| WEST SENECA TOWN OFFICES | TOWN BOARD PROCEEDINGS | |
| 1250 Union Road | Minutes #2003-06 | |
| West Seneca, NY 14224 | March 24, 2003 | |
| Page eight . . . |
PROBLEMS OF THE PUBLIC
FLOODING ON PARKSIDE DRIVE AND WILLOWDALE DRIVE (continued)
Supervisor Clark stated that although the board members did not believe that they could keep the residents totally safe and dry, after the previous flood they implemented improvements to mitigate and control the flooding. They could not prevent the flooding or remove that area from the flood plain and they never said that this was possible. Flood control improvement plans were reviewed and approved by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) and the Army Corps of Engineers. The town had an HECII, a hydraulics stream analysis, performed for the new berm by a consultant and approved by the Army Corps of Engineers. They built a new berm between one and 2½ feet high and the top of it was set at elevation 627, which is the 100-year flood elevation. A spillway was cut to allow flow into the soccer complex before overtopping the new berm. Three 12-inch pvc cross culverts with check valves were installed through the berm to allow water through to the soccer complex, and two 6-inch submersible pumps were installed at the end of Parkside Drive that handle water at the rate of 1400 gallons per minute. They also petitioned the Army Corps of Engineers constantly and for the last two years were able to remove some gravel from the Gossel Island area in an effort to keep that area clear. Supervisor Clark realized that there was some disagreement over the soccer complex, but he understood that the soccer complex was flooded hours before the berm was overtopped. The new spillway was completely under water indicating that the entire area was flooded and the new berm was overtopped indicating that flood elevation was greater than the 100-year flood. Sandbags on top of the berm kept some water out but would not have prevented flooding in the beginning because the flow was too great. Supervisor Clark stated that it was impossible to estimate flow capacities from floods because every occurrence was different and it could not be calculated. Cross culverts were designed to be self-maintaining and they were found to be flowing when checked by town employees and fire fighters on the scene. Supervisor Clark felt that the improvements made by the town made a big difference in mitigating the effects of the flood and maintaining the water. If the improvements had not been made over the last two years, the flooding and disaster to the residents' homes would have been much greater. The new berm prevented a lot of water from getting in faster initially and the new cross culverts and submersible pump removed water from the street faster. Engineers were confident that the new ice control structure would have prevented this occurrence. Supervisor Clark noted that the ice control structure was not completely the town's project. They had been petitioning the NYSDEC for a long time and Town Attorney Tim Greenan devoted 15 to 20 percent of his professional time for many weeks to push the project along, but they were dealing with the federal government and the NYSDEC. There was a disagreement over the Project Cooperation Agreement, and the state abandoned their normal process of securing the land easements, but the town immediately reacted and hired their own law firm to take over the easement process. The process was slow, but they were continually trying to speed it up.
Councilman Osmanski also disagreed with the residents' statements that the board had done nothing and stated that they had done everything they could, but it was all in the hands of the state and federal government and they were awaiting their approval. The board had met with the residents and asked them to make phone calls and write letters to help speed up the process. When agreements were presented to the town they were approved and the town was the first one to commit to the funding. Councilman Osmanski stated that the town would spend any reasonable amount of money to help resolve this problem.
Mr. Greenan stated that the primary cost of the $3 million ice control structure project would be paid for by the Army Corps of Engineers, with NYS paying part of the cost and the town paying the smallest share. The town's initial role was only to contribute money to the project, NYS was to acquire the land, and the federal government would build the facility. They ran into a problem when the state decided not to acquire the land, so the Town Board directed that the town take over the responsibility of acquiring the land and that they move forward in doing so even if no agreements were in place because of the level of bureaucracy at the NYSDEC and the Army Corps of Engineers. The fact that the agreement was not signed was not at all slowing down the process because the Town Board decided to spend the money and move forward to complete the project even if other bureaucracies were dragging their feet.
