Here we go again: http://www.scribd.com/doc/158958621/...20130724101302
My comments: http://www.scribd.com/doc/158956718/Canisius-SPR-080813
Printable View
Here we go again: http://www.scribd.com/doc/158958621/...20130724101302
My comments: http://www.scribd.com/doc/158956718/Canisius-SPR-080813
I haven't been in the area when the field is in use...is there a problem with noise, traffic, litter, underage drinking, vandalism, etc?
What were the initial objections? Did any of them come true?
I thought having the field there was odd, and I didn't like the idea simply because west Seneca used to be a lot greener, but other than those "annoyances" and the assumed annoyances I listed above, I don't really see any real non nimby objections (and I'm not disparaging the nimby angle, which I do empathize with).
The main objection was that this was not a permitted use under the zoning law. Since this project was only in the planning/construction phase and not in actual use Canisius was able to get by based just on their representations that classes such as biology, ecology and such were going to be held on-site and therefore this was a school and therefore permitted in a residentially zoned area.
This matter was tabled at last night's planning board meeting.