Discussion

The following letter ran in the January 14, 2001 issue of the Daily Messenger and is reprinted here with permission.

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Victor heeded developer at expense of residents

To the editor:

When the Pioneer apartment proposal was submitted last year to the town of Victor, I was told by those more politically savvy than I that this was a "done deal" and that code violations, zoning ordinances, density issues, environmental concerns and previous binding resolutions would be ignored or interpreted in favor of the developer because residents have less influence than developers. This has turned out to be true.

The instances are too numerous to cite but let me give three examples:

· Density: The May 27, 1986 resolution, number 148, states the density for the original development to be 2.096 units per acre. Now, however, the town attorney included in his density interpretation 22 acres that were sold in 1988 and which no longer belong to the property in question. This brought the density to 5.9 units per acre so the developer could have his 154 apartments. How come? I don't know. Do you?

· Reasonably similar: Development of the property as stated in resolution number 148 mandates "for sale" townhouses and any future development be reasonably similar to what was originally approved. We have at present a mixture of single-family homes and owner-occupied townhouses of predominantly two units per building. The proposed townhomes-style apartments consist of 20 large buildings with seven or eight units per building. The town boards say this is reasonably similar. How can they say this? I don't know. Do you?

· Environment: Of the 36.5 acres in question there are approximately 10 acres of wetlands, leaving 26.8 acres to be developed. According to the developers' environmental assessment form, of these 26.8 acres, 21.9 acres of vegetation (trees, shrubs and ground cover) will be removed.

It isn't difficult to imagine the environmental damage. How can they permit these? I don't know. Do you?

At the Nov. 14 Planning Board meeting the developer was given an unlimited amount of time for his presentation. The chairman limited the residents in opposition to the project to one speaker for a duration of not more than five minutes.

It's obvious there are two solutions to this dilemma - political and legal.

Boards must be held responsible for their actions. It may take some time for this administration to be voted out of office, but voted out it must be. I only hope that they will not inflict too much damage to the town before being sent on their way.

It is such a shame that residents of the town of Victor must resort to legal representation for their voices to be heard, but evidently that is necessary.

Caroline Reissig
Cambridge Circle
Victor

[Home] [News] [Issues] [Action] [Calendar] [DCC] [Photos] [Discussion]

Please mail comments about this web site to TheDrumlins@netzero.net.

The opinions expressed in this website do not necessarily reflect those of Acorn Technology or the website maintainers.

Site hosting donated by