Before
THE TOBYHANNA TOWNSHIP PLANNING COMMISSION
---
In Re: Regular Business Meeting
---
Tobyhanna Township Government Center Building
State Avenue
Pocono Pines, Pennsylvania 18350
Thursday, February 7, 2008, beginning at 7 p.m.
---
PRESENT: MARK SINCAVAGE, Chairperson
JOSEPH MILLER, Vice-Chairperson
TED VANDERVLIET, Board Member
ANNE LAMBERTON, Board Member
ROBERT McHALE, P.E.,
Township Engineer
PATRICK ARMSTRONG, ESQUIRE, Solicitor
ALSO PRESENT: PHYLLIS HAASE, Zoning Officer
---
Panko Reporting
537 Sarah Street, 2nd Floor
Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania 18360
(570) 421-3620
2
1 MR. SINCAVAGE: I'll call the
2 regular scheduled meeting of the Tobyhanna Township
3 Planning Commission to order. Is there any public
4 comments?
5 Hearing none, we'll move on to
6 approval of the January 2008 minutes received
7 electronically. Motion?
8 MR. MILLER: Make a motion we
9 accept the minutes as presented.
10 MR. SINCAVAGE: Motion. Second
11 to the motion?
12 MRS. LAMBERTON: Second.
13 MR. SINCAVAGE: All those in
14 favor, please say aye. Aye.
15 MR. MILLER: Aye.
16 MRS. LAMBERTON: Aye.
17 MR. VANDERVLIET: Abstain.
18 MR. SINCAVAGE: We had a joint
19 work session with the supervisors concerning the
20 Act 167. At that meeting, it was determined that
21 we will schedule another work session with them,
22 possibly. We are still reviewing the 167.
23 Under old business, the first
24 item on our agenda is Blakeslee Pharmacy Windy
25 Corners Realty.
3
1 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: Good
2 evening. I have newly revised plans and I have a
3 response letter to -- the letter that we got from
4 Bob McHale -- yesterday? The day before yesterday.
5 And Bob does have copies. I did find a few
6 additional spelling errors that have been corrected
7 since and there is one more detail that was missing
8 off the plan.
9 This colored one is not the
10 latest one. It just hasn't changed all that much,
11 so I didn't bother coloring another one.
12 Okay. You want me to go over
13 all the comments?
14 MR. SINCAVAGE: This is quite
15 lengthy here.
16 MR. McHALE: Actually, the
17 majority of the comments were addressed with the
18 submittal we received yesterday. I think the major
19 outstanding items at this point is related to
20 stormwater management. And, Sarah, you might want
21 to explain that a little bit as far as how things
22 were constructed and why we are in the position we
23 are in.
24 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: If you
25 actually look at the writing in the stormwater
4
1 management plan, C-4, originally this basin was
2 supposed to be constructed larger than it was.
3 Okay? And it wasn't constructed as large as it
4 was. We decided to take a quarter of this building
5 and this area here. This building drains back to
6 basin two, as is three quarters of the new
7 building, because it drains to the back and the
8 sides where the new swale is going. Okay?
9 What we are planning on doing
10 now, in order to get this basin to work, is
11 slightly enlarging it. Okay? So that it's on this
12 side. And we are going to be putting in a trench
13 drain here with the four inch outlet pipe that's
14 going to connect to this exiting six inch pipe that
15 will bring this water over here in order to get
16 this basin to work.
17 The original design of the basin
18 was done by Pasonick and they had it coming up this
19 way. When I took the project over, they wanted
20 additional parking along here, so we made the basin
21 rectangular, but as I said, it wasn't constructed
22 as large.
23 Now, also to address water
24 quality, what we are planning on doing is lowering
25 the basin so that we can hold the first flush water
5
1 in the basin and we are going to till up the ground
2 and make some sand and some compost with it or peat
3 or something, so that more of the water will
4 infiltrate in the ground. And we are going to be
5 doing the same thing in at least part of the area
6 here for water quality.
7 This one's dropped down six
8 inches. This one is going to be dropping down
9 three inches because it's a much larger basin.
10 There is no reason to do six inches in that. But
11 we still haven't -- when you do stormwater
12 modeling, you're looking at the difference between
13 preexisting conditions and post conditions. And
14 for some reason, the stormwater model that I've
15 got, that's identical to what Pasonick had done
16 using the rational method, is not coming up with
17 realistic -- well, none of the rational method used
18 is realistic volumes, but is not coming up with a
19 realistic hydrograph and I can't figure out why.
20 I've double checked all my numbers. My numbers are
21 correct. The numbers I ran today using a different
22 program in a different engineering office is
23 actually identical pre to post, pre to pre. The
24 difference is in the post number. I don't know why
25 that was happening, but I'm going to work that out
6
1 with Bob so that Bob is happy.
2 And since I've addressed all the
3 other issues, I'm asking for conditional approval.
4 And I know you're not supposed to give conditional
5 approval, but I think by next Monday or Tuesday, I
6 can have this finished and the building is almost
7 finished and Dave's going to need a C of O.
8 You know, this has been an
9 ongoing project for a long time. And, you know,
10 he's got interested tenants. They are not going to
11 wait forever for him to be able to get them in
12 there. It's, you know, other medical people. So
13 he really needs to get approval so that he can get
14 approval of the supervisors at its next month's
15 meeting.