| WEST SENECA TOWN OFFICES | TOWN BOARD PROCEEDINGS | |
| 1250 Union Road | Minutes #2003-06 | |
| West Seneca, NY 14224 | March 24, 2003 | |
| Page nine . . . |
PROBLEMS OF THE PUBLIC
FLOODING ON PARKSIDE DRIVE AND WILLOWDALE DRIVE (continued)
Councilman Graber stated that the Project Cooperation Agreement (PCA) was originally supposed to be signed in September 2001, but at that time Governor Pataki appointed a new commissioner of the NYSDEC and she decided to change the philosophy as to how they handled flood control projects. New York State was the first state in the country to take on the federal government and try to make them change the way they did business. It was now almost two years later and they still did not have a signed PCA, but he understood that they were very close to signing it. Councilman Graber noted that federal law prevented the town from taking on responsibility for the project. The Army Corps of Engineers was responsible along with the NYSDEC and the town had no say in it.
Councilman Osmanski noted that the NYSDEC and Army Corps of Engineers had also disagreed on the long-term maintenance of the ice control structure.
Mr. Greenan stated that as far as the town's responsibilities and at the Town Board's direction there were no obstacles and they were moving forward to get the easements, site control and land acquisition. The surveyor was hired and they would be hiring the title search company, even in the absence of signed agreements. When this was done and the land was under control, it would be up to the Army Corps of Engineers to build the facility.
Supervisor Clark stated that many of the residents had water in their basements, and it was recommended that they form some partnership to help themselves by doing additional protection work in their homes to mitigate and reduce the chance of their basement flooding. One of the town's inspectors mentioned that T-valves were not installed in several of the homes as recommended and basement window protectants or glass block windows were not installed. These would have offered a lot more protection against basement flooding.
Councilman Graber questioned if the creek bed could be dredged.
Mr. Montz stated that he was not aware of any dredging in that section of Cazenovia Creek. He was not certain if they would have to go through the Army Corps of Engineers to do that work.
Highway Supt. Pat Finnegan stated that under the Army Corps of Engineers recommendation they had removed the gravel sandbar around Gossel Island, but there was a stipulation because it could be considered mining. They had to get special approval from the NYSDEC and Army Corps of Engineers. A representative from the NYSDEC, one from the Army Corps of Engineers, and Mike Kerl walked the creek annually from Leydecker Road to the city line. The town received a letter following the walk stating what could and could not be removed and the town followed up on it.
Councilman Osmanski thought that the Town Board had been working very hard to get the ice retention structure, but Mrs. Penders made some positive points that he did not have answers for and he felt they should look at them. They did not have all the answers, but they were working together to try to solve the problem.
Joe Roncone, 74 Parkside Drive, suggested that the two 6-inch pumps be replaced with bigger pumps so that the water could be removed faster.
Sharon Farr, 75 Parkside Drive, questioned if there was a projected date for the ice retention structure.
Councilman Osmanski stated that they could not guarantee any date until the NYSDEC and Army Corps of Engineers signed the agreement.
Councilman Graber stated that the present schedule called for construction to begin in the summer of 2004.
Mary Reusch, 39 Parkside Drive, noted that the new berm was not a level berm and it rose as it went into the soccer field. When the residents sandbagged it, the water flowed as it should. She suggested raising the berm along the entire length of Willowdale Drive.
| WEST SENECA TOWN OFFICES | TOWN BOARD PROCEEDINGS | |
| 1250 Union Road | Minutes #2003-06 | |
| West Seneca, NY 14224 | March 24, 2003 | |
| Page ten . . . |
PROBLEMS OF THE PUBLIC
FLOODING ON PARKSIDE DRIVE AND WILLOWDALE DRIVE (continued)
Mr. Greenan stated that the Army Corps of Engineers would not allow the town to raise the berm above the 100-year flood plain level. They had to get it approved to bring it up as high as it was, because the Army Corps of Engineers did not want the flooding to just be moved to a different location upstream. The board had instructed Mr. Greenan to find out whether the NYSDEC or Army Corps of Engineers would approve raising the berm higher than it was on a permanent basis or with sandbags during a flood event. He would also be asking if they could lower the banks of the creek near the soccer field.
Jim Bove, 11 Willowdale Drive, commented that the residents were tired of the red tape and bureaucracy involved.
Supervisor Clark noted that Senator Bill Stachowski and Assemblyman Brian Higgins were the residents' state representatives that dealt with the NYSDEC and Congressman Jack Quinn was their federal representative that would deal with the Army Corps of Engineers.
