In the past year developers have petitioned the Lancaster Planning and Town Boards for permitted land use changes (rezones) over a half dozen times. Of those four were for rezone applications to change Residential District One (R-1) zoned property to Multifamily Residential District Three (MFR-3) for the purpose of building a patio home subdivision, a senior apartment and patio home complex, a senior townhome subdivision and a senior patio home subdivision.

All aforementioned developments have received SEQR negative declarations as not having any significant adverse potential impacts despite public concerns and commentary. Developments along already overburdened roads such as William Street, Harris Hill Road and Genesee Street will not be impacted they declare, and where no road improvements will be forthcoming to accommodate present and future accumulative town growth.

Developer mantra for seeking rezone land use change is to accommodate market demand and that the project concepts would be less intrusive as they are deed restricted senior (55 and over) projects. While the town accepts developer concept reasoning, residents have reason to believe that the projects would not be financially viable if developed as zoned and as less dense Residential One District (R-1); and in fact, less apt to meet R-1 environmental concerns.

In addition, rezone and site plan approvals were given for the development of a 156 townhome development one mile east of the Broadway/Parkdale development.

Although residents voiced traffic, flooding and drainage issues, lack of signalization/turning lane, emergency service provisions, and other, none were found significant enough by the town board to warrant a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) by the developer.

Where residents voiced concerns about the volume of traffic on already overburdened Harris Hill, Genesee and William roads and the accumulative impact with the proposed projects and such roads will not be widened or further improved, the town was satisfied with the traffic report the developer presented.

Rezone should be denied

All but the Broadway/Parkdale MFR-3 rezone have been approved.

The Broadway/Parkdale proposed 46 patio home development rezone has not gone before the Town Board for approval yet. It is the most intrusive regarding the adverse quality of life impact on the residents of Parkdale/Glendale (the oldest residential subdivision in the Town of Lancaster) and Broadway.

Rezone challenges

Although the SEQR hearing resulted with a negative declaration that there are no significant environmental impacts associated with this development, the residents believe otherwise and have submitted a supermajority petition to the Clerk’s office. Such petition necessitates a four (4) member ‘yea’ vote for rezone approval. The Parkdale/Glendale residents voice concerns and comments as follows:

The residents requested meeting with the council members to share information and voice their continued concerns as the media had given the council members the impression that their concerns had been addressed by the developer and his engineer at the rezone public hearing. There were three meetings held with different members at each and not more than two at one time and which is not permitted. They shared the following concerns:

• They are not against development taking place on the site. They prefer R-1 development. This site has seen several development projects put forward here since 2000; not one of them for R-1 development.

The developer was disingenuous at the rezone public hearing when he declared that if the rezone were denied for the 46 patio home development, smaller lot sizes than R-1, the developer would put in a 49 single-family residential subdivision. Well, why doesn’t he do that now instead of seeking a rezone? Because he can’t 49 R-1 homes on 14.21 acres with three storm-water collection ponds in place already and one more to come wouldn’t allow it. He could more likely build only 25-30 homes; and some would be in the floodway. Has the DEC even signed off on this plan?

• Drainage

Residents still voice concerns that the drainage plan is not adequate to ensure flooding and drainage problems will be eliminated. Their concerns regarding pond capability, pond interconnectivity, and whether the storm-water discharge into the wetland to the south is legal and acceptable to the DEC are legitimate but have gone unanswered by developer and town engineers.


• Buffering

Proposed is a twenty foot (20’) swale easement along the west boundary line of the property line for drainage and water discharge into the wetland. There is already a sewer line installed in the easement 20 foot below ground level. Because the easement Parkdale homeowners are being told plantings or a fence is not possible. Why not a fence? Does the 20 foot easement extend to the Parkdale/site property lines, or three-foot from the property line allowing the construction of a privacy fence? Patio home lot sizes have a smaller footprint and the Parkdale neighbors will be denied privacy.

• Traffic

Despite the claim made by the developer that patio home development attract empty nesters, people of age of 55 and over (and deeded as such) peak hour traffic will have no more than 30 vehicles entering Broadway, the volume of vehicles accessing this development and leaving will have an impact on an already overburdened road; and where another 156 townhomes are being constructed a mile to the east.
• Traffic Conflict

Although there is a turning lane available on Broadway, several hazardous conflict points will exist for vehicles making left hand turns into and out of the proposed site, Parkdale, Glendale and Steinfeld roads because of street offsets and proximity.

• Character of Neighborhood

The Parkdale/Glendale subdivision was the first in the Town of Lancaster. It has become surrounded by multiple-family developments; developments permitted by like rezones. They deserve better.
The residents should not be rebuked by being told that if this property is not rezoned something is sure to be developed on the site. They admit to that and declare in turn, “Build it as it is zoned.”

This rezone is not in the best interest of the community as a whole and especially for the neighbors who reside adjacent (west) to this proposed rezone development project. Good governance dictates this rezone application should be denied.