16 MR. SINCAVAGE: Sarah, explain
17 the trench drain to me, please.
18 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: The
19 detail is on Sheet C-6. Basically it comes -- it's
20 a prefabricated form and it comes in lengths of 98
21 feet. Then it has a box. At the end and that box
22 it drains to the outlet pipe. It's at point 66
23 slope. And you buy it as a package. It will
24 basically run along here.
25 MR. SINCAVAGE: You're doing
7
1 this to catch the sheet flow off the parking in
2 order to bring it in --
3 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: Sheet
4 flow off the parking lot, yes.
5 MR. SINCAVAGE: Is there enough
6 volume?
7 MR. McHALE: It's going to the
8 basin on the west where she's got --
9 MR. SINCAVAGE: I'm saying does
10 this trench provide enough volume to get to --
11 MR. McHALE: We haven't gotten
12 to all the calcs on that. It needs to provide
13 proper conveyance to the west.
14 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: Yes.
15 MR. SINCAVAGE: I have seen
16 these used, but never in that type of situation.
17 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: I have
18 used them a lot, mainly like industrial types,
19 where you have a loading dock where it goes down.
20 Also on high school tracks, they are used to keep
21 any water from the infield from coming out onto the
22 track.
23 MR. McHALE: A slider drain can
24 also be used.
25 MR. SINCAVAGE: Pat, you had
8
1 some issues?
2 MR. ARMSTRONG: The only thing
3 I'm still waiting for is the applicant's attorney
4 to respond concerning the access easement for
5 Maple -- I think it's Maple Road. We had
6 corresponded a few times, Geoff Blake I believe is
7 his name. I have not heard back from him for a
8 while. Have you heard anything, from your --
9 MR. DAVID MURPHY: What do you
10 need to hear from him?
11 MR. ARMSTRONG: He was in the
12 process of -- I wanted the access easement that was
13 prepared and recorded before we had a chance to
14 look at it to be revised to some extent, and that's
15 how we left it. And he was going to get back to me
16 whether or not he would agree with that or not. I
17 have not heard back from him.
18 MR. DAVID MURPHY: What
19 specifically do you want Geoff to respond? I'm not
20 clear on what you're trying to tell me to tell
21 Geoff.
22 MR. ARMSTRONG: I thought he
23 might be here this evening. What I can do is give
24 him a call to see where he stands. I was
25 indicating to him that I would like to have seen
9
1 some revisions to that access easement. No
2 revisions were made that I'm aware of. I have not
3 seen a revised draft for that.
4 MR. DAVID MURPHY: Revisions --
5 MR. ARMSTRONG: To the access
6 easement. The access easement and maintenance
7 agreement. I believe it's Maple Road.
8 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: What kind
9 of revisions?
10 MR. ARMSTRONG: Well, revisions
11 with respect to who is responsible for the road,
12 the maintenance for the road, the actual owners and
13 individuals that were a party to that access
14 agreement. I mean, he's aware of what my issues
15 were with respect to it. I just haven't heard back
16 from him. I mean, I can call him again tomorrow to
17 see where he stands on that. Apparently he hasn't
18 spoken to you about it.
19 MR. DAVID MURPHY: I can tell
20 you the history of the road, but all I know is
21 Mr. Blakeslee gave me a right of way. As far as
22 maintaining, we did not speak on it, Mr. Blakeslee
23 and I. As to prior history, anyone who have been
24 around -- Mark, as you would know even before I got
25 there, that road has always been no maintenance
10
1 other than snowplowing. I have, just on my own,
2 taken up and tried to maintain it as much as I can.
3 We alleviated the water problem with that detention
4 pond because there was a time you wouldn't drive
5 down that road right now. So there is only a few
6 months out of the year that road could be used.
7 They would actually cut through my parcel and go
8 into those back houses. But there is no -- I had
9 no maintenance agreement with Mr. Blakeslee, so I
10 don't know what Geoff could tell you.
11 MR. ARMSTRONG: Nevertheless,
12 that's one outstanding issue that needs to be
13 clarified for my understanding and I also need to
14 discuss it with Mr. Blake, Geoff Blake.
15 MR. DAVID MURPHY: I'm lost. If
16 I talked to Mr. Blakeslee and we did not discuss
17 that, what's Geoff going to tell you? Nothing.
18 MR. ARMSTRONG: Well, he's your
19 counsel that you gave me his contact information
20 for the last time you were here with respect to
21 that access easement, and that's who I contacted
22 with questions for that access easement.
23 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: I think
24 what it's coming down to is Windy Corners Realty
25 doesn't want to take over the maintenance for that
11
1 road.
2 MR. ARMSTRONG: And they don't
3 need to. I just need to know who is maintaining
4 the road and make sure that they do have an access
5 easement for that road.
6 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: The
7 maintenance is being done by the owner of the road.
8 MR. ARMSTRONG: That may be so,
9 but that's the whole point of me getting this
10 cleared up with apparently Geoff Blake. Is that
11 who I should be continuing to talk to about this?
