LeRoy Pennysaver & News

LE ROY PENNYSAVER & NEWS - SEPTEMBER 5, 2021 Dear Village of LeRoy Residents, We are writing this for you to think about and ask questions about. This is in regards to the East Ave. motion to change the area south of the Rd. from R-1 {1 family homes} to a Pud which would contain 30 duplex homes, that is 60 rental units. The plan would also include some 1 family homes, depending on the day, anywhere from 10 to 20 private home lots. The Mayor & Village Board are on the right thought path. Add more homes to gain more tax $, allowing all our taxes to be reduced. Are there other alternatives and considerations to be looked at? There are many. Several weeks ago we submitted 4 questions to the village as per recommendations by the Mayor's column and received answers. 1. The Village Funds which the Mayor projected to be used for the construction of continuation of East Ave. were originally earmarked for what? How much is this amount if the project is approved. 2. Has a professional study been completed on traffic and safety concerns for the area, if enlarged, with only 1 entrance & exit into the area? 3. Has a professional study been completed on water & flood concerns not only as it pertains to this area but also as it impacts on other areas of the village? 4. In 1964 when we purchased a building lot, which is now 38 East Ave, A complete development of single family homes & new streets were projected for this area but a disagreement ensued between the village & the owner of the property. The Village refused to do the infrastructure work as the owner, contractor was responsible for this work. Has a law or rule changed since then? Answers: Mr. & Mrs. C, 1. Originally I had said we were going to use CHIPS money which is money we get from the state to be used for road projects. However we can not use those in this case. The village would be using unallocated fund balance ( money the village has saved.) we are going to put a cap of 1 million dollars. 2. We have tried to do a traffic study, but our equipment did not work accurately, we are going to get help from the county to finish it , I will pass it on when we get it. 3.) the water issue has been scenically proven to help with storm water to some degree. 4) in 1988 the village board passed a resolution allowing the village to pay some expenses of contractor with the hopes of encouraging growth, so Yes it is legal. Thank You, Porp! At this point we still do not have some of the information that we feel would lend itself to make an informed appropriate change. Hear are additional considerations. 1. When our village or we propose a road, house or other structure we find out how much it will cost, the work involved and possible problems we might encounter. No one has even brought up the rd. necessary for entering the PUD from East Ave. into the proposed PUD area. A road must go in front of all the proposed duplexes. The developer already stated when talking about another problem that they were not in the business of building Rds. So who will be putting in that Rd. & any needed utilities? 2. Are you satisfied with the contractor putting in a stone Rd. leading from East Ave. to South St. with a locked gate which can be opened in an emergency by ambulance personal, firefighters or the police in case of emergency? Now other considerations for us villagers: 1. Do we need more rental units in LeRoy? We read a 2019 report which we are trying to verify, which stated that LeRoy at that point was 40% Rentals. We are also looking for data on numbers, of subsidized senior living units., non subsidized senior living units & apartments for everyone. 2. Owners who live in their own homes. What percentage? 3. Where does Village end & Town begin? How many building lots are available in the Village? Will they require new roads? 4. Do we all need to see how any changes need to fit into current & future budgets? 5. Would it be worth looking at the original proposal in the 1960's contracted & developed by Mr. Fussell for the future of that area? We are currently trying to find a copy of the surveyed project. If any one has information pertaining to any of the questions involved, please contact us by calling 585-768-7356 or by email at joey3rd17@frontier.com. Joseph and Florence Condidorio The New York Association for Pupil Transportation (NYAPT) is reminding drivers to be extra careful this year as school districts begin to reopen across the state. The Association is also alerting parents and caregivers that there could be disruptions to school transportation this year as school districts face an unprecedented shortage in school bus drivers driven by the COVID-19 pandemic, extension of extra unemployment benefits and demand for drivers in the package handling industry. According to a statewide survey conducted by NYAPT of school bus drivers across the state, an estimated 50,000 motorists in New York illegally pass stopped school buses every day school is in session, endangering students and putting their lives at risk. “Providing NewYork’s school-age children a safe school bus ride to and from school each day is our top priority, and we urge all drivers to do their part and be extra cautious as schools reopen,” said NYAPT President Ted Nugent who is the school transportation director at the Coxsackie-Athens CSD. “We are asking drivers to avoid distractions while driving, be aware that school buses are back on the roads, and to always stop when they see those red lights flashing on a school bus because students’ lives depend on it.” New York State Vehicle and Traffic law requires all vehicles to come to a full stop when approaching a school bus stopped with red lights flashing. Red flashing lights indicate that a child is either boarding or disembarking a school bus. New York state law prohibits the passing of a school bus that is stopped with red lights flashing regardless of your direction of travel, even if there is a multi-lane or divided highway. Penalties for a first-time offense include a fine from $250 to $400, five points on your license and the possibility of 30 days in jail. A second conviction within three years will result in a $600 to $750 fine and up to 180 days in jail; while three or more convictions will result in a fine from $750 to $1,000, mandatory revocation of your driver’s license and up to 180 days in jail. Nugent continued, “Riding a school bus is the safest way for a student to get back and forth to school each day, and we hope drivers across the state will do their part to keep it that way.” NYAPT Reminds Drivers of the Dangers of Passing a Stopped School Bus