Baldwinsville — Several Baldwinsville residents have filed an Article 78 petition against the village of Baldwinsville’s board of trustees, claiming a resolution they issued allowing the North West Fire District to proceed with the construction of a fire station was improper.

The petition, filed Nov. 12, seeks to annul Resolution No. 96/2015, passed on July 16, based on the grounds that the village did not provide adequate public notice or hold a hearing regarding the matter as required under village law. It was filed by Edgewood Drive residents Joyce Ramseyer, Joseph Cellini and Elizabeth and Richard Bernardin and Smokey Hollow Road resident Amanda DelCostello.

The resolution in question approves the construction of a firehouse on a 6.75-acre lot at 104 Smokey Hollow Road within the village of Baldwinsville, though the zoning currently at the site doesn’t allow for such a use. However, the board determined, according to the resolution, that “it is in the best interests of the village of Baldwinsville to exempt the proposed use as a fire station from the rules of the PDD [Planned Development District] in which it is to be located, since the public safety and the other factors found by the village board outweigh the need to require strict compliance with the zoning rules for this site…”

“I guess the issue is that the petitioners felt that the village made the wrong decision,” said village attorney Robert Baldwin.

An Article 78 proceeding can be filed in the New York State Supreme Court system to appeal the decision of any state or municipal government. It must be filed within four months of the date of the decision to be appealed. In this case, the deadline for filing was this week, as the village board issued the contested resolution on July 16.

The petition states that the board properly advertised and held a public hearing on the proposal at the May 21 and June 4 board of trustees meetings and that it properly closed the public hearing on June 4. The board then issued a similar resolution to the one in question, Resolution No. 59/2015, on June 4.

continued — However, on June 18, the board rescinded that resolution with Resolution No. 71/2015.

“Some of the information that we have been given we have since been led to believe by other people is inaccurate,” Mayor Dick Clarke said of the board’s reasoning for rescinding its approval of the zone exemption in a June 24 Messenger article. “We can’t proceed until we are sure what we’re looking at.”

According to the Article 78 petition, the board then never re-advertised or reopened the public hearing, which they say is a violation of Village Law Section 7-725-b, but still granted Resolution No. 96/2015, “[allowing] for construction of a facility that is out of character based upon Village of Baldwinsville Code Section 345-25.” The petitioners also called private meetings between the board and members of the NWFD in the intervening period “arbitrary and capricious.”

Though the fire district’s attempt to build a station was voted down in September, Ramseyer said the residents are still concerned about what could go on the property.

“We just want to clarify the zoning rules,” Ramseyer said. “It’s a residential area. The old zoning is only for residential and nursing homes. Should some other business or enterprise come in, we want them to have to go in front of the board of trustees and the mayor. We want them to have to go through the whole process again.”

Ramseyer said she and her neighbors were concerned that, since the fire district couldn’t build on the property, they might decide to sell it.

“The village has altered the zoning with a variance,” she said. “It could be sold, and if the zoning isn’t changed, it can be used for other things. Anything could go there until that variance is taken away.”

But according to Gregg Humphrey, the village’s code enforcement officer, the village didn’t have to issue any kind of variance.

continued — “According to our legal counsel, as the fire district is a municipality, they are somewhat exempt from our zoning laws,” Humphrey said. “No variance is required for another municipality to utilize this property whether it is a school district, town, county, state, federal government or fire district.”

Baldwin backed up that assertion.

“The North West Fire District is treated as a municipality,” he said. “It’s not unlike if the town of Lysander or the town of Van Buren was trying to build something in the village. They have limited immunity. The village needs to make a determination as to whether the interests of the applicant outweigh the needs of the municipality to require strict adherence to zoning laws.

At this point, the matter is in the court’s hands. A preliminary hearing is set for Jan. 13.