12 MR. DAVID MURPHY: Or the owner.
13 MR. McHALE: The easement was
14 drafted and recorded before it was reviewed by the
15 township. The township has concerns and some
16 changes need to be made to the easement. So would
17 you please have Geoff Blake call Mr. Armstrong and
18 let them finish coordinating the revisions that
19 need to be made. Can that be done?
20 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: Yes.
21 MS. HAASE: Sarah, Mr. McHale's
22 letter, Item 6, spoke to the fire lanes. And your
23 response is basically you're saying it's been taken
24 care of. But it's not in accordance to what the
25 letter was, the fire lanes you have here.
12
1 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: Right
2 here. Yes, those were okay. I was under the
3 impression all I was supposed to do is --
4 MR. McHALE: The fire lanes
5 themselves and the striping with the signage was
6 acceptable as you had shown on the plan. What I
7 was asking for and you can simply revise and add
8 some additional text to your drawing, was to take
9 the fire lane text and along the front of the main
10 drive in front of the proposed building where the
11 14 parking spaces are, just add two more pavement
12 markings of fire lane, fire lane. Simply do that.
13 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: Oh. I'm
14 sorry.
15 MR. McHALE: You don't need to
16 sign that section. We just don't want people
17 double parking and such to where it creates
18 congestion for the fire company. That's a very
19 simple item to address. The other item is related
20 to the cost estimate. And this is again a minor
21 change. The one you presented back to us does have
22 some realistic numbers now for the landscaping,
23 however, there is nothing in here for striping and
24 pavement markings.
25 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: Right.
13
1 He included that all in the price for the --
2 MR. McHALE: Then we should put
3 asphalt topcoat, including pavement striping,
4 marking, that type of thing. And the other thing
5 that is not in here, that would be to add a number
6 four, is the revisions for the detention basins and
7 the slotted drain or the trench drain that you're
8 proposing. And that's a very simple item to
9 address as well.
10 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: Let me
11 make sure that I've got it right. You want the
12 site plan. You want this?
13 MR. McHALE: Just take heavier
14 text and put fire lane.
15 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: No lines
16 or -- just the text?
17 MR. McHALE: That would be fine.
18 We don't want to create any
19 confusion for those parking there. We want to keep
20 it clear too.
21 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: Right,
22 yes.
23 MS. HAASE: And, Sarah, also if
24 we can make certain that we understand, both you
25 and the applicant, that you just had stated that
14
1 they need to get an occupancy so they can have the
2 physicians and the other lessees to enter the
3 building. Understand, the improvements have to be
4 completed.
5 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: They do?
6 MS. HAASE: What's not bonded.
7 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: Even if
8 he does a bond?
9 MS. HAASE: What improvements
10 aren't bonded, the items would have to be completed
11 before the CO.
12 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: Right. I
13 thought you were requiring a bond.
14 MS. HAASE: The detention basin.
15 MR. McHALE: Yes. We listed
16 those items. That's cost estimates that you
17 provided.
18 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: Right.
19 MR. McHALE: What you're
20 speaking about is a highway occupancy. The only
21 issue that I'm aware of is -- and maybe you can
22 fill us in on this or the owner, is that the
23 highway occupancy permit lapsed or is no longer
24 valid, is that correct?
25 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: That is
15
1 true.
2 MR. McHALE: It's not that you
3 have to go back out and make improvements to the
4 roadway, it just needs to be reissued?
5 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: Yes.
6 MR. McHALE: So that needs to
7 happen.
8 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: Yes. Of
9 course they are making me do a left turn analysis
10 in order to do it. They just sent us a letter back
11 saying they wanted -- Shikhman started it, I'm
12 sure. So, anyway, I'm going to do that. I'm going
13 to do it in-house because it's just a matter of
14 establishing what the traffic into the building is
15 going to be and half of it is going to come from
16 the left.
17 MR. McHALE: How did this all
18 get to the point where the HOP was no longer valid?
19 Can you fill that in for me?
20 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: It's hard
21 to know because the DOT people don't have their
22 full records, which is not a surprise, because I've
23 never known them to have their full records, but
24 from what we can gather, they went out and
25 inspected and they had several things that David
16
1 had to address. David did that. He called them
2 and they never showed back up, but they don't have
3 any records of his ever calling and having done
4 anything, so now they want him to reapply and go
5 through everything all over again, like he never
6 did anything, and we did already. And we got the
7 first comments back. And the one comment was they
8 want a left turn analysis. This building is
9 nowhere near as big as Shikhman, so I'm assuming
10 it's not going to be a problem.
11 MR. McHALE: Are they having you
12 look at the existing building plus the proposed or
13 just the proposed?
14 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: Yes.
15 MR. McHALE: Both of them?
16 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: Both.
17 MR. McHALE: How many square
18 feet are the two together?
19 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: A little
20 under eighteen hundred.
21 MR. SINCAVAGE: Eighteen
22 thousand.
23 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: Yes,
24 sorry.
25 MR. McHALE: How much were the
17
1 Shikhman's square footage.
2 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: I thought
3 it was over 20. We changed Shikhman so many times
4 to be honest. At this point in time I couldn't
5 tell you without checking. Also, we don't have the
6 school traffic down this far, I don't think, so --
7 MR. McHALE: But is PennDOT --
8 are they allowing you to continue use of the
9 access? How is that going to work? Because the
10 certificate of the occupancy requires, you know,
11 that you have the HOP before you're issued that,
12 but he does have another access, which is Maple
13 Road.
14 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: Right.
