Laserfiche WebLink
i <br /> II <br /> I. <br /> i <br /> Siegfrieds, while ignoring the concerns and rights of the (� <br /> Plaintiffs . The By-Laws, Article VI, § 174-24 (C) (7) , require E <br /> that the Board consider such conditions necessary to protect <br /> the public health and safety, and to minimize a project 's <br /> impact on the character of a neighboring and on neighboring <br /> properties and their occupants. <br /> 17. Instead, in its published recitations of why it granted the jt <br /> permit, the Board focused on the Applicant ' s ability to !� <br /> obtain approval from other permitting bodies, rather than on <br /> enforcing focusing on its area of jurisdictions; that being <br /> the zoning By Laws. It also focused on the Agreement for <br /> Judgment between the Applicant and the Siegfrieds, while <br /> ignoring other' s neighbors ' concerns. <br /> 18. In addition, Plaintiff Myles Frank McHue, did not receive <br /> notice of the initial public hearing on this matter in <br /> accordance with the law, therefore even assuming he was the <br /> only person in interest not having received notice, <br /> notwithstanding publication, the public hearing was not held <br /> in accordance with the law. <br /> 19. Therefore, the Board' s decision was in excess of its <br /> authority and must be annulled. <br /> COUNT I <br /> 20. The Plaintiff restates and incorporates by reference, as if <br /> fully set forth herein, all of the averments listed above. <br /> 21. The Plaintiff contends that the decision of the Board of <br /> Appeals exceeds the authority of the Board and should be <br /> annulled because such decision was based on legally untenable <br /> ground, and/or is unreasonable, whimsical, capricious, or <br /> arbitrary. <br /> WHEREFORE, THE PLAINTIFF RESPECTFULLY REQUESTS THAT THIS HONORABLE <br /> COURT find that the decision of the Board of Appeals exceeds the <br /> authority of the Board, that it should be annulled, and that a <br /> permit the should not be granted to the Applicant. <br /> �I <br /> COUNT II <br /> 22. The Plaintiff restates and incorporates by reference, as if �! <br /> fully set forth herein, all of the averments listed above. <br /> WHEREFORE, THE PLAINTIFF RESPECTFULLY REQUESTS THAT THIS HONORABLE <br /> COURT deny the Application, or in the alternative, remand the <br /> matter to the Board for a further hearing based on the relevant <br /> criteria outlined in the By Laws. <br /> 4 <br /> i' <br />