Archive: News

After lengthy deliberations the Lansing Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) postponed a decision on an appeal challenging a building permit issued to the Lansing Rod & Gun Club to move its shooting ranges in order to comply with a United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) order of consent.  The deliberations Tuesday were a continuation of a public hearing last month.  ZBA Chairman Hurf Sheldon said that any decision the ZBA makes would be separate from Code officer Lynn Day's decision to issue the permit.  But after two hours of deliberation no decision was made.

"We're not going to vote tonight," Sheldon said. "There is a lot of extra information we have to process.  We have to get maps and some things to confirm (the issue of segmentation).  The period for public comment is closed."

Last month's public hearing had not been closed, but Sheldon began Tuesday by saying that only the appellants and their representatives, plus gun club attorney Andrew Leja would speak before the public hearing was closed.  Those who chose to speak said they had no more to add, except homeowners Lisa Ruzicka and Tim Farrell, who, with an unofficial 'organization' of Ludlowville residents called 'Citizens for a Healthy Salmon Creek Watershed' filed the appeal December 10th.

Ruzicka challenged the accuracy of a map used in the decision and referenced by Leja's response to last months s hearing.   She charged gun club representatives with making irrelevant claims that are 'highly prejudicial', and said the appeal was filed with much care and within the time period proscribed by Town law.  Farrell challenged a statement that the Rod & Gun Club had exhausted all alternatives before deciding to move their trap range.  He said that the club had refused to consider steel shot as an alternative to lead, which would make moving the shooting ranges unnecessary.

At that point the public hearing was closed, meaning that public comments would no longer be accepted and the board would begin deliberations - the public could stay to observe the deliberations, but would no longer provide input to the board.

"Our deliberations are being held under de nova, which means 'of new'," he said. "We're going to be reviewing all the information from all of the parties and making our own decision.  We may consider the zoning officer's decisions, but the decision is ours alone.  It is no reflection on the Code Officer et al.."

If the appeal is upheld the gun club would have to cease construction and revert the property to the condition it was in before the permit was issued.  The appeal included charges of twelve violations of town law in determining whether to issue the building permit, challenged the Codes Officer with not following procedure in hiring the town engineer to review the project's Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), not following procedure outlined in town law to address the effects of the proposed full project, and failing to consider full project resulting in segmentation.

One of the key issues debated in the public hearing in January was whether or not moving the shooting ranges constitutes a 'new use', which has specific meaning in zoning law.


"It appears to me that all of the land that is being used under the new plan was being used under the old configuration," ZBA Attorney Paul D. Sylvestri. "The zoning code doesn't differentiate between types of shooting.  So it just says 'Sportsman Club with Shooting', but it doesn't say trap shooting versus rifle shooting versus pistol shooting versus bows and arrows.  So it appears to me that Lynn was correct in his interpretation of this piece of the code (1001.1)."

That began lengthy deliberations on each charge in the appeal.  At times there was some discussion about environmental concerns, particularly as they relate to an EPA consent order and what opponents of the project estimate is 200 tons of lead from over half a decade of shooting near Salmon Creek.  EPA has jurisdiction over these environmental issues, and at one point a ZBA member asked Lega why shooting of lead shot has continued when it was apparently prohibited.

"It was addressed in the course of the negotiations with the EPA," he said. "There are downsides to that that were addressed. The EPA gave us a menu of options to select.  One of them was relocation of the ranges to an area that could be reclaimed, that was out of the stream area, the flood plain.  That was the one the club chose.  That's EPA agreed to go forward with the order and execute it."

He added that the EPA doesn't absolve the club from local requirements such as building permits, but issued a consent order for the option the club chose, and the club then pursued a building permit application with the Town.  He said the the club has responsibility of monitoring the pH of the soil on an ongoing basis to insure that there are no spikes that need to be brought to the attention of regulators.

By the end of the meeting there were still some issues the board wanted clarification on, including questions about maps that may or may not apply to the issue.  Sylvestri noted that while the EPA has jurisdiction over the environment in this case, the ZBA could consider the impact of lead shot to a hillside as it might apply to expanding a non-conforming use.

"To recap, we have been using the appeal as sort of a guide to go through the reasoning," Sheldon summed up. "We're trying to find out what it is we don't know and what it is we need to know to be able to make a decision."

The board voted to table the closed session until a future meeting.  Sheldon said that next month's scheduled ZBA agenda is already full, so he will try to set up a separate meeting on March 5th. 

v15i7