15 MR. McHALE: You need to figure
16 out how we are going to work this out.
17 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: Yes.
18 Well, hopefully, by -- within a month I'm going to
19 have the permit and it will be a moot point.
20 MR. McHALE: But if you have to
21 put a left turn lane in.
22 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: I'm
23 certainly hoping we don't have to do that. And
24 given -- I looked through the Shikhman study again
25 because it really irritates me that we have to do
18
1 it.
2 MR. McHALE: Let's not get into
3 Shikhman.
4 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: I know.
5 One of the things is, if you look in the back of
6 that study, she used a table that you use if you've
7 got five percent of your turn -- people turning
8 left.
9 MR. McHALE: It's okay, though.
10 Let's stay with this project and let's ask the
11 planning commission members if they want to make
12 any further comments. Those are the only items I
13 can think of, the highway occupancy permit, the
14 cost estimate and the revision for the stormwater
15 portion.
16 MR. ARMSTRONG: And you're going
17 to be working with Bob over the next week or so on
18 that stormwater issue?
19 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: Yes.
20 MR. SINCAVAGE: Were these plans
21 resubmitted by yesterday by 4 o'clock?
22 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: Yes, they
23 were.
24 MR. McHALE: Yes.
25 MR. SINCAVAGE: And, Bob, what's
19
1 your recommendation at this point?
2 MR. McHALE: Well, as I began to
3 indicate earlier was that all of the items that are
4 listed in the review letter were addressed, with
5 the exception of what we just spoke about. And the
6 modifications, the stormwater report needed to be
7 made some adjustments to get that worked out. Most
8 of the improvements are already there onsite. So I
9 don't foresee the stormwater management report
10 being a major hurdle to get refined and cleaned up.
11 That cost estimate and now the HOP is a little
12 stickier than I thought. I was thinking they were
13 just going to PennDOT with the old permit and say
14 here's what we had approved. The items got changed
15 or adjusted. Is there a way to get an extension or
16 something. But if they are not doing that, if you
17 have to do a left turn lane analysis, it
18 complicates things a little bit.
19 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: They
20 would have done that if they could have found their
21 old file, but of course they can't.
22 MR. McHALE: Okay. Those are
23 the only outstanding items other than the financial
24 securities.
25 MR. SINCAVAGE: And your issue
20
1 is with the --
2 MR. ARMSTRONG: I still need to
3 get clarification on the access easement.
4 MR. DAVID MURPHY: You have
5 Geoff's number?
6 MR. ARMSTRONG: We communicated
7 a couple times. I just haven't heard back from him
8 for a while.
9 MR. SINCAVAGE: Any comments
10 from the commission?
11 MR. MILLER: If we look at a
12 conditional approval here --
13 MR. ARMSTRONG: It would be
14 conditional on -- the HOP sounds like it could be
15 pretty significant.
16 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: But you
17 always give conditional approval based on HOP.
18 MR. SINCAVAGE: That's outside
19 agency. I don't have a problem with that.
20 MR. ARMSTRONG: The stormwater
21 and access easements.
22 MR. MILLER: That could be -- I
23 think that that's not a big problem, the
24 stormwater.
25 MR. McHALE: That's correct.
21
1 But I think that's something that can be worked
2 out. It's just a matter of getting the numbers to
3 work. They are already showing on the plan that's
4 being proposed to be approved, the trench drain
5 into that area. So everything in concept, in
6 preliminary form is there.
7 MR. MILLER: What you see looks
8 okay, though?
9 MR. McHALE: Yes.
10 MR. SINCAVAGE: How soon are you
11 going to be able to get these improvements done
12 that have to be done?
13 MR. McHALE: If you flip to the
14 first page, the title sheet, there is a note
15 number.
16 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: No. 24, I
17 think.
18 MR. McHALE: Note No. 23, they
19 list the items that have yet to be completed,
20 landscaping, pave wearing course, those items are
21 included in the cost estimate. The dumpster
22 enclosure -- I guess there was fencing that went
23 around that enclosure, correct? That should be in
24 the cost estimate as well.
25 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: Yes.
22
1 MR. McHALE: Bollards, that's
2 not something that is necessarily a land
3 development item. That sounds like more of a
4 building issue.
5 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: Yes.
6 MR. McHALE: The revisions to
7 the basin and install the trench drain. Those will
8 be bonded.
9 MR. SINCAVAGE: Right. So that
10 they are not doing -- you're not doing the
11 corrections to the basins until the summertime?
12 MR. McHALE: Well, this is what
13 we want to talk about also, is that these are the
14 following items. They are proposing an August 15th
15 date. Now, that's something we need to think about
16 and say is that -- do you want it to go on until
17 August 15th or is that something that could be done
18 by July or June or something to that effect?
19 So that's up to you all to think
20 through and decide. We do have Note 24, which
21 indicates that according to state highway law they
22 have to have a highway occupancy permit. So that
23 covers the lack of a permit today.
24 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: Yes.
25 MR. McHALE: And then 25, they
23
1 need to complete an as-built survey. Once all the
2 stormwater improvements are done, they need to
3 as-built those facilities and provide that.
