Lancaster's Leaders and recycled "Council Member" at work

[4248]

Speakupwny.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Editorials
SEQR and Public Hearing held on 00 Pavement Road development rezone
Lee Chowaniec
The Lancaster Municipal Review Committee (MRC, made up of Town and Planning Board members) conducted a State Environmental Quality Review (SEQR)
__________________________________________________ ___________

Lancaster Town Board says,
If it don't fit the zoning - we'll change the zoning until it fits.

This project is so typical Lancaster:

• Get rezones and approvals for one concept.
• Then get changes made to the original approval.
• Then come back with a "New" project for the same site and ask for more changes.
• Then ask for more "rezones" because of the new changes to the "New" project is different from what was approved before.

Lancaster's Supervisor Bob Giza, with the help of X-Town Board Member Neil Connelly( rumored to be the next Dem plug in for Mr.D.Amatura's vacant seat) - want to relieve this projects sponsors from the cost of sidewalks. Even though they were included in the "previous recommendation memo of October 21, 2009" for this project.

That will grant the sponsor a $30,000.00 gift and shift that same burden to the taxpayers.

At the meeting: a Resident: “Doesn’t the town require sidewalk installation?”

Supervisor Giza replied: “We do, but we waiver them at times but we always reserve the right to put them in later.”

Working man/taxpayers translation= We let them go for thirty thousand dollars - developers happy - we look marvelous! Especial when next year both people involved - Supervisor B.Giza and X-Council Members Neil Connelly might need some campaign cash/donations/support/developer good will !

Then if need be, as Supervisor B.Giza said:"We reserve the right to put them in later." -- Working man/taxpayers translation = Taxpayers will have to pay instead.

Partial excerpt:
The Planning Board discussed this issue at length and a motion was made by (X-Town Board Member)Neil Connelly to eliminate the comment regarding the sidewalks from the previous recommendation memo of October 21, 2009, for the single-family home development located north of the senior housing project on Pavement Road.

The Town of Lancaster reserves the right to request sidewalks are put in at a future time when it would be appropriate. Motion seconded by Melvin Szymanski and unanimously carried. (and the developer smiles)



Why are these issues so obvious to taxpayer/residents - but our Town Officials pretend they don't see it ?

Fronczak: “The original rezone was for two senior buildings. Now since we rezoned it then and we are rezoning this parcel of property again, shouldn't’t this be considered ‘spot rezoning’? It’s like if it doesn’t fit their plan, keep rezoning it.”

Also, as stated in the article, it appears this project will actually "isolate" the few Seniors it houses. Then they will ad some "Patio Homes" and such for others.

So this is truly no longer a "Senior Housing Complex"

because a year ago they said this:
"At an October 1, 2008 Planning Board (PB) meeting, Michael Connors, presented to the Planning Board the site plan for the proposed senior apartments (60 years of age or greater) to be located on an 18-acre site at 6026 Broadway near Pavement Road."

Also, "Mr. Connors(project rep.) also asked that the two conditions previously placed on this portion of the 8 acre parcel to be rezoned be lifted concerning interconnectivity with the senior housing project and age restriction.

The plan shows 21 single-family dwelling lots with the implementation of a cul-de-sac. The ingress/egress on Pavement Road will be directly across from Muirfield Drive. Six lots will front on Pavement Road. Based on the information presented to the Planning Board,

And our Town Officials, who are eager to please watched as "a motion was made by Melvin Szymanski to recommend approval of the rezone to the Town Board with the following conditions: 1.) Previous age limit condition on this project to be lifted. 2.) Previous interconnectivity condition on this project to be lifted.

Well as usual we see our Elected Officials and their "Politically Appointed" Town Officials at work for their supporters.

Don't forget, in Lancaster:
We can rezone rezones,
Make wetlands disappear,
Rare Birds or Animal habitat is no issue,
Theres no NIMBY we cant discredit

and best of all, as Lancaster Supervisor Bob Giza/IDA Chairman says, Tax breaks and IDA deals are waiting. Generous incentives await your arrival and require "No Negotiations"

[shortstuff]

that represents business as usual in Lancaster. In reading this, it is of concern that they do not want sidewalks. I really do not understand why they are opting for no sidewalks. It is a perplexing question. The only thing I could surmise is that they don't want the seniors mingling with the young folks, or is the real issue having to do with Liability?