The Planning Board of the Town of Lancaster held a public hearing Wednesday evening to hear all interested parties regarding applications for preliminary plat approval for the proposed “Windsor Ridge South Phase 2” Subdivision, consisting of 193 Single Family Homes on +/- 116.9 acres, located 00 Bowen Road in the Town of Lancaster.

The project sponsor representative declared the preliminary plat for the entire site was approved about nine year ago. They are here petitioning the board to approve amending the plat by closing off the Manchester Lane exit to Brunck Road as it is little used and there will now be an access road to Bowen Road. This will be the project sponsor’ final plat submittal before construction commences.

Several Bowen Road homeowners spoke against the closing of the exiting Road that exists onto Brunck Road (the only change from the original plat concept). They cited the following reasons:

Brunck Road exit needed to relief the traffic volume that will exit onto Bowen Road. It is difficult to get onto Bowen now.

Bowen Road is already a dangerous road with exiting volume of traffic and vehicles travelling at high speeds

Tragic accidents have already occurred with resulting deaths

Writer addresses board

Chowaniec: I am looking for clarification on what I heard from the Greenman-Pederson engineer and the Bowen Road homeowners on the closing of Brunck Road. Is this hearing only on the requested closing of Brunck Road or that this is about final plat consideration and approval for building to commence? (No board response)

We are told by the project sponsor engineer that the preliminary plat plan was previously approved by the planning board and is returning because of the removal of the exit to Brunck Road. On June 16, 2008, the town approved a single-family residential subdivision to be known as “Windsor Ridge South Subdivision Phase I. Is this public hearing to consider approval of Phase II or just on the plat revision to remove Brunck Road?

As there was no board response again and was told there would be none, just comments from interested parties, I asked if I could speak on the conditions set in the plat approval. I was told they would allow it and were interested in hearing my comments.

First off, I cannot understand why this public hearing is being held after the Planning Board recommended approval of the revised preliminary plat plan to the Town Board? The only comment made by the board was that the recommendation was not approved by the town board and the reason for the hearing. “We are here to listen to the public comments and not to respond.”

The original plat concept called for 319 lots. Many were removed because of the impact to the creek, wetland and the adjacent areas. In 2007, a DEC permit authorized activity for the construction of a 6-phase 295 lot residential subdivision – down from an initial concept of 319 homes.

On March 28, 2008 the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC issued a Commence Work Permit for the construction of a 6 Phase 292 lot residential subdivision. The expiration date on the permit is listed as September 30, 2017. As we have been informed by soil expert Don Owens, wetlands grow. Considering all the development that has taken place with the Phase I construction and on the north side of Brunck Road, water has been pushed with less land available to act as sponges. It is my opinion that the town should require current wetland delineation; especially when the application sponsor is claiming that no properties sit in the buffer zone. That DEC permit conditioned that if anything changes in the future, they or the town has an opportunity to rescind the permit. Looking at the current site drawing where there are supposedly no homes in the buffer areas (and as claimed by the developer) how that can claim can be made today based on a wetland delineation made nine years ago. A new wetland delineation should be considered before plat approval is given.

In a NOI published by the Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) in November of 2006 for wetland disturbance, the correspondence mentions that the wetlands on site were delineated in 2001-02 upon visits by the NYSDEC and the ACOE. The 2008 DEC states that the wetland boundaries remain valid until October 2007. Was the property re-delineated in 2007 or thereafter? I can’t find proof it was. An updated wetland delineation should be something the town should consider; my opinion based on the water that was on site back in 2007 and considering the growth that could have occurred in the past nine years.

My concerns are based on the fact that my subdivision was developed in a wetland and I am well acquainted with the consequences of flooding and drainage issues. No future Windsor Ridge South homeowner should encounter building structural failures or water issues after paying dearly for his home.

Traffic

One of the conditions calls for a traffic study addendum. What this exactly encompasses is unknown.

Considering it has been nine years since the initial study was performed, and since we have seen traffic increase significantly on this two lane county road with the addition of residential development and commercial development at the west end of William Street, the town should consider having the project sponsor conduct a full blown traffic study.

The last GBRTC William Street traffic study conducted, as far as I can remember, was in 2009 and where the daily traffic generation between Aurora and Transit was 13,500 vehicles. That number has to be over 15,000 today.

Closing of exit to Brunck Road

I am of the opinion that with a subdivision the size of Windsor Ridge South (292 homes and its street configuration) the town would favor having three road ingresses and egresses for traffic flow and emergency services response times.

Of course Brunck Road is now little used because Phase I development occurred to the south portion of the site and the exit to a signalized Lake Ave/William Street was more convenient and safer. As Phase II development in the north-east area increases, so too will the volume of traffic exiting Brunck Road.

Considering the comments made by Bowen Road residents on difficulty of already accessing Bowen Road, the traffic volume, safety, et al, the town should consider requesting the developer add signalization or a turning lane to the concept. In 2008, the developer was told by the town that with the inception of TRAMO, the developer would be held fiscally responsible to contributing to traffic control road improvements.

Water collection ponds and drainage control.

Town Engineer Robert Harris has recently submitted a three page correspondence to the board listing 24 concerns that the project sponsor has to be addressed. That is good enough for me. I have a lot of faith in Mr. Harris’s competence.

Cleaning of the Houses

That was discussion at the November 16th Planning Board meeting. It did not wind up in the conditions set. It should be. When Wal-Mart developed its site, it washed the homes and decks that had been impacted by the dust and grime – ones selected by an expert in deciding extent of contamination.

Lastly, Mrs. Anderson, I would like to ask why you voted no to this project – now and back in 2007. But as board members are bound not to respond; oh well. It would be interesting as you are an employee of the DEC