Development
Where oh where will the Aldi’s be?
By Lee Chowaniec
Jan 6, 2008, 17:51

That’s kind of what the Lancaster Planning Board (PB) wanted to know at their recent board meeting. Project proposals have been presented to the PB for the construction of an Aldi’s on William Street (across from the Wal-Mart project) and on Transit Road between Rite Aid Pharmacy and Lancaster Bowling Lanes.

Chris Andrzejewski of Genesee Engineering petitioned the PB on behalf of 81&3 of Florida (Bella Vista) to rezone the property of John C. Herdzik, 4745 William Street, from present R-1 (Residential) to General Business (GB) for use to build a retail shopping center.

The added land, along with land already owned by 81&3 of Florida will allow them to construct a 38,600 square-foot retail shopping center.

When asked whether there was a tenant in place for the retail center, Andrzejewski declared that one of the tenants was Aldi’s.

PB Chair Stanley J. Keysa asked Andrejewski whether he was aware that Benderson Development had appeared before the PB with a proposal to build an Aldi’s on Transit Road.

On December 5, 2007, James Rumsey of Benderson Development Company presented to the Planning Board the site plan for a proposed 15,121 sq. ft. grocery store located at 4937 Transit Road. This parcel is located 300 feet south of William Street adjacent to the existing Rite-Aid Pharmacy. The site plan shows an entry/exit on Transit Road and an entry/exit on William Street (Rite Aid) driveway.

Andrejewski replied that he had heard that, but that 81&3 of Florida was also pursuing building the Aldi’s at William Street.

PB minutes

After examining the site plan drawing, Keysa replied that, “the arrangement would work a lot better if they could consolidate the inner roadway systems, but now we will be looking like the railroad tracks marching through Cheektowaga.”

PB member Lawrence Korzeniewski interjected that the next time Benderson came before the board with further information on their Transit Road project proposal, he would be asking for reasons why they could not be working to consolidate inner roads to alleviate some of the curb cuts that would negatively impact traffic and traffic safety should such consolidation not take place.

Benderson was scheduled to appear before the PB on January 2, 2008 to make another site plan presentation.

Andrejewski claimed the William Street design was better adapted to handle traffic onto William, especially when the Wal-Mart is in and signalization is installed. Andrejewski declared the county has signed off that signalization will be located at the aligned intersection of the Wal-Mart and the William Street / Flix retail project.

PB member Rebecca Anderson spoke on the impacts of a project that was now twice the size of the originally proposed Aldi project. She made mention that even more traffic on William would have a significant adverse negative impact on the neighboring residential homes and subdivisions that already have difficulty getting out of their driveways and subdivision streets, especially considering the folly of having four curb cuts for commercial entry / exit and that William Street funnels down to a two-lane county road a few hundred feet beyond the proposed Wal-Mart / Flix driveways.

Anderson also voiced concerns on traffic safety as well and requested an accident report be submitted to the PB. The report should focus on William Street and the Lancaster side of the Transit / William intersection.

Keysa interjected that as far back as twenty years ago when he was Town Supervisor, he had requested the county look into William Street and that nothing has been done. “That’s why we need some focus on William Street and is why a traffic study has been done in Lancaster.”

Town Attorney Richard Sherwood interjected: “Once the traffic study is completed, the town and county would then be able to provide further information to get a federal grant to make road improvements.”

Keysa stated that the drainage ditches could be piped and a turning lane constructed along William Street. Sidewalks would have to go on homeowner properties, as there is not enough right away.

Anderson declared that the commercial developers should be held to installing sidewalks. “That would aid the seniors living in the apartment complex to walk to the commercial development.”

Town Engineer Robert Harris informed the PB that the Community Block grant the town had applied for to install sidewalks along the south side from the senior development had been denied for this year.

Buffer zone

The town took issue with the fact that the project drawing clearly indicated that there was not enough room for a berm to add protection to the remaining residential property to the east, and occupied. “At minimum, a fence with vegetation would be required,” interjected Keysa. “This is not a site plan yet, changes need to be made.”

Korzeniewski declared he was still concerned about the radius size that would allow tractor-trailers to turn to exit/enter the operation and/or to travel through inner roads. Concerns were also voiced concerning the parking spaces on the other side of the access road regarding viability and safety considering regarding the traffic flow through the complex, people walking to the operation from said parking slots and standing shopping carts.

Andrejewski was asked whether “it was common to have an Aldi’s this size or was this a “super Aldi’s?” He answered that it would be an Aldi’s and something else.

PB member Melvin Szmanski interjected: “The other Aldi’s proposal by Benderson was supposed to be before us tonight.”

“Well, they’re not here,” responded Keysa.

Szmanski then asked Andrejewski: “If the other Aldi’s goes up (Transit Road), is this building going up here anyway?”

“Yes”, but not that size,” Andrejewski responded.

“Even if Aldi’s comes in here, changes have to be made because this is a different site plan from the original Aldi’s,” said Szmanski.

Town Council member Donna Stempniak apprised Andrejewski that a site plan had already been approved for an Aldi’s, and now you want a rezone so that you can build something more than an Aldi’s.

Stempniak voiced concerns about the rezone and the impact it would have on the remaining residential parcel. “When Flix Theater was built, assurances were given that there would be adequate buffer to protect the two homes to the east of their driveway.”

Stempniak continued: “We keep encroaching on those properties and I haven’t heard a peep about whether there has been an intent to purchase the remaining Bow property. I would be more willing to take a closer look at this if the Bow property were purchased. It would make GB zoning and/or alternate zoning more doable. Think of the poor guy backed up to all this development.”

Keysa agreed saying that such purchase would make it more logical and allow for a buffer, road accessibility, etc.

Conditions

At that point, Chair Keysa listed the conditions that the applicant would have to answer before the PB could make a determination:

1) Signalization would have to take place on William Street before any construction could take place.
2) Elimination of residential driveway
3) Extension of sidewalk from the Rite Aid Pharmacy property.
4) Construction of a barrier along the east side of the building to buffer the residential property.
5) If GB zoning were permitted that close to residential, there might be a desire to restrict certain type activities that would be permitted on that property.

Keysa asked if anyone would like to move a motion. The PB members interjected that they wanted the use identified for the second tenant. “What’s going in there,” asked PB member John Gober.

At that point, Keysa added condition 6 to the list of condition, namely, identify building use. Use would clarify what restrictions would be cited to protect remaining residential property and to identify traffic impact.

Keysa interjected that he would like to see a master plan worked out between all property owners that would lead to an inner road traffic flow that would enter and exit only at the conditioned signalization location, namely, the aligned Wal-Mart / Flix driveways.

PB members and Stempniak voiced agreement that any other driveways should be eliminated – remove the Rite Aid and Sunoco gas/mini-mart driveways.

Town Attorney Richard Sherwood questioned whether “Ali’s is driving the train.” He advised the PB that they were spending a lot of time and effort considering two projects that had Aldi’s as a tenant, and that should one succeed over the other, the board is being told the concept plans may be changed.

Chair Keysa relied that this was the third meeting with this project sponsor rep and have just be told that if the Aldi’s doesn’t locate on William Street, the concept will be changes.

Sherwood then said the PB had a right to know where Aldi’s plans on going.

Keysa and PB member Gober once again stated to Andrejewski “until the Wal-Mart went in and signalization took place, the development of their project proposal could not take place. That has been so conditioned.

Per Andrejewski’s request, a motion was made and approved to table the rezone petition until the applicant came back with responses for the six conditions set that evening.

















© Copyright 2003 by Speakupwny.com