To: Town of Lancaster Supervisor and Town Board Members 

From: The Residents of Maple Drive in the Hamlet of Bowmansville and residents of Lancaster 

Date: 5/2/2025

Subject: Opposition to the Proposed Project #2954, Woodspring Suites, 0 Maple Drive, S.B.L., #82.-03-3-1

We, the undersigned residents of Maple Drive, strongly oppose the proposed construction of another hotel in our Hamlet. This development threatens the character, environment, and well-being of our community, and we urge the relevant authorities to reject the proposal and consider our plea.

Our concerns include:

1. Safety - the proposed hotel has a very low rating and results in an influx of transient individuals. There is already a strain on the volunteer fire department and police - and the existing Red Roof Inn has only served to make it worse with 911 calls and illegal activity. When walking with our pets and families near the Red Roof Inn, Maple Dr residents will often find used hypodermic needles, Narcan spray, discarded vapes, empty beer and liquor bottles along with other trash and broken glass scattered along the side of the road. Some younger and teenage residents of Maple Drive use our street to access Transit Road, walking to and from work. Our kids bike and skateboard on this street. Many of the residents purchased homes on our street because it was a quiet and safe street and neighborhood. This is what we want to get back to and maintain. We do not want our children and families exposed to another project that undermines the security and stability of our neighborhood.

These concerns are not hypothetical—they reflect a growing pattern of danger in our area. On the night of November 5, 2025 - hours after the Lancaster Town Planning Board carried a motion 4-3 to recommend the approval of the Site Plan for Woodspring Suites Hotel to the Town Board - the Lancaster Police engaged in a high-speed chase ending at the Red Roof Inn on Maple Drive. Two illegal immigrants wanted for robbery were pursued running through the woods behind Salvatore’s Grand Hotel. One was apprehended, the other was never found. What’s more, the recent tragic death of bicyclists on Pleasant View Drive, caused by a drunk driver, and the earlier incident on Stutzman Road where a pedestrian was permanently disabled in a hit and run by a drug-impaired driver, are sobering reminders of what’s at stake. Increasing transient traffic and drug- and alcohol-fueled activity heighten the risk for everyone, especially our children, retirees, and pedestrians who use Maple Drive and surrounding roads daily. We cannot allow another destabilizing development to further compromise the safety and character of our neighborhood.

According to Lancaster Police and Fire Department records, there were a total of 801 calls between 10 hotels in the Town of Lancaster between January 1, 2025 and November 11, 2025 alone. We do not need to introduce an additional hotel, which would bring transients to the area, and more of this illegal activity. The nature of these calls includes prostitution, rape, child pornography, infant pornography, civil disputes, gang intelligence, drug overdose, larceny, possession of stolen property, robbery, narcotics, trespassing, domestic trouble, countless welfare checks, vehicle theft, and a dead body.

2. Concern Regarding Developer Misrepresentation and Credibility

During the zoning review process, the developer misrepresented material facts to the Town Zoning Board in ways that materially affected public awareness and participation. The applicant appeared before the Zoning Board under the name “Indus Hospitality Group,” rather than clearly identifying the project as a ​WoodSpring Suites long-term stay hotel. As a result, neighboring residents were unaware of the nature of the proposed development and did not attend the meeting to voice concerns, believing the application to be unrelated to a hotel project of this scale and use.​ 

Additionally, the developer presented an individual as a “neighbor” in support of the project who does not, in fact,​ reside at the adjacent property.​ The individual presented as a neighboring resident, Paul Stephen, Jr., does not live at the property in question, which is currently neglected and overrun and is owned but not occupied by him. Moreover, Mr. Stephen is not a disinterested party. He is a part owner of Stephen Development, a prominent family-owned real estate firm based in Clarence, NY, and stands to benefit financially from the sale of the land to the proposed hotel. 

This issue was acknowledged in writing by Zoning Board Chairman​ Jill Monacelli, who stated: “My fellow board members and I were surprised that no citizens, other than Paul Stephen, Jr., appeared before the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) meeting on September 11, 2025, to offer input regarding the height variance being requested by the proposed hotel.  I didn't catch, and perhaps none of my fellow members caught, that the name Indus Hospitality Group was different from the name that had been used at previous town meetings, Woodsprings Suite Hotel, which would explain the lack of attendance by the public.​ I have watched and rewatched the video of the presentation of that case, and paid special attention to Mr. Stephen's appearance before the Board.  My impression at the time of the meeting was that Mr. Stephen resided at 130 Maple; he gave no indication that it was a rental property.  Rewatching the video, I would have continued under that impression, were it not for the information you've provided.​ Furthermore, in answer to your question, I can't speak for the other board members, but I was unaware of Mr. Stephen's connection to the sale of the land located at 0 Maple Drive.​ I don't know if that would have changed my vote, but certainly it is information that should have been disclosed, and appears likely to have been withheld by design.​"

Presenting a financially interested party as a local resident undermines the integrity of the zoning review process and raises serious concerns regarding the developer’s transparency, credibility, and good faith in dealings with the Town and this historic hamlet.

3. Historic Preservation - According to the Town of Lancaster Comprehensive Plan (Pg 25 & 26), "The Bowmansville hamlet is known for its collection of historic homes and other buildings, including the Sacred Heart of Jesus Church and Shrine that was built in 1920. Many structures in the hamlet are over 100 years old, and merit recognition." Another notable structure is a 1837 historic cobblestone home located on neighboring Genesee Street (#5226).

