Pleasant View sidewalk project fails approval

[Lee Chowaniec]

Supervisor Ruffino’s sponsored resolution to pursue funding opportunities to complete the Pleasant View Dr. Sidewalk Project failed to receive a second from any board member and failed approval.

The project cost was estimated at $4,277,486. The town would apply for a NYS Department of Transportation grant of $3,421,973 and matching grant revenues of $855,493 (20%).

Sidewalk project proponents and opponents spent over an hour at the open public comment session on the prefile resolutions presenting petition results and reasons for, or against the project. Both were equally impressive and tenacious in defending their positions.

I was most impressed with Councilmember Mazur’s reasons why he did not second Supervisor Ruffino’s sidewalk project proposal. Mazur declared he needed to speak on his reason not to second the motion and alluded that he had brought up the matter in the work session.

Mazur brought about his environmental concerns regarding issues of tearing down 30-year-old-trees on front lawns, loss of front yard landscaping, no tree survey in place, etc., with no landscaping plan in place and too many unanswered questions. “We have residents living there 40-50 years that are going to have sidewalk maintenance issues.”

“We have a situation with patio homes. If we had been smart as a town when those patio homes were going in, we should have had sidewalks put in. We didn’t. We failed as a town. Plowing those streets in the winter is a huge problem for Associations in keeping streets clear for bus pickups.”

“The Planning Board was never brought into the process. This is a Planning Board issue that was never dealt with. It’s a community development issue and there was another set of eyes not consulted. The Planning Board had no input in the process.”

Mazur spoke on when the Pleasant Meadows subdivision was developed just east of the High School there was no connectivity of roads connecting the development to the high school to allow for safe walkability. “We should have made the developer put in connecting roads – another planning mistake,” said Mazur. “We wouldn’t have kids walking on Pleasant View.”

Mazur lamented that when he was a kid they built connecting subdivisions that provided for safe walkability. He declared the issue that the town is facing was self-created. “We did this to ourselves.”

Mazur spoke on the funding. He declared “Ms. Wallace (NYS Assembly) reported she was going to try to get the town some money to cover the town’s portion of the grant (20%, $885,000), try to get some money from the county, but the town would still have to put some money into the project. “I think it needs to be looked at more closely,” Mazur closed with.

Comment

Councilmember Mazur and the Pleasant View Drive residents addressing the board brought up issues of traffic, traffic safety, lack of sidewalks, subdivision interconnectivity and walkability, traffic speed on a two-lane county road, overdevelopment and other. Those and other issues now plaguing the town now and should have been addressed during town development.

When some Pleasant View Drive residents declared this was their project and didn’t need to hear from others that did not live on their street, they were dead wrong. Others who have like situations were just waiting to appeal to the town with, “When am I going to get my sidewalks? When am I going to get the open drainage culverts piped and filled in?

We are paying for the sins of our fathers. Too often developer best interests were favored over that of the residents. If the town cannot accommodate for the growth but keeps developing, that is not following smart growth principles, that is ‘dumb’ growth.

[shortstuff]

Supervisor Ruffino’s sponsored resolution to pursue funding opportunities to complete the Pleasant View Dr. Sidewalk Project failed to receive a second from any board member and failed approval.

The project cost was estimated at $4,277,486. The town would apply for a NYS Department of Transportation grant of $3,421,973 and matching grant revenues of $855,493 (20%).

Sidewalk project proponents and opponents spent over an hour at the open public comment session on the prefile resolutions presenting petition results and reasons for, or against the project. Both were equally impressive and tenacious in defending their positions.

I was most impressed with Councilmember Mazur’s reasons why he did not second Supervisor Ruffino’s sidewalk project proposal. Mazur declared he needed to speak on his reason not to second the motion and alluded that he had brought up the matter in the work session.

Mazur brought about his environmental concerns regarding issues of tearing down 30-year-old-trees on front lawns, loss of front yard landscaping, no tree survey in place, etc., with no landscaping plan in place and too many unanswered questions. “We have residents living there 40-50 years that are going to have sidewalk maintenance issues.”

“We have a situation with patio homes. If we had been smart as a town when those patio homes were going in, we should have had sidewalks put in. We didn’t. We failed as a town. Plowing those streets in the winter is a huge problem for Associations in keeping streets clear for bus pickups.”

“The Planning Board was never brought into the process. This is a Planning Board issue that was never dealt with. It’s a community development issue and there was another set of eyes not consulted. The Planning Board had no input in the process.”

Mazur spoke on when the Pleasant Meadows subdivision was developed just east of the High School there was no connectivity of roads connecting the development to the high school to allow for safe walkability. “We should have made the developer put in connecting roads – another planning mistake,” said Mazur. “We wouldn’t have kids walking on Pleasant View.”

Mazur lamented that when he was a kid they built connecting subdivisions that provided for safe walkability. He declared the issue that the town is facing was self-created. “We did this to ourselves.”

Mazur spoke on the funding. He declared “Ms. Wallace (NYS Assembly) reported she was going to try to get the town some money to cover the town’s portion of the grant (20%, $885,000), try to get some money from the county, but the town would still have to put some money into the project. “I think it needs to be looked at more closely,” Mazur closed with.

Comment

Councilmember Mazur and the Pleasant View Drive residents addressing the board brought up issues of traffic, traffic safety, lack of sidewalks, subdivision interconnectivity and walkability, traffic speed on a two-lane county road, overdevelopment and other. Those and other issues now plaguing the town now and should have been addressed during town development.

When some Pleasant View Drive residents declared this was their project and didn’t need to hear from others that did not live on their street, they were dead wrong. Others who have like situations were just waiting to appeal to the town with, “When am I going to get my sidewalks? When am I going to get the open drainage culverts piped and filled in?

We are paying for the sins of our fathers. Too often developer best interests were favored over that of the residents. If the town cannot accommodate for the growth but keeps developing, that is not following smart growth principles, that is ‘dumb’ growth.

Wouldn't part of the responsibility lie with the Code Enforcement Officer Lee? Simme was the CEO at the time. It's a mess over there and you are spot on regarding the "sins of our forefathers.."