4 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: Yes. And
5 if you look at this construction sequence on Sheet
6 C-6, it has a deadline of July.
7 MR. McHALE: Yes. It's my
8 understanding that Monroe County Planning
9 Commission received this revised plan on January
10 14th and so there has to be 30 days lapse between
11 the time that they review it or we need to get the
12 review letter within 30 days or 30 days has passed
13 before the board can act upon it.
14 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: Yes.
15 MR. McHALE: So that will be the
16 middle of this month. So that they won't be able
17 to really act upon it until the March meeting
18 anyway.
19 MR. SINCAVAGE: So the board of
20 supervisors can't act on it until their March
21 meeting, is that what you just said?
22 MR. ARMSTRONG: At the earliest.
23 MR. SINCAVAGE: At the earliest.
24 So our meeting is before theirs.
25 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: But the
24
1 supervisors normally require that you get approval
2 the month before.
3 MR. SINCAVAGE: No, but I'm
4 having some discomfort with what you're -- we are
5 directed not to give conditional approval, which
6 you know.
7 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: I know.
8 Yes, I remember that real well.
9 MR. McHALE: The way the
10 meetings fall, it looks like the second is the work
11 session for the board of supervisors and we have a
12 planning commission meeting on the 5th and then
13 they have their regular scheduled meeting.
14 MR. SINCAVAGE: No. All right.
15 So March 3rd would be the work session. The sixth
16 would be our meeting. Then the 10th. So this
17 approval date will give them hardly a day to look
18 at it, whereas, I mean, it's up to you all, if
19 things could be cleaned up next week, except for
20 the highway occupancy permit, but we can't have
21 these things drag on either. There has to be some
22 commitment on the part of the owner and his
23 engineer, if you all decide to go that route.
24 MR. MILLER: If we make it
25 conditional and Bob's okay with the items --
25
1 MR. ARMSTRONG: Or you could
2 waive and if they clean up everything crystal clear
3 by your March 6th meeting, you know the board of
4 supervisors may be --
5 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: I really
6 don't want to do that guys. This has cost them a
7 lot more money than he originally thought. You
8 know, he needs to get that C of O. You know, there
9 is a chance that the supervisors would turn it down
10 for -- especially since we missed their work
11 session.
12 MS. HAASE: Sarah, in fairness
13 to the township, none of this has been created by
14 the township. None of it has. There has been
15 deficiencies from 2005. There has been
16 deficiencies through this whole project. So this
17 can't be put on the township.
18 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: No, but
19 it is also a benefit to the township to get some
20 additional medical people into the area.
21 MR. DAVID MURPHY: Can I speak
22 for a moment?
23 MR. SINCAVAGE: Absolutely.
24 MR. DAVID MURPHY: I'm not
25 putting the blame on anybody but myself. I mean, I
26
1 don't want the township to think anything. Just
2 that I'm also not a professional. My game is
3 pills. But we decided to take this to task.
4 MR. ARMSTRONG: Careful, we are
5 on the record.
6 MS. HAASE: Mr. Murphy is a
7 pharmacist.
8 MR. DAVID MURPHY: Yes. But
9 what actually Sarah is mentioning is really true.
10 One thing I am seeing is the overall people coming
11 in who actually -- like physical therapy. Our
12 citizens right here, they are driving 25 miles one
13 way, 50 miles round trip, fixed income, so we are
14 considering also now gasoline. But to me, it's a
15 danger factor of 115. I think -- I hope you would
16 take that into consideration as part of this,
17 because the sooner it is, the sooner lives won't be
18 in danger. I mean an 80 year-old driving down 115
19 is frightening enough. I mean, I don't mean it to
20 the person or the age, I mean just that oncoming
21 traffic. I don't want to step on toes there, but
22 that's the real consideration. That's the whole
23 purpose of it. The whole purpose of why I left
24 half of it empty is I'm shopping for quality. I'm
25 not just looking to fill this thing up, I want our
27
1 citizens here to benefit. I don't want just
2 another doctor. We need a group. We don't need a
3 single. We do need physical therapy. We do need a
4 lot of things I'm putting in. At the same time
5 intentionally leaving it vacant so we can get more
6 quality here. That's the whole purpose behind
7 that. I hope we don't lose sight of that, because
8 I'm intentionally not renting. We have St. Luke's
9 who is coming in. If they get the traffic and they
10 like the numbers, they want to bring in specialists
11 and they're considering a physicians group also and
12 possibly some sort of imaging. That's in my
13 discussions with them. They want to see how it
14 starts off. So these are things I think we need to
15 discuss as a benefit to the community.
16 I know there is little quirks
17 here and I'm guilty, okay, of being a novice in
18 trying to be a builder. But on this end, it's also
19 a great tax benefit to the township. I'm not
20 bringing in children, I'm bringing in taxes. But
21 really that whole health care thing is a big issue
22 here. I hope, at least all of you, would take that
23 into some consideration in making judgement on
24 hopefully what's minor and we can fix.
25 MR. ARMSTRONG: Right, but you
28
1 also have to understand that this commission is not
2 in the practice of granting conditional
3 recommendations to applicants because it's, you
4 know, the practice of the township not to do that,
5 number one. Number two, they're extra cautious
6 with respect to this particular project, given the
7 fact that certain things had not been done pursuant
8 to the representations previously before this
9 commission.
