12/29/06 - Proposed building has neighbors concerned

(as published by Cortland Standard, Corey Preston reporting)

If a 5th Ward meeting at the Cortland County Office Building Thursday night is any indicator, the county can expect vocal Opposition to its proposal to build a Public Health building on south Main Street. County officials said at the meeting they will work with the city and area residents to alleviate concerns.

More than 20 residents who live in the neighborhoods along south Main, William and Randall streets voiced concerns at the meeting, primarily that a proposed parking lot for the facility would greatly disrupt their neighborhood.
The Legislature voted Dec. 28 to buy 2.46-acres of land that includes the currently vacant Moose Lodge at 157 Main St., Robbins Vending on Main Street, two houses on Randall Street and two on Williams Street.
“I think the building is beautiful as drawn, but the parking lot is just a Goliath that destroys the nature of the neighborhood,” said Pete Snell of 15 William St., who pointed out during the meeting that the border of the parking lot in the county’s early renderings of the facility would be 17.5 feet from his house. Snell and his neighbors stressed the proposed facility would potentially be bringing 200 county employees and another 200 patients to the neighborhood daily, creating potential safety issues. The estimates for employees and patients were prepared from County Administrator Scott Schrader.
“I can’t fathom all the traffic this would create, especially with the elementary school right down the road and all the children in the neighborhood,” said Helene Maxwell of 10 William St. “Frankly, it’s frightening to think about.”
Peter Hans, who lives at 8 William St., agreed. “My biggest concern, having two small children, is increased traffic on William Street as well as south Main,” Hans said. “But I’m also worried about the lack of green space, the runoff — I think the building’s a good idea, but there’s so many issues they haven’t considered.”
Alderman Dan Quail (R-5th Ward) agreed. “I’m really disappointed in the communication, or the lack thereof,” Quail said. “I like the rendition of this on south Main, no question, but I think we need to look at the impact this will have on that area.”
Schrader, Legislator Ron Van Dee (D-5th Ward), who called the meeting, along with other county officials in attendance, attempted to assure those on hand that the county will heed all of these concerns as the project moves forward.
Schrader said that, although it isn’t required to, the county would adhere to the city’s site plan review process, and was confident the concerns of residents could be alleviated with proper planning. Municipalities are exempt from site plan review.
The renderings of the proposed 15,300-square-foot facility released by the Legislature so far are extremely preliminary, Schrader said. Formal site plans would have to include trees for buffers, fencing between residences and the parking lot and various other mitigations that would minimize any negative impacts on the community. “I truly believe that, given the chance, we can satisfy 90 percent of the people here tonight,” Schrader said after the meeting. “Just give us an opportunity, let us come up with a design and plan that attempts to mitigate what are certainly legitimate concerns.”
The Legislature, to date, has only voted on the property acquisitions, Van Dee said, and any plans to build will likely be contingent on the county’s ability to satisfy residents’ needs.
“Those people who live in that area take great care of their property and they have a right to be concerned, but I’m hoping that once we get some engineers working on this, we’ll be able to find ways to correct these problems,” Van Dee said. “If we don’t, if the people who are willing to have an open mind and work with us aren’t satisfied, then there’s no way I can vote to build this.”
In response to numerous suggestions during the meeting that the county look elsewhere for the placement of the parking lot, Van Dee said he intended to go out with Schrader in the coming weeks to look at alternative properties along south Main Street.
“I’ve been saying from day one that I’m not in favor of putting a parking lot there,” Van Dee said. “I knew people were upset, I’ve gotten an awful lot of phone calls, and I’m not sure if we’ll find a better option, but we’re going to try.”
Kathy Wilcox, of 60 Church St., who said she had contacted a number of her neighbors about Thursday’s meeting, said she was unconvinced by the county’s assurances.
“I don’t think the people here were heard — I think they’ve made up their mind,” Wilcox said. “The most important thing is the kids walking back and forth from Randall School, but we’re also going to see our property values go down significantly with a parking lot there, and our whole neighborhood is going to change.”
Still, other residents said they could get behind the project if the county effectively mitigated their concerns.
“If it’s done right, I could probably be happy with it, but it’s just difficult to say at this point because it’s such a vast change from what it was before,” Snell said. “I’m going from having two next door neighbors to 400, not to mention noise pollution, light pollution — it’s going to take a lot of work and better communication.”
Legislator Carol Tytler (D-3rdWard) said the meeting was an important opportunity for residents to voice concerns and to give legislators an idea of the challenges they’ll face.
“We really haven’t been able to work on this at all so far, but now we can take this information and hopefully we can improve some things in that neighborhood,” Tytler said.