After a heated meeting got confrontational, the Town of Batavia Planning Board agreed to table consideration of a proposed housing development until the next meeting on March 15. At issue, is whether to reopen the environmental review for "Gardner Estates."
Board members already approved the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQR), declaring the development would not negatively impact the surrounding area.
But, after a few discrepancies and minor changes to the project arose, Planning Board Chair Kathleen Jasinski invited the applicant, Frank Andolino, president of Nathanial Development, to come to the meeting to clarify a few points.
Instead, Andolino sent his attorney, James Bonsignore, of Fix Spindelman Brovitz & Goldman.
"I'm very disappointed," said Jasinski to Bonsignore as he sat down before the board.
"Not disappointed that you're here, but that he (Andolino) isn't."
It was clear throughout the meeting that most board members had an uneasy sense about the proposed Gardner Estates project. The newest proposal from the applicant is to build single-family homes off Clinton Street Road. Previous proposals included plans for apartments and/or duplex housing.
Board members basically told Bonsignore that they felt a little swindled when it came to two issues. (A) Planning for a cul-de-sac versus a road to connect with Clinton Street Road, and (B) the developer's funding sources.
Board members want to see what the state Department of Transportation has to say about the road options, so Tuesday evening focused on funding.
Most members of the board agree that they have asked many times in the past if the developer planned to use conventional or public funds. The latter would only be granted if low-income housing were part of the plans, hence their concern about the source of funding.
At past meetings, they were led to believe that public funds would not be used to finance the project.
"Whether or not this project is publicly funded has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not this application meets the zoning requirements for the division of land," Bonsignore said.
He acknowledged the question had been asked repeatedly but would not characterize the answers given. He claimed that at all times the question was "improper," and answers were "for informational purposes only."
A board member pointed out that they weren't called "improper" at the time and the replies indicated the project would use conventional funding.
Bonsignore told them "You can't reopen SEQR because you having second thoughts or you're regretting the determination...We said we intend to pursue conventional funding but we absolutely did not exclude the possibility of public funding.
"We never misrepresented anything. This is not a trial, and if this is how we are going to be questioned I am going to leave."
One board member cited two problems he had with public funds being used to build Gardner Estates. Chiefly, there's already an overload of public housing in the area. Secondly, the funds should not be "wasted" on building public housing in a community that already has plenty of it.
When the board agreed to table the issue, polite apologies were exchanged but there seemed to be a lingering distrust of the mysterious developer (who no one on the board has ever met or spoken with) and his intentions.
Board Member Lou Paganello said he has repeatedly tried to get information about the company and has come up with nothing but a Web site.
"I wasn't given any information about the company at all -- not just for the financing but for the reputable company that supposedly it is," Paganello said. "When you're talking about a project that concerns a town, you would think that you could come up with some information or a call or a letter and nothing happened. Nothing at all."