10 MR. DAVID MURPHY: Well, at
11 least I hope you see that we are trying.
12 MR. SINCAVAGE: That's very
13 commendable, and certainly the township wants this
14 type of facility. We know there is a need for
15 that, and that's certainly come up in our
16 comprehensive plan, but the commission is put in an
17 awkward position.
18 MR. DAVID MURPHY: I'm with you.
19 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: How about
20 a special meeting in two weeks.
21 MR. DAVID MURPHY: Even if you
22 look at the past history, Mark, my place always --
23 I tried to keep it nice, make it nice. This is my
24 place. It will not fall short on it.
25 MS. HAASE: Sarah, when do you
29
1 think you will have the submission to PennDOT,
2 because that's an issue in order for you folks to
3 get your CO.
4 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: Ive
5 already submitted once to PennDOT. We've got the
6 comments back, and I expect early next week to
7 resubmit.
8 MS. HAASE: Because in order for
9 me to issue a CO, I have to get verification from
10 them.
11 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: Maybe we
12 can work something out where in the meantime we can
13 block it off and route people off of the other
14 road.
15 MR. SINCAVAGE: Sarah, I heard
16 you state earlier that you could have this cleaned
17 up by Tuesday, I think you said?
18 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: I'm
19 certainly hoping to. Since I'm having to use
20 another engineering firm with a different computer
21 model, I don't have complete control of that, but
22 they told me they'd work on it on Monday.
23 MR. SINCAVAGE: All right. Bob,
24 if you get everything by Friday next week, can we
25 schedule a special meeting for the 21st? Would you
30
1 be ready by the 21st?
2 MR. McHALE: Yes.
3 MR. SINCAVAGE: And you have to
4 satisfy the easement, your attorney.
5 MR. ARMSTRONG: I'll talk to
6 Geoff Blake on that.
7 MR. SINCAVAGE: Everything has
8 to be worked out by next Friday to the satisfaction
9 of the township. If that is done, we will schedule
10 a special meeting the 21st. Does that give us
11 enough advertising time?
12 MR. DAVID MURPHY: What is it
13 that you're looking for then, Mark, so I have an
14 idea or will Sarah have it written down?
15 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: I have it
16 written down.
17 MR. SINCAVAGE: Sarah should
18 have everything. Bob needs to be satisfied with
19 the stormwater. There are some questions about the
20 fire lanes.
21 The two main issues are the
22 stormwater and the access onto Maple Road.
23 MR. McHALE: Have you applied to
24 PennDOT?
25 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: Yes. And
31
1 I have gotten their first round of comments back.
2 MR. McHALE: Okay. Good.
3 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: We will
4 have those addressed by probably next Tuesday or
5 Wednesday.
6 MR. ARMSTRONG: To be quite
7 honest, this will also give Bob more time to look
8 at -- I mean, I know you submitted it yesterday
9 around 4, but maybe more time to process everything
10 that's just been submitted to him.
11 MR. SINCAVAGE: We are giving
12 you until next Friday. We are giving you a week
13 and one day. Everything.
14 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: That's
15 acceptable.
16 MR. DAVID MURPHY: Just what you
17 told me just now, not the landscaping?
18 MR. McHALE: That includes the
19 cost estimate and those types of -- all the clean
20 up.
21 MR. DAVID MURPHY: Cost estimate
22 of what? I keep hearing this.
23 MR. SINCAVAGE: For the bonding.
24 MR. DAVID MURPHY: What would
25 that include, the blacktopping?
32
1 MR. ARMSTRONG: Improvements.
2 MR. McHALE: There were some
3 items missing. The trench drain, the modification
4 of the stormwater basin, all those kind of things.
5 Just add additional dollars to it.
6 MR. DAVID MURPHY: Okay. I have
7 not seen it.
8 MR. SINCAVAGE: Your engineer
9 submitted it.
10 MR. DAVID MURPHY: I didn't get
11 to see them. That doesn't mean I saw them, but
12 that's okay.
13 MR. SINCAVAGE: You understand?
14 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: Yes.
15 MR. SINCAVAGE: Clearly?
16 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: Hey,
17 listen, if I can turn all those comments around in
18 less than 24 hours, I can beat next Friday.
19 MR. DAVID MURPHY: Thank you.
20 MR. SINCAVAGE: Are you
21 available -- you want to do it early at 5 o'clock
22 or keep it at 7?
23 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: So if the
24 special meeting happens, it will be the 21st at 7?
25 MR. SINCAVAGE: Correct.
33
1 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: Okay.
2 Thank you very much.
3 MR. MILLER: I make a motion to
4 table the plans of Windy Corners Realty
5 Development.
6 MR. SINCAVAGE: I have a motion.
7 Do I have a second to the motion?
8 MR. VANDERVLIET: Second.
9 MR. SINCAVAGE: All those in
10 favor, please say aye.
11 MR. MILLER: Aye.
12 MR. VANDERVLIET: Aye.
13 MRS. LAMBERTON: Aye.
14 MR. SINCAVAGE: Aye. Sarah, do
15 you want these plans back so you can review them or
16 not?