Tina Bove, 11 Willowdale Drive, commented on the frustration felt by the residents and suggested that a Citizen's Committee be formed to keep everyone informed, share information, and do what needed to be done.
Supervisor Clark stated that there was an organized group that was trying to provide information to the residents on a regular basis.
Diane Siminski, 44 Parkside Drive, stated that the Southgate Homeowner's Association was formerly organized and they met on a consistent basis every six weeks at the meeting room in Southgate Plaza. The next meeting was scheduled for April 30th at 7:00 P.M. Mrs. Siminski thought that the town was trying to help wherever they could, but she asked if a group from the Homeowner's Association could meet with the Town Board members in a timely fashion to keep them informed.
Supervisor Clark stated that every piece of paper he received concerning this matter was forwarded to Mrs. Rola of the Homeowner's Association.
Mrs. Siminski wanted to see more personal communication between the board members and the homeowners to keep them better informed. She would let the board members know when they would like to meet with them.
Mr. Greenan suggested that he and Mr. Montz give the homeowners specific things to address with their state and federal representatives rather than simply expressing their general dissatisfaction. He further noted that after the first flooding incident, there was a lawsuit started by several individuals in the neighborhood against the town, and it put the town in an awkward position. He had cautioned the town at that time regarding what was communicated and how it was communicated.
PROPOSED GROUP HOME ON CHIPPEWA COURT
Lois Spellman, 79 Willowcrest Drive, presented a petition signed by 110 of the residents of her neighborhood who were opposed to the sale of 4 Chippewa Court to People Inc. for a group home. Mrs. Spellman stated that there were 141 houses in the neighborhood with 61 children, and it was still developing. She expressed concern for the children and commented on the increased traffic that a group home would bring. Mrs. Spellman felt that People Inc. was a business and did not belong in a residential neighborhood. She commented on the trouble the neighborhood had with teenagers in the park where the police had to respond. Mrs. Spellman stated that she was not prejudiced against the mentally challenged, but she wanted them to live safely, wanted her own children to live safely, and was not sure what the supervision would be at the group home.
Carol Sabuda, 108 Willowcrest Drive, stated that she lives directly across from 4 Chippewa Court and questioned why the sale of this property to People Inc. was kept a secret. Mrs. Sabuda questioned why there would not be a meeting to let the residents know what was happening in their neighborhood.
| WEST SENECA TOWN OFFICES | TOWN BOARD PROCEEDINGS | |
| 1250 Union Road | Minutes #2003-06 | |
| West Seneca, NY 14224 | March 24, 2003 | |
| Page eleven . . . |
PROBLEMS OF THE PUBLIC
PROPOSED GROUP HOME ON CHIPPEWA COURT (continued)
Supervisor Clark stated that state law allowed group homes to be established in neighborhoods without any approval from the Town Board or the residents. There was very little that the town could do to help with the residents' concerns.
Mrs. Sabuda stated that Willowcrest Drive was a cul-de-sac and there was a playground at the end of Chippewa Court. She felt that the group home would bring a lot more traffic into the neighborhood and cause parking problems. Children in the neighborhood had to pass the house on their way to the playground and it would be dangerous if there were cars parked on the corner. Mrs. Sabuda understood that three severely disabled children would be occupying the home, and she thought that the children in the neighborhood would be frightened of them. She also thought that children in the neighborhood would make fun of the residents of the group home. Mrs. Sabuda commented on the location of the bedrooms and bathrooms in the house and did not believe that it was suitable for three severely disabled children. She questioned if the town had anything to do with making sure a house was suitable for use as a group home. She further questioned why the present owner was not required to get approval from the neighbors when they raised the roof, as she was required to do when she added on to her home at the rear.
Councilman Graber advised that a property owner could add on to their home without the neighbors' consent as long as they did not encroach on the setback or violate any of the Zoning Laws.
Joan Burch, 83 Shawnee Place, noted that the homes in this section of Chippewa Court were all ranch homes and she did not believe that they were permitted to build up.
Supervisor Clark stated that the town did not police any deed restrictions and he did not know of any all ranch subdivisions where they would prohibit someone from building up as long as they met the building codes.
