Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: In Lancaster’s best interest

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    8,922

    In Lancaster’s best interest

    The letter in today’s Buffalo News ‘Everybody’s Column’ struck home.

    http://buffalonews.com/2017/05/24/le...g-politicians/

    The past several Lancaster Town elections focused more on politicos and party supporters attacking each other’s personal lives, perceived ethical transgressions and ‘guilt by association’ assertions.

    This election year coincides with the master plan revisit, review and updating – especially code revisions. This year wouldn’t it be nice to expect from all candidates their attention and resolute to address the issues/comments brought forth by residents at the recently held public forum on the master plan.

    There were many resident comments on what needed to be addressed and remedied and should be the focus of this year’s candidates campaign forum:

    • Traffic/overburdened roads – no north-south corridor

    • Flooding and drainage issues

    • Infrastructure improvement

    • Voiced concerns on encroachment in agriculture districts

    • New zoning ordinances needed to eliminate rezones and rezones of rezones that often impact resident quality of life and property value. Site plan conditions that favor resident protection need to be enforced

    • Absence of sidewalks – William, Bowen, Pleasant View Drive

    • County indifference to Lancaster needs – Como Park Lake dredging & dam repair, filling in of open drainage ditches to create road shoulders where there are none, etc. Same old cry of no county money and the existing conflict between County Exec and Legislator.

    Comment

    The master plan revisit and revision is long overdue; seventeen (17) years since the adoption of the plan in pace. Some of us residents have been requesting this review and revision for years. Many of the issues plaguing Lancaster today could have been avoided had there truly been a comprehensive plan in pace, not a ‘generic’ water-downed adopted master plan.

    Zoning Ordinances

    Zoning code classifications and code enforcement of modified changes need to be established whereby rezones and rezones of rezones are no longer a common practice; a practice that favored developer best interests over that of residents and the community as a whole.

    Too often prospective homeowners did their homework, went to the town to ensure future development would remain R-1 zoned, was assured it would stay so zoned, only to find years later the adjacent property was rezoned to something other; something other that intruded on their quality of life and adversely impacted their property value.

    Traffic/ Overburdened Roads

    With the exception of considering the building of a north-south corridor when the current master plan was under review the town has been remiss in addressing and accommodating road improvements for a town sprawling where developer best interests were being served over that of the community.

    Wetlands/ Buffer Zones/Segmentation

    The indiscriminate destruction and/or filling in of valuable and functional wetlands, the permitting of development in wetland adjacent areas and floodways, the permitting of roadways that bisected state regulated wetlands and sanitary sewers in town creeks – and the resulting flooding and drainage issues – should all be eliminated.

    Site Plan Conditions

    Site plan conditions included in site plan approvals to protect resident/property owner right to quality of life and property value market value should be enforced. Too often in the past a developers verbal or even written agreements were meaningless and not enforced even if written as site plan conditions.

    These are the issues that the candidates should be speaking on.


    Unlike the current master plan where input came mostly from town officials, developers, realtors and other vested parties, the town is looking for resident input - as they best know what the issues are. Get involved by attending the formal meetings or submit your written comments to the Clerk's Office or Wendel, the architecture, engineering and planning firm, hired to assist with the preparation of the Comprehensive Plan

  2. #2
    Member mark blazejewski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    5,307
    With the exception of considering the building of a north-south corridor when the current master plan was under review the town has been remiss in addressing and accommodating road improvements for a town sprawling where developer best interests were being served over that of the community.


    That is my pet peeve.

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,675
    Quote Originally Posted by mark blazejewski View Post
    That is my pet peeve.

    Hey Mark,

    I was glad to see one of the candidates running for Town Council attended this public forum, Adam Dickman. He has a keen eye when it comes to infrastructure being that he has served on the ZBA, if my memory serves me correct.

  4. #4
    Member mark blazejewski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    5,307
    Quote Originally Posted by shortstuff View Post
    Hey Mark,

    I was glad to see one of the candidates running for Town Council attended this public forum, Adam Dickman. He has a keen eye when it comes to infrastructure being that he has served on the ZBA, if my memory serves me correct.
    That is certainly positive. The candidates certainly need to lend significant attention to this issue.

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    1,660
    Correct me if i'm wrong, but don't all new builds require sidewalks in front of them?