17 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: I'll take
18 one and give it to David.
19 MR. SINCAVAGE: Locust Ridge
20 Quarry Contractors Shop. We have received a letter
21 and it's been confirmed by our solicitor that they
22 have withdrawn the plan.
23 MR. ARMSTRONG: That's correct.
24 I sent a confirming letter just yesterday.
25 MR. SINCAVAGE: So that item is
34
1 removed from our agenda.
2 Next item is Verizon Wireless.
3 MR. RICHARD WILLIAMS: Good
4 evening. Again, my name is Rich William, Attorney
5 for Verizon Wireless. Here tonight we have Gary
6 Stouffer from Rettew Associates, who actually
7 prepared the plans for this evening, as well as
8 Patrick Riordan from Strategic Communications
9 Services, who actually located the site on behalf
10 of Verizon Wireless. To the best of my knowledge,
11 none of us are selling pills, so.
12 With that, what I'd like to do
13 is have Mr. Gary Stouffer come up and explain what
14 changes have been made to the plans since the last
15 meeting before the commission last month.
16 MR. GARY STOUFFER: Since the
17 last meeting, Mr. McHale had some minor comments we
18 had addressed and resubmitted the plans, and after
19 that he had one more note to be added to the plan.
20 The firm panel number, we had transposed a
21 figure -- an 8 to a B, and subsequent to submitting
22 the plans to Mr. McHale, we did receive the county
23 review letter. So we added that data on the plan.
24 So there was three minor changes that were
25 addressed and resubmitted back to Mr. McHale.
35
1 MR. RICHARD WILLIAMS: One thing
2 I wanted to note as well. If you remember from
3 last month, there was the gentleman from the Locust
4 Lake Village Home Owners Association raise an issue
5 relative to an access easement to the facility.
6 What I have done is I pulled copies of the deed.
7 As I indicated last month, this property is
8 actually owned by SBA. A lot of times the tower
9 company will lease the property. This property is
10 actually owned by SBA. And within the SBA's deed
11 is an access easement to a public road.
12 What I have also done is
13 attached to that deed the deed from Locust Lake
14 Village to SBA's immediate predecessor in interest.
15 So you can see basically how that easement came
16 about.
17 In addition, since our last
18 meeting, we had forwarded a copy of Verizon
19 Wireless's plan to a gentleman named Ed Roach, who
20 is assistant general counsel for SBA, and he had
21 forwarded our plans over to counsel for the home
22 owners association who indicated that they have no
23 problem with our proposed collocation. They wanted
24 to raise some issues with respect to SBA relative
25 to the upkeep of the road, but we believe that
36
1 issue has been resolved as well.
2 MR. McHALE: You all got a copy
3 of the February 6th --
4 MR. SINCAVAGE: Yes.
5 MR. RICHARD WILLIAMS: The last
6 item that I had is, one item that Mr. McHale asked
7 for was a letter from SBA indicating the site had
8 previously been constructed per the approved plans
9 and that a certificate of occupancy had been issued
10 as well. We gave him basically a draft copy of
11 that or a carbon copy. What we have is the
12 original letter for the township file.
13 MR. McHALE: Thank you very
14 much.
15 MR. SINCAVAGE: Bob, your letter
16 recommends approval subject to the requested
17 waiver. Have they satisfied all the comments
18 within this letter, February 6th letter?
19 MR. McHALE: Yes.
20 MR. SINCAVAGE: The only waiver
21 you're requesting is SALDO 135.17.L and M?
22 MR. RICHARD WILLIAMS: L, M, Q
23 and 135.18.15.
24 MR. SINCAVAGE: That's SALDO?
25 MR. RICHARD WILLIAMS: Of the
37
1 SALDO, correct. Which is the final plan
2 requirement.
3 MR. ARMSTRONG: Which ones?
4 MR. RICHARD WILLIAMS: 135.17.L,
5 135.17.M, 135.17.Q, 135.18.15.
6 MR. McHALE: There are several
7 typical items that will need to be submitted on
8 that approval, and that's all the signatures and
9 notarization and those kind of items as well as
10 electronic files. That would be done by the
11 board's approval.
12 MR. SINCAVAGE: All right.
13 MR. McHALE: So those items have
14 not been completed, but, yes everything else has.
15 MR. ARMSTRONG: And I missed
16 that last waiver.
17 MR. RICHARD WILLIAMS:
18 135.18.15. Just in general, 135.17.L requires
19 details such as building sewer system, bridges,
20 petroleum lines within 500 feet of the property.
21 135.17.M requires existing street intersections
22 with driveways within 500 feet. 135.17.Q requires
23 a plan for surface drainage, natural restorative
24 features throughout the property, stone fields,
25 environmental habitats. And 135.18.15 requires a
38
1 drainage study, stormwater drainage plan, in
2 connection with the final plan.
3 MR. McHALE: And the waiver
4 requests are listed on the site plan.
5 MR. ARMSTRONG: I looked through
6 the Monroe County Planning Commission's letter.
7 One thing they seem to actually recommend was
8 barbed wire on top of the fencing. Did you see
9 that?
10 MR. GARY STOUFFER: I think
11 that's existing. We have a note on the plan to
12 match --
13 MR. McHALE: Match existing.
14 Okay.
15 MS. HAASE: I believe there is a
16 section of the ordinance that prohibits barbed
17 wire.