Page 49 of the Town of Lancaster Comprehensive Plan - 4.2 Goals - Community Character - states: "protect historic districts and historic homes."

Our Bowmansville Hamlet was featured in the November 2025 issue of the Buffalo Spree Magazine in an article titled, "Honoring Roots While Branching Out to Bowmansville. "The historic hamlet is leafy and rural, and their home is nestled among other historic properties...." (Guild, Wendy "Honoring Roots While Branching Out to Bowmansville." Buffalo Spree: The Magazine of Western New York, Nov. 2025, pp. 54-57).

Some of the century homes on our street include:

-1845 Conventional-style home at 6 Maple Drive

-1890 Cape-Cod at 101 Maple Drive (The home originally sat where the thruway is now and was moved to its present location in the mid-1900s. Current owners, Sid and Barb Reigle, have photographs of the home being moved).

-1892 Victorian with a French-style mansard roof at 106 Maple Drive - formerly a manor to an apple orchard

-1900 Colonial at 41 Maple Drive - home passed down to family through the generations

-1902 Colonial Revival at 96 Maple Drive - published for its historical significance in the November 2025 issue of Buffalo Spree Magazine

-1910 - Old-style home at 12 Maple Drive

Other Maple Drive homes with notable significance:

-1937 Gabled-ell style home at 102 Maple Drive, built by one of the original owners of 96 Maple Drive

-1941 Sears Catalog Home at 60 Maple Drive

The decision to allow this development is the decision to compromise the integrity of a residential neighborhood now noted in a major publication for its unmatched character and history.

4. Green-space - there are acres of important wildlife - trees, snapping turtles, turkeys, deer, etc. Lancaster deemed itself "Tree City USA" for more than 25 years - "a town who cares about its trees cares about its people." If indeed our street's forest is a Climax Forest, it should be protected.

5. Privacy- the site land is already elevated - with four stories on top of that - are these transient hotel visitors going to be able to see right into our backyards?  Kitchen windows? Bedrooms? Pools? Hot tubs? This is the current privacy that residents have. How will this loss of privacy affect the value of our property and homes? A plan for a fence or sufficient barrier is not included in the hotel plans. The hotel backs up to residential properties. What will prevent hotel occupants from wandering onto our properties? 

6. Noise and light impact - The existing trees and wooded areas currently help buffer noise from the Thruway, Transit Road, and the airport. If this natural barrier is removed, noise levels in our neighborhood will increase. We would like to understand what kind of sound-abatement measures are planned to make up for the loss of this natural noise protection, especially with the removal of climax forest that now shields our homes.

Residents are also concerned about the light trespass the hotel will bring. Parking lot lights, building lights, and signage will create significant light pollution that spills into nearby homes. Light trespass is widely treated by municipalities as a nuisance comparable to noise due to its documented impact on circadian rhythms and overall wellbeing. We want to know what specific steps will be taken to prevent this—such as shielded fixtures, limits on brightness, or restrictions on overnight lighting—before any approvals are granted.

7. Flooding - vast portions of Maple Drive are directly in the floodplain - there's concern of the possibility that construction of this property could further impact and exacerbate the floodplain. This could possibly result in severe damage to our properties and result in our insurance rates increasing. Bowmansville flooding always is happening and was just live on the news March 6th, 2025. https://www.wgrz.com/article/tech/science/environment/lancaster-ellicott-creek-flooding/71-76859f16-e531-4d62-b5a5-d4df6aa58c23

8. Water pressure issues - our water pressure is already strained - how will placing 122 rooms on top of that make an impact? We shouldn’t have to remind you of the house fire at 125 Pleasantview Drive in 2018 where water pressure issues resulted in issues putting out the fire. Or the fully engulfed garage fire at 20 West Home Rd in Aug. 2020 with no water pressure in the W Home Rd fire hydrant where the fire department had to connect hoses to East Home Rd.

9. Traffic - Cut through traffic is already a major safety issue, adding more hotel guests using Maple Drive as a cut through once the hotel is built will only make it worse. Many residents feel blocking Maple Drive to current residents only is not a solution as Genesee St (due to the national registry for the historic home across from Regency Dr.), Harris Hill Rd and surrounding streets can't be widened and traffic is already backed up at rush hour. 

10. Overdevelopment- Lancaster is already becoming overdeveloped and so many of our green spaces have been destroyed and replaced with businesses and subdivisions. Currently, there are more than 10 hotels in less than a mile radius from the Red Roof Inn where this new hotel wants to go next-door. None of these hotels are booked at capacity and many of them are also low budget. Do we want to keep our property values up, our green space green, our wildlife thriving and most importantly our families safe? Or are we trying to turn Lancaster and Bowmansville into another Cheektowaga? 

The construction of a hotel is in direct conflict with ‘Lancaster's Comprehensive Master Plan for the Hamlet of Bowmansville’, which clearly prioritizes concern for our community and preserving its greenspace.

We respectfully urge local authorities to reconsider this development and instead uphold their responsibility to protect our Hamlet’s historic character, environmental integrity, cultural identity, and the close-knit community that defines it.

Signatures are provided as attachment

We hope that our concerns will be taken seriously and look forward to your response.