project

   A decision has been handed down in the matter of an Article 78 proceeding filed by Laurence P. Schweichler, D.D.S. against the Village of Caledonia, Acting Supreme Court Justice Joan S. Kohout ruled to uphold the actions of the Caledonia Village Board of Trustees and Planning Board pertaining to the proposed Hardwood Properties apartment complex. A 25 page decision was issued in the matter September 29, 2006.

   "…the court denies and dismisses the Article 78 petition in all respects…..The court declares the actions and determinations by the respondents (Village of Caledonia), to have been lawful and denies the petitioner’s (Dr. Schweichler) request to declare the rezoned parcels R-2 (single family) and to direct that no final approval for rezoning be granted," Kohout said in the court ruling.

   Schweichler, whose Church Street dental office boarders the 1.578 acre lot where Hardwood Properties plans to construct a three-story, 21 unit apartment complex, challenged the Village’s rezoning of the property from R-2 (single family) to R-3 (multi-family) and its subsequent approval of the Hardwood Manor project. Schweichler’s attorney filed the Article 78 proceeding on his behalf in NY State Supreme Court, Livingston County, in April 2006. Schweichler had not yet met with his attorney when contacted for comment on the outcome of the case but said,

   "We were certainly disappointed in the court’s decision. I wanted a day in court with this and we had that. I’ll be talking to my attorney about the appeal."

   Schweichler challenged the Village Board and the Planning Board’s compliance with SEQR (State Environmental Quality Review), the Planning Board’s vote to rezone the property so that the Hardwood Manor project would comply, calling it "spot zoning," and raised concern that there were conflicts of interest between three voting members of the Planning Board and James Sickles, President of Hardwood Properties, the developer for Hardwood Manor.

   The court did not find evidence to substantiate any of Schweichler’s claims and therefore ruled that the actions of the Village of Caledonia had been lawful. Judge Kohout upheld the decision of the Village of Caledonia Planning Board to approve rezoning of the property at North and Church Streets to R-3 (multi-family) and the Village Board’s approval of the proposed Hardwood Manor apartment project. Village accounting records reveal that the lawsuit cost taxpayers $16,742 in legal fees to defend the actions taken last year by the Board and Planning Board in the Hardwood Manor project.

   Hardwood Properties President Jim Sickles had this to say after learning of the court’s decision.

   "This decision is a victory for the residents of Caledonia who have supported this project from the beginning and who very much want to remain in the area but have been unable to find suitable housing. This is a wonderful community with many hard working people. It’s just too bad that a handful of activists have the ability to nearly cripple growth and make all the other taxpayers carry the burden of expensive legal fees. Caledonia needs to create a more developer friendly environment to attract other high quality projects such as this one. Otherwise, the economic consequences of stagnation will crush this community. We are committed to this Village, and we will do whatever we can to help it thrive", Sickles commented.

   Sickles said preliminary site work will begin this month with an aggressive construction schedule getting underway in May 2007. Hardwood Manor is expected to be complete and ready for its first tenants in late fall 2007.

Resident challenges proposed Hardwood Manor in court

   Church Street, Caledonia resident Laurence P. Schweichler, D.D.S. filed an Article 78 proceeding against the Village of Caledonia and Hardwood Properties, LLC in Livingston County Supreme Court on April 19, 2006. Schweichler, who resides at 3190 Church Street and whose dental practice is located at 3144 Church Street, opposes the plans for a 21 unit apartment building proposed for 261 North Street (adjacent to Schweichler’s dental practice) by developer Hardwood Properties, LLC. The proposed project, called Hardwood Manor, has been in the public eye for the past several months. To proceed, the developer first needed the zoning on the parcel to be changed from R-2 (single family dwelling) to R-3 (multi-family dwelling) to accommodate the project. The developer purchased the property in the 1990’s when it was zoned R-3 and had planned to build a multi-family project there. In 1998 the zoning on the property was changed to R-2 during a village-wide rezoning plan which halted the developer’s plans for the multi-family project. The Caledonia Village Board approved Hardwood Properties’ zoning change request in March 2006. The VB, lead agency in the SEQR process, later made a negative declaration (meaning that the project would have no significant negative impact on various environmental issues), leading the way for the developer to proceed in the Site Plan Review process. The Village Planning Board held a public hearing on the Site Plan Review on April 26, 2006 at which Schweichler and his wife both read statements opposing the project. Another village resident told the VPB that he thought the results of the SEQR were vague and recommended that the Village Board redo the SEQR and qualify the results with more conclusive verbiage. The VPB is now receiving written comment from the public on the proposed Hardwood Manor project.

   According to Schweichler’s attorney in this case, Alan Knauf, Esq., his client’s petition specifically challenges the Village’s approval of the developer’s zoning change request from R-2 to R-3. Knauf charges that the Village’s action represents spot zoning and that a zoning change must be considered as it relates to a comprehensive plan, something Knauf says the Village Board did not do because it doesn’t have a comprehensive plan.

   In addition, Knauf said the SEQR is "inaccurate and insufficient because of various deficiencies." Specifically, the petition alleges that the environmental assessment form "fails to adequately address the impacts of the Septic Improvements or groundwater and/or wellhead issues." Further, he said the SEQR did not provide adequate explanation for the negative declarations issued on several environment concerns. Knauf will argue in Supreme Court that the VB’s negative declaration under SEQR is "arbitrary and capricious and in violation of SEQR," and charges that the rezoning is illegal spot zoning.

   Mayor Joe Caluorie was contacted but is not able to make comment on the case. Jim Sickles, owner of Hardwood Properties, responded to the Article 78 saying, "It’s a real shame that the taxpayers will have to pay the costs of defending the Article 78 on a property that was zoned R-3 since 1963 with the intention that a multi-family building would go up there. Hardwood Properties is just finishing what was intended since 1963. This project has been through the due process. We were very diligent and we complied with every request the Village made to us. The shame here is the cost to the taxpayers," Sickles responded.

   The case will be heard in Livingston County Supreme Court on June 26, 2006.