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    8,922
    Quote Originally Posted by yaksplat View Post
    Correct me if i'm wrong, but don't all new builds require sidewalks in front of them?
    Town Code

    Sidewalks will be required along the entire street frontage of a lot or parcel that abuts an arterial or collector street on any and all town streets or county or state highways when the lot or parcel is developed, unless expressly waived by the Town Board.

    Resolution/Permit Language

    RESOLVED that the following Building Permit applications be and are hereby reaffirmed:

    CODES:

    (SW) = Sidewalks as required by Chapter 12-1B of the Code of the Town of Lancaster are waived for this permit.

    (CSW) = Conditional sidewalk waiver

    RESOLVED, that the Building Permit Applications herein coded (SW) for sidewalk waiver be and are hereby reaffirmed with a waiver of the Town Ordinance requirement for sidewalks, and

    BE IT FURTHER
    RESOLVED,
    that the Building Permit Applications herein coded (CSW) for conditional sidewalk waiver be and are hereby reaffirmed with a waiver of the Town Ordinance required for sidewalks, however, the waiver is granted upon the expressed condition that the Town of Lancaster, at any future date, reserves the right to order sidewalk installation at the expense of the property owner.

  7. #7
    Member gorja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lancaster, NY
    Posts
    13,150
    Is that waiver when a constructed sidewalk would be a sidewalk to nowhere?

    Georgia L Schlager

  8. #8
    Member gorja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lancaster, NY
    Posts
    13,150
    Quote Originally Posted by shortstuff View Post
    Hey Mark,

    I was glad to see one of the candidates running for Town Council attended this public forum, Adam Dickman. He has a keen eye when it comes to infrastructure being that he has served on the ZBA, if my memory serves me correct.
    I saw two other council men candidates at this forum. Ron Ruffino and John Abraham

    Georgia L Schlager

  9. #9
    Member mark blazejewski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    5,307
    Quote Originally Posted by gorja View Post
    I saw two other council men candidates at this forum. Ron Ruffino and John Abraham
    I am very happy to read that. That is very promising.

    ALL of the candidates need to focus on, and address, the vital issues of overburdened roads and the attendant traffic problems.

    To me, they are very important safety issues, and solutions are desperately needed.
    Last edited by mark blazejewski; May 26th, 2017 at 04:41 PM.

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    1,660
    They must crank out those waivers for all of the houses on siebert. If all of the new houses had sidewalks, then most of the street would have sidewalks.

  11. #11
    Member gorja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lancaster, NY
    Posts
    13,150
    There use to be a bunch of new houses on Pleasantview w/out sidewalks. I'll have to do a drive by.
    They don't seem to give any details of reasons for a waiver.

    Georgia L Schlager

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,675
    Quote Originally Posted by gorja View Post
    I saw two other council men candidates at this forum. Ron Ruffino and John Abraham
    Yeah, Abraham is the Liaison to the Planning Board, thereby he is involved to see this process started. Ruffino, I am glad he was there, both who serve on the board should be in attendance. I'm glad to see that.

    I should have been more clearer in my statement-Republican candidate(s).

  13. #13
    Member gorja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lancaster, NY
    Posts
    13,150
    Quote Originally Posted by gorja View Post
    There use to be a bunch of new houses on Pleasantview w/out sidewalks. I'll have to do a drive by.
    They don't seem to give any details of reasons for a waiver.
    There will be sidewalks in front of houses from Pavement to Tranquility Lane on Pleasantview according to the Code Enforcement Officer.

    Georgia L Schlager

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Collins Lancaster Airport grant disturbs Safe Aviation Coalition of Lancaster
    By Lee Chowaniec in forum Village of Lancaster and Town of Lancaster Politics
    Replies: 39
    Last Post: September 26th, 2014, 09:22 PM
  2. Conflict of interest - not in Lancaster - Board of Ethics - not in Lancaster !!!!!!!!
    By 4248 in forum Village of Lancaster and Town of Lancaster Politics
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: May 23rd, 2012, 04:02 AM
  3. Safe Aviation Coalition of Lancaster responds to Buffalo-Lancaster Airport flight pat
    By Lee Chowaniec in forum Village of Lancaster and Town of Lancaster Politics
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: January 6th, 2011, 08:33 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: January 6th, 2011, 03:20 PM
  5. Resident questions Lancaster Town Board on Lancaster Airport SEQR; Part I
    By speakup in forum Village of Lancaster and Town of Lancaster Politics
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: August 21st, 2009, 01:11 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •