Text · page 12 of 77
Read the whole document on one page (all 77 pages, each with its own heading)
This document was a scan. Its text was produced by character recognition and may contain errors; check the original for exact wording.
J. HS June 12, 2026 Aurora Town Board 575 Oakwood Avenue East Aurora, New York 14052 Re: — Application for Site Plan Approval and Special Use Permit Applicant / Property Owner: Carner Development Group Inc. Project Site: 1196 Big Tree Road, Town of Aurora, NY; SBL No. 165.00-1-28.21 Project: Campground with Wellness Theme with Accessory Uses Zoning Districts: Agricultural and Rural Residential Dear Aurora Town Board: Our firm represents Carer Development Group Inc. (“Carner”), the owner of 1196 East Main Street in the Town of Aurora and applicant for the Site Plan and Special Use Permit Approvals. Legal Standard for Decisions on Special Use Permits As a preliminary matter, it must be stressed that the New York State Court of Appeals, which is the highest New York State Court, as well as New York State Appellate Courts and New York State Supreme Courts, have consistently set forth the law regarding a municipal board’s decision on special use permits. These rules are: 1. “Review of an application for a special use permit must begin with the recognition that ‘Tt]he inclusion of the permitted use in the [zoning] ordinance is tantamount to a legislative finding that the permitted use is in harmony with the general zoning plan and will not adversely affect the neighborhood.’ The burden on the applicant, unlike the heavy burden on one seeking to obtain a variance, is a light one.”* 2. “The denial of a special permit may not be based on general objections by the Board, adjacent landowners or others, or on conclusory findings which do not have evidentiary support in the record. Further, community pressure is an improper ground upon which to base the denial of a special permit.”2 1 Greene v. LoGrande, 96 AD2d 524, 525, 464 NYS2d 831, 833 (2d Dept 1983) (internal citations omitted). ? Wegmans Enterprises, Inc, v. Lansing, 134 A.D.2d 898, 900, 521 N.Y.S.2d 1011, 1012 (4th Dept 1987) (internal citations omitted); See also Twin County Recycling Corp. v. Yevali, 90 N.Y.2d 1000, 1001-1002, 688 N.E.2d 501, 502, 665 N.Y.S.2d 627, 628, 1997 (internal citations omitted): Court of Appeals reverses the denial of a special use permit upon the following ruling: “the board may not base its decision on generalized cormmunity objections ( Matter of Pleasant Val. HOPKINS SORGI & MCCARTHY PLLC Attorneys at Law 574 Main Street, Suite 204 « East Aurora, New York 14052 Office: 716-805-7191 Ext 2 ¢ Mobile: 716-908-3289 * E-Mail: [email protected] hsmlegal.com