Mrs. Burch stated that she had three adopted children and two of them were physically and mentally challenged. She felt that the residents were attacking the disabled when everyone should be given the chance to live a decent life. Mrs. Burch stated that her son was physically, mentally and sexually abused in the neighborhood and he had no friends in the neighborhood. She thought it was atrocious that the parents would not teach their children not to make fun of someone who was challenged. Mrs. Burch did not see any problem with a group home locating in the neighborhood and suggested that they help others who need help.
Rick Elling, 24 Chippewa Court, stated that he had no problem with the mentally or physically disabled moving into 4 Chippewa Court, but he felt it was putting a business in a residential area. He questioned what it would do to the property values in the neighborhood and who would make up the tax money that would be lost from a tax-exempt parcel. Mr. Elling further questioned if this was a done deal even before the meeting with People Inc.
Town Attorney Tim Greenan advised that for zoning purposes the property would be considered a single-family residence and not a business. People Inc. was a non-profit corporation and a community service provider. Past experience had shown that their facilities located in residential neighborhoods had no effect on the surrounding property values. Mr. Greenan stated that 10 years ago a section was added to the NYS Mental Hygiene Law that addressed locating people with developmental disabilities in communities and neighborhoods rather than in institutions and this superceded any town law. People Inc. purchases the property under contract and then notifies the town and the neighbors. The town had a very limited response available to them, and the only basis they could disapprove a facility was if there was a concentration of that type of facility in a neighborhood and it substantially changed the nature of the neighborhood. Mr. Greenan stated that historically West Seneca was extremely friendly to the developmentally disabled. The state school on East & West Road once housed hundreds of developmentally disabled people, but when the NYS Mental Hygiene Law was amended it required that those individuals be placed in the community. There were a number of group homes on East & West Road and Leydecker Road near the state school and the town was not notified of them. When the first group home was proposed outside the state school property in 1994, the town was notified of it and a number of residents came to the Town Board with the same concerns as those mentioned at this
| WEST SENECA TOWN OFFICES | TOWN BOARD PROCEEDINGS | |
| 1250 Union Road | Minutes #2003-06 | |
| West Seneca, NY 14224 | March 24, 2003 | |
| Page twelve . . . |
PROBLEMS OF THE PUBLIC
PROPOSED GROUP HOME ON CHIPPEWA COURT (continued)
meeting. The Town Board voted to deny that facility based upon a concentration of group homes and that it would substantially change the character of the neighborhood. At that time, the southeast corner of West Seneca had the highest concentration of group homes in New York State, because of all the facilities along Leydecker Road and East & West Road. The town had a court action at that time, but the Supreme Court ruled that a high concentration would have to exist in a block of the town, rather than in a corner. The town was unsuccessful at challenging the group home and they came to the conclusion that there was nothing they could do to stop group homes. They did find that when the residents attended the People Inc. meetings, listened to what they had to say, and expressed their concerns, People Inc. was able to alleviate some of their concerns.
Councilman Graber stated that past experience had shown strong opposition from the neighborhood, but there was nothing the town could do for them. He noted that the group homes operated by People Inc. were very well kept and the residents of the group homes did not bother anyone. The neighbors did not complain about them and often had positive feedback about People Inc.'s operation.
Councilman Wroblewski stated that Rhonda Fredrick of People Inc. was a very professional person, and he recommended that the residents attend the informational meeting that was set up. When the group home was established on Sky Hi Drive, his neighbors had many of the same concerns. At that time, he visited other group homes in the area to speak with the neighbors and received positive feedback from them. The property was kept impeccable with regard to lawn maintenance and snow removal and the only problem they ever had in his neighborhood was when the burglar alarm went off a couple of times. Councilman Wroblewski was not aware of any problems at any of the group homes where the police had to be called and he had not received any calls from residents after the group homes went in. One legitimate complaint was the tax-exempt status of the group homes, but Senator Stachowski recently sponsored a bill that would require them to make a payment in lieu of taxes and the West Seneca Town Board went on record in support of that bill.
