Editorials
Board holds public hearing on amending zoning for proposed senior apartment complex
By Lee Chowaniec
May 11, 2008, 23:48

A public hearing was held at last week’s Lancaster Town Board meeting that allowed the project sponsor an opportunity to describe his project and give reasons for rezone approval and to allow for the board members and public to ask questions and make comments.

Michael Connors of Affordable Senior Housing Opportunities of New York (Clover Management) petitioned the board to approve rezone of 18 acres of AR land (agriculture/residential) to MFR-4 (multiple family residential) for the purpose of building a two-phase/two buildings 164-unit senior apartment complex at 6026 Broadway, at the intersection of Pavement Road.

Project proposal

The design has changed from the original proposal; downsized to be more compatible with an MFR-4 zoning requirement. The building wall length is 245 feet without an offset and will require two zoning variances from the Zoning Board of Appeals.

Connors declared that the agency was a not-for-profit entity and that this development would be geared to seniors, 60 years of age or older, capable of independent living and with incomes of 60% to 80% of the medium income ($25,000 TO $35,000).

They are looking to serve a group that makes more money that allows them to live in a building financed by HUD, but don’t quite make enough money to live in a property such as Greenfield.

According to Connors Lancaster does not provide the type of stock that is designed for seniors. This type complex will provide for socialization; access to visiting friends within the complex, gathering rooms and availability to make transportation arrangements with other residents for trips to the doctor, dentist, shopping, and other routine travels. “It is a community unto itself,” declares Connors.

”The building is totally handicap accessible and all the apartments are handicap adaptable,” said Connors. “The building is fully sprinklered, has a community room, a laundry room, an exercise room and a beauty parlor.”

There will be 36 one-bedroom apartments, 650 to 695 square-foot in size and rent for approximately $725 to $750 per month and that includes heat and hot water. The 46 two-bedroom apartments would be approximately 850 square feet in size and rent for approximately $850.

Connors stated that they thought the senior citizen population in Lancaster was of low to middle income and are no longer in a position to financially or physically maintain their own homes. “This fills a gap in the market place.”

“We hope to meet the unmet needs of the senior population in the Town of Lancaster with a product that is a quality product, new, safe, affordable and professionally managed.”

The second 82-unit building will be constructed only after the first building is completed and occupied and if the market demonstrates a demand for such a building.

Planning Board recommendation

After commenting on water pressure issues that have been brought to light by Belmont Shelters, floodplains at the north end of the property and the need for back-up power generation in the event of a power failure, the Town of Lancaster Planning Board by unanimous vote recommended rezone approval to the Town Board with the following conditions:

1. Rezone subject to approval of two variances by the Zoning Board of Appeals.

2. Rezone subject to approval of a restrictive covenant regarding senior housing language.

Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) comments

As an involved agency in the project, the DEC:

1. Requested by writing that the applicant must determine the 100-year flood elevation and determine which portions of the site are actually within the determined floodplain by elevation.

2. A hydrologic and hydraulic study must be performed for this portion of the watershed.

3. Approximately 63 percent of the site is located on soils that contain hydric inclusions. It is strongly recommended to have a Federal wetland delineation performed on this property.

4. A Tributary of Plum Bottom is located at the northwest section of the project area. Although this Tributary is not a ‘protected” stream, if federally regulated wetlands are filled or the stream is modified, erosion control measures should be taken to minimize adverse impacts to the streams water quality and ensure that erodible materials do not leave the project site – Environmental Conservation Law.

Public Hearing comments

Supervisor Robert Giza commented that there should be common area where power is generated and residents can assemble should there be a power failure. “We should not have to evacuate them should there be a power failure.”

Connors: “We are open to the idea.”

Giza: “Will a van service be provided for transportation?”

Connors: “If we were successful in moving forward with this (seventh such project), we have begun to do some research in house on purchasing some transportation. It would serve not only this building, but the others as well. I guess the answer to your question is yes!”

Giza declared that we do have a need for a senior apartment complex like this one.

When asked what project would be considered if there were no demand for a second apartment building, Connors replied it could be one of several different senior type products; a low rent apartment complex, a patio home complex, or maybe a product that would serve higher income seniors.

Upon questioning, Connors responded that that it was a not-for-profit agency, that there were no building fee structure issues, that the developer was confident in getting variances from the Zoning Board of Appeals as the project has been downsized and that there were no traffic issues as the Institute of Traffic Engineers in their guidelines state that for an adult senior housing complex the percent of individuals using vehicles came in at only 8-11 percent during peak travel hours.

Connors stated that IDA incentive funding would be pursued.

When asked about the compatibility between this project and the upscale subdivision going up across Pavement Road, Connors claimed that they were encouraged by the Forbes / Carpeto developer to pursue the project at the location proposed.

When asked, Connors said that garages would be provided. “For each building, there will be four six-bay garages, often times used for storage instead of vehicles.” No rental fee was discussed for the available 24 garages.

Connors was asked about the IDA funding and who the investors were and how do they make money on a not-for-profit project.

IDA member Paul Leone answered that the IDA does not fund projects, but gives incentives. “They haven’t applied yet, so we don’t know what that will entail.”

Connors answered that there are investors associated with the project who will profit the same as if the project sponsor went to a conventional financial institution. “There are investors and there is a marginal profit they make; not for a profit, or a large profit. It’s a small amount they get on the investment.”

“So you’re saying it’s not-for-profit, but there is some profit involved, asked Councilman Dan Amatura. “I can’t see someone putting up millions of dollars and not making a profit on they’re investment”

Connors responded: “Again, an investor is going to invest in real estate, more speculative than just a clean deal.”

Amatura interjected: “But there is a profit.”

Connors: “Yes.”

Amatura: So, it’s not really “not-for-profit?”

Connors: “It is a not-for-profit organization.”

Amatura: “But someone is making a profit on this project? So, it’s a not-for-profit organization, but someone is making a profit on this project?”

The issue concerning bussing residents for medical, shopping, etc. services arose again. It could burden the town to provide van service that is already at capacity. “Why should I bother my neighbor, my son or whoever for travel arrangements when the town provides van service,” could very well become the thought process.

The project location is far from any major retail center, doctor offices, dentists, hospitals, etc.

“If there were medical emergencies, 911 could be called or we could provide such service through Metro,” voiced Connors.

When asked whether the potential environmental impacts, as noted by the DEC, would be considered before rezone was approved, the board responded that such matters would be considered at SEQR.

Everyone is of the opinion that there is a need for such project in Lancaster. The issue will center on whether environmental impacts can be mitigated, whether the project fits the character of the neighborhood and whether the location is situated in an area that best serves the quality of life for individuals in their senior years.



















© Copyright 2003 by Speakupwny.com