18 MR. ARMSTRONG: Is there barbed
19 wire on there now?
20 MS. HAASE: That I can't speak
21 to. That I don't remember.
22 MR. GARY STOUFFER: That I'm not
23 certain.
24 MR. RICHARD WILLIAMS: Maybe
25 Patrick.
39
1 MR. PATRICK RIORDAN: The last
2 time I was at the site, the fence wasn't up yet.
3 That's when I took the pictures.
4 MR. ARMSTRONG: Maybe the
5 planning commission wants to -- I don't know if
6 they want to make --
7 MR. SINCAVAGE: Whatever is out
8 there existing is fine. Any comments?
9 MRS. LAMBERTON: I don't have
10 any.
11 MR. SINCAVAGE: Any comments
12 from the public?
13 Okay. I'll entertain a motion
14 to recommend approval to the board of supervisors
15 for the Verizon Wireless Land Development Plan,
16 provided that they meet all the requirements of the
17 February 6, 2008 township engineer's letter and
18 recommend waiver to SALDO Section 135.17.L and M,
19 SALDO 135.17.Q and SALDO Section 135.18.15.
20 Do I have a motion to that
21 effect?
22 MR. VANDERVLIET: So moved.
23 MR. SINCAVAGE: Do I have a
24 second to the motion?
25 MRS. LAMBERTON: Second.
40
1 MR. SINCAVAGE: Motion and
2 second. All those in favor, please say aye.
3 MR. MILLER: Aye.
4 MR. VANDERVLIET: Aye.
5 MRS. LAMBERTON: Aye.
6 MR. SINCAVAGE: Aye.
7 MR. RICHARD WILLIAMS: Thank you
8 for your time.
9 MR. SINCAVAGE: Next item on our
10 agenda is Arcadia property.
11 I'll recuse myself from this.
12 Joe will take over as vice chairman.
13 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: Hello. My
14 name is Mark Radcliffe, Reilly Associates, here to
15 discuss both Lot 100 and Lot 110, which is the next
16 item on the agenda, land development plan. We'll
17 speak to them together because they are so closely
18 related.
19 I believe last month Chris was
20 here and explained some of the layout changes we've
21 done. That's when we submitted plans to Bob for
22 his review in response to his previous comment
23 letter and to update some changes that we've made
24 to the layout. I won't belabor the point, I'm sure
25 you're familiar with the plan by this point, except
41
1 if there is any specific question, now that you've
2 had the chance to review the full plans regarding
3 the site or anything that's proposed right now.
4 MR. McHALE: Mark, you may want
5 to give an overview of your concept to what you're
6 doing stormwaterwise.
7 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: Sure. As
8 you well know, DEP requirements requires you manage
9 the volume of a two-year storm that runs off from
10 the site. This land development, by its very
11 nature, creates a lot of impervious area. This
12 building, you know, up here, is nearly 30 acres of
13 building. In order to accomplish that, we are
14 routing our stormwater in a series of berms,
15 shallow berms that we intent to construct in the
16 existing woodlands, adjacent to the wetlands. The
17 idea is to get the water flowing sheet flow behind
18 those berms, where it can be slowed down, held up,
19 infiltrated into the ground, recharge the wetlands
20 and manage that volume. We'll achieve both
21 infiltration and by kind of leveraging the existing
22 plant community that's there, vapor transpiration
23 to do that -- vapor transpiration to do that, keep
24 with the DEP guidance. One of the advantages we
25 have is this big wooded complex, as it is now, it's
42
1 got (inaudible), spongy. Rather than try and
2 construct something that recreates that, we decided
3 to take advantage of what we had there. And that's
4 what we are doing.
5 On the colored plan, all these
6 orange lines, you will notice on the detail plans,
7 there is a number of these berms in there. And
8 they just show soil berms covered with fabric and
9 seeded, again, all within the guidelines of the
10 department's CMP manual. And that's our volume
11 control.
12 We have rates control for the
13 central drainage basin for both sites, for Goose
14 Run, to match the Act 167 requirements for a pre to
15 post rate matching. We have some stormwater
16 because of the drainage divide along here draining
17 to the north into the Tobyhanna Creek. That is a
18 conditional detention drainage area, detention
19 structures up there.
20 In addition to those berms, we
21 are using some subsurface drainage on the parking
22 areas in a limited extent, partially to manage the
23 volume -- mostly to manage the volume from the
24 northern side of the site. So, it's a pretty
25 complicated storm plan. They keep getting more
43
1 complicated. I'm sure Bob is -- I know we've
2 spoken.
3 MR. McHALE: One of the benefits
4 to what they're proposing is it will minimize
5 disturbance of that area that's basically southwest
6 of the basin and the building parking lot, that
7 area Mark's identifying there. And what's unique
8 about it is that, instead of having a simple
9 outfall structure or two coming out of the basin
10 that controls volume and rate, they're distributing
11 some of this water and some of it is water that's
12 coming off site that they are diverting around the
13 driveway that's to the east. And it goes into
14 these bermmed areas. They are not very large,
15 correct? They are like 18 inches, 24 inches high?
16 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: Exactly.
17 MