Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Rezone topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lancaster planning board opens environmental review for proposed 96‑lot subdivision
Summary
The Town of Lancaster planning board voted to open the coordinated environmental review (SEQR) for project 2303, a proposed residential subdivision and rezoning referral. The applicant said the mine permit runs through 2027 and proposed enlarging an existing 1.6‑acre pond to about 12 acres for site drainage.
The Town of Lancaster planning board voted to open the coordinated environmental review for project 2303, a sketch plan and rezoning referral for a proposed residential subdivision.
Mark Romanowski, representing PM Pavement, told the board the town board previously failed to carry a denial and referred the rezoning back to the planning board for further review. "That's why we submitted the sketch plan in the first place, was to provide information that's the basis for the rezoning," Romanowski said during the presentation.
Why it matters: Opening the SEQR (referred to repeatedly in the meeting as the "seeker" process) starts a 30‑day period for lead‑agency coordination and agency comment that can shape requirements for reclamation, stormwater and access. Board members said those agency comments are likely to affect conditions attached to any recommendation the planning board sends back to the town board.
What the board heard: Romanowski said the owner, Mr. Marinaccio, bought the property in 2011 and used it for clay mining; the site’s mining permit remains valid through 2027 and there is not yet a formal mine‑closure plan on file. On specifics, the applicant said the existing pond is about 1.6 acres now and that the project envisions enlarging it to roughly 12 acres to serve as a detention and drainage feature.
Board members pressed the applicant on a number of issues the SEQR review will examine, including whether the proposed subdivision would connect to the Heritage Trail (the applicant said they would remove the trail connection as a condition if that was the board’s preference), who will pay for a required lift station if the county won’t, and whether Erie County Highway and the local fire chief will require two entrances. The applicant said it is their intention to provide two access points.
Tree removal and gas line questions: The board asked who removed trees on the site. Romanowski said, "Our client, Mr. Marinaccio," had removed trees and that they believed DEC permission was not required because those trees were not in wetlands; others in the room said they would follow up to verify agency involvement. The presence of a National Fuel pressurized gas line on the parcel prompted questions about whether the developer had permission for road crossings; the applicant said they had not yet obtained that permission and would coordinate with the utility.
Board action: A member moved to open the coordinated environmental review and another seconded the motion. The Chair called the voice vote and members voted in favor; the board recorded that opening the coordinated review was the action intended for the night and that no final approvals were being given.
Next steps: The applicant said they will submit revised materials addressing the comments raised and coordinate with DEC and other agencies before returning. The planning board will receive agency comments through the SEQR process and then provide a recommending report to the town board, which is the lead agency for the coordinated review.
Votes at a glance: The planning board voted to accept the May 20 minutes earlier in the meeting (motion by a committee member, second by another member; voice vote approved). Later, the board voted to open the coordinated environmental review for project 2303 (motion to open SEQR; seconded; voice vote in favor).
