To the editor:
On Tuesday, Jan. 10, the Board of Trustees of The Village of Manlius are scheduled to vote on a proposal submitted by Ellish Realty of Nanuet, N.Y., to sub-divide, re-zone and construct a two-story, 14-unit apartment building at 240 West Seneca St., commonly referred to as Limestone Commons Plaza. The neighborhood adjoining this lot and, which would be irreparably harmed should the proposal be approved, is known as Meadow Stream.
Meadow Stream residents have attended and voiced their opinions at, the public hearings held by the board of trustees and the planning board. Not a single resident, homeowner, taxpayer or citizen of Meadow Stream or the village of Manlius has spoken in favor of the proposal and oppose it for the following reasons:
1. The current storm and sewer drainage infrastructure, (designed and installed more than half a century ago) in the proposed area of development has been compromised (some would say failed) as a result of relentless development around and along the West Branch of Limestone Creek. This has increased the frequency and severity of flooding of the above referenced property. It has also increased the frequency and severity of flooding endured by homeowners in the area. The proposed building with 14 apartments would exacerbate these conditions and jeopardize the safety and property of the area’s residents as well as any occupant of the proposed apartment building.
2. A portion of the lot under consideration as well as significant parts of the proposed building, lie within the 100-year flood plain as defined by the most current (Nov 4, 2016) FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map. Building in this area, especially construction of any residential facilities, would be highly imprudent, reckless and irresponsible. The welfare of any resident of such a facility would inherently be at risk due to flooding.
3. In the event of flooding, the ability of emergency and rescue personnel to access and service the area will be severely compromised. The potential for high water rescues, which pose a significantly greater risk to emergency and rescue personnel, would greatly increase. This represents a significant personal liability to the property owners and residents as well as a legal liability to the village.
4. The Onondaga County Planning Board in its Oct 12, 2016 review and minutes of this proposal unequivocally state: “Flooding as one of five primary natural hazards of local concern, with the potential to cause extensive threat to property and safety; buildings within the floodplain can negatively affect the free flow of nearby waterways and drainage, and building within a floodplain is therefore discouraged.”
5. A portion of the lot proposed for development lies within a regulatory floodway as determined by the FEMA FIRM dated Nov 4, 2016. Accordingly and as defined by FEMA, this is: “The channel of a river or other watercourse and the adjacent land areas that must be reserved in order to discharge the base flood without cumulatively increasing the water surface elevation more than a designated height. Communities must regulate development in these floodways to ensure that there are no increases in upstream flood elevations.”
It is abundantly clear that the proposed development directly conflicts with this federal regulation.
6. A two-story apartment building immediately behind and adjacent to the houses on Brookhill Drive North represents a visual and aesthetic offense and would allow a clear view (unmitigated by any barrier natural or made-made) into the backyards and homes of the residents thereby greatly reducing their privacy. The added security risks and inevitable light and noise pollution inherent to a 14-unit apartment building like the one proposed, is undesirable and unwanted.
7. The values of existing homes would be invariably depressed by the presence and close proximity of a multi-residential apartment building.
8. The easement between the lot in question and Brookhill Drive North allows for easy passage to the neighborhood’s streets and would enable residents of the apartment building to explore and wander into and through the neighborhood representing a potential security risk to the residents of the Meadow Stream sub-division and their property.
9. The same easement represents a potential thoroughfare for motor vehicles. Were such a thoroughfare created, it would represent an existential threat to the quality of life of all Meadow Stream residents and exacerbate traffic congestion entering into and exiting from Brickyard Falls Road.
10. The proposed development would significantly and adversely affect Limestone Creek, a stream and New York state drainage easement regulated by the state department of environmental conservation.
11. The EAF (Environmental Assessment Form) submitted with the proposal clearly states that endangered species are present in Limestone Creek. It is highly probable that they would be adversely impacted and permanently disturbed by the proposed development.
In short, the actions and development under review by our elected officials provide no benefit to the residents of the village of Manlius and would benefit only the developer who, until now, has been respectful of the Meadow Stream neighborhood and its residents.
We recognize and value the village of Manlius for its inherent beauty and the quality of life it provides for us and our families and respectfully request that Mayor Whorrall and the Board of Trustees reject the proposed zone change, sub division and development in order to help preserve the character, values and quality of life of Manlius. These are the attributes that drew us to Manlius and they are the reasons we choose to continue to live in this exceptional community.
Arthur B. Shedd, Jr, spokesperson
Residents of Meadow Stream, Manlius