Paul Kline, 120 Willowcrest Drive, commented on the number of group homes in West Seneca and noted that the group home in Tobey Hill was three-tenths of a mile from 4 Chippewa Court and the group home in Heather Hill was two-tenths of a mile from the neighborhood. He felt there was already a high concentration of group homes in this neighborhood. Mr. Kline had researched some other group homes and found that there was a problem on Dover Drive when one of the residents of the group homes was walking around that neighborhood naked and on California Road in Orchard Park when a resident of a group home entered the lunchroom of a business yielding a knife. There were a lot of children in the neighborhood of the proposed group home along with a playground, and Mr. Kline felt that the residents concerns were legitimate. He referred to a letter from Orchard Park Councilman David Beyer to a resident of Westgate Blvd. in Orchard Park stating that in two instances they were able to block group homes from going in. Mr. Kline asked for the Town Board's help in stopping the group home on Chippewa Court and suggested that they take a strong stand against this state mandate and suggest to People Inc. that they find another location that didn't have other group homes within one-half mile of each other.
Carol Krzal, 1651 East & West Road, stated that she lives across from the group home run by People Inc. on East & West Road near Sunshine Park and there was never any problem. The lawn was always mowed and there wasn't a lot of traffic. Mrs. Krzal thought that it was unfortunate that children would ridicule others less fortunate than them and suggested that the parents teach their children to respect everyone, whether or not they were physically or mentally challenged. Mrs. Krzal thought that society should take care of those who were physically and mentally handicapped.
Scott Kruger, 72 Cherokee Drive, stated that the residents of the group home would be taken from a trained, unionized labor force and moved into privatization with People Inc., and he felt that this was wrong. Mr. Kruger referred to a letter he had received regarding two sex offenders that lived at the state school and questioned if a group home resident could be charged if anything were to happen.
Mr. Greenan responded that if any of the group home residents committed a crime they would be subject to criminal law. He was not certain whether individuals with that type of propensity were allowed to live in a group home.
| WEST SENECA TOWN OFFICES | TOWN BOARD PROCEEDINGS | |
| 1250 Union Road | Minutes #2003-06 | |
| West Seneca, NY 14224 | March 24, 2003 | |
| Page thirteen . . . |
PROBLEMS OF THE PUBLIC
PROPOSED GROUP HOME ON CHIPPEWA COURT (continued)
Councilman Osmanski stated that People Inc. already had three children selected to live in the proposed group home and their families lived nearby. They could be very severely disabled and even wheelchair bound. He suggested that the neighbors attend the People Inc. meeting and listen to all the facts.
Chief Gehen stated that the state school was traditionally used as a stop over point and he had talked to the director with regard to security when these individuals were assigned there. They were only assigned to the state school for a short period of time until they could find a placement in a more secure facility, not a group home. They could be there for as short a period as one month or they could be there three months. There were two areas within the state where these individuals could be sent, and as soon as a bed opened up at one of them the individuals were transferred there. The director assured Chief Gehen that when these individuals were housed at the state school, they were on a one-on-one supervision level, constantly supervised, and never left alone.
Councilman Hicks stated that he lives on Sunrise Terrace, one block away from the most highly concentrated area of group homes. He lived there for 16 years and there were hundreds of kids in the neighborhood who played in Sunshine Park near the group homes. Councilman Hicks stated that most of the children who occupied the group homes were severely handicapped and in wheelchairs with 24-hour supervision. There were not a lot of vehicles parked at the group homes and only one van would pick them up, take them to school and bring them home. Councilman Hicks stated that there had never been any incidents in his neighborhood.
Councilman Wroblewski stated that People Inc. was very willing to honor any requests of the residents. He suggested that the residents think about anything they might like to see at 4 Chippewa Court, such as screening, and bring those requests to the meeting.
RECONSTRUCTION OF BELMONT, HYBANK AND WOODWARD DRIVES
Cindy Atzrott, 9 Belmont Drive, stated that residents had previously presented a petition against sidewalks and raised curbs, and she questioned the status of the proposed reconstruction of Belmont, Hybank and Woodward Drives.
Town Engineer George Montz stated that the design work was almost complete and they would then be writing a general information letter to the residents indicating what improvements would be included. The next step would be to ask any resident in favor of the sidewalks and curbs to circulate a petition.
Supervisor Clark understood that the town would be surveying the residents door-to-door for their opinion on the sidewalks and curbing.
Mr. Montz responded that the curb and gutter was going to be included in the project because there were drainage problems on the street and if they did not include the upright curb, the water would continue to run off the pavement and cause the same problems. The survey would only be for the sidewalks and the usual process was for any resident who wanted the sidewalks to circulate a petition in favor of them. The survey would also be split over the three streets in case there was one street that wanted the sidewalks and one that didn't. Mr. Montz stated that they were trying to avoid a door-to-door survey. The letter would indicate that the Engineering Department would come out and talk to the residents if they had any questions. The letter could also have a place to sign whether or not the resident wanted the sidewalks and send it back to the town.
Ms. Atzrott noted that the residents had presented a petition last October representing 50 homeowners who were against the sidewalks and curbs. She questioned the time frame for the town deciding on whether or not to install sidewalks and curbs.
Mr. Montz stated that the residents would be receiving a letter within the next two to three weeks.
George Rockey, 68 Woodward Drive, was concerned that the sidewalks not be forced on the residents. He had circulated a petition and almost all of the residents of Woodward Drive did not want the sidewalks.
| WEST SENECA TOWN OFFICES | TOWN BOARD PROCEEDINGS | |
| 1250 Union Road | Minutes #2003-06 | |
| West Seneca, NY 14224 | March 24, 2003 | |
| Page fourteen . . . |
PROBLEMS OF THE PUBLIC
SUPPLEMENTAL PAY & HEALTH BENEFITS FOR EMPLOYEES CALLED TO ACTIVE DUTY
Beth Pratt, 22 Royal Coach Road, thanked the Town Board members for the earlier motion with regard to supplemental pay and continuation of health insurance benefits for town employees called to active duty. This was the second time her husband, Officer Timothy Pratt was called up since September 11th and it alleviated a lot of her stress. Mrs. Pratt stated that Tim was proud to serve his country and was proud to be part of a town that supported him.
PRESENTATION OF COMMUNICATIONS BY BOARD MEMBERS AND DEPARTMENT HEADS
ABANDONMENT OF A PORTION OF MCCORMICK ROAD
Councilman Hicks stated that pursuant to Article 205 of the Highway Law, a highway was deemed abandoned if it was not open and working within six years of the time it was laid out.
Motion by Councilman Hicks, seconded by Councilman Graber, to authorize the Town Board and Superintendent of Highways to sign a statement of abandonment in a form approved by the Town Attorney's Office declaring the town's abandonment of a portion of the paper street known as McCormick Road.
| Ayes: All | Noes: None | Motion Carried |
APPOINTMENT OF RICHARD ANTICOLA AS PART-TIME LABORER (CAR WASHER)
Motion by Councilman Graber, seconded by Councilman Osmanski, to appoint Richard Anticola as part-time laborer at a rate of $7.00 per hour effective March 24, 2003 to work as a car washer in the Highway Department and authorize the Supervisor to complete and sign the necessary forms for Erie County Personnel.
| Ayes: All | Noes: None | Motion Carried |
COUNCILMAN GRABER RESPONDS TO SUGGESTION TO MERGE SUBURBS WITH BUFFALO
Councilman Graber referred to a recent article in Viewpoints written by Kevin Gaughan and his implication that the best way to help the City of Buffalo was to merge all the inner ring suburbs with the city. Councilman Graber suggested that the City of Buffalo resolve their own problems and stated that he was totally opposed to this and would fight to keep West Seneca from merging with the city.
TOWN BOARD MEETINGS SCHEDULED
Supervisor Clark announced the Town Board meetings scheduled for the second quarter of 2003:
| Monday, April 14, 2003 @ | 7:30 P.M. |
| Monday, May 5, 2003 @ | 7:30 P.M. |
| Monday, May 19, 2003 @ | 7:30 P.M. |
| Monday, June 9, 2003 @ | 7:30 P.M |
| Monday, June 23, 2003 @ | 7:30 P.M. |
ADJOURNMENT
Motion by Supervisor Clark, seconded by Councilman Osmanski, to adjourn the meeting at 10:45 P.M.
| Ayes: All | Noes: None | Motion Carried |
PATRICIA C. WISNIEWSKI, RMC/CMC
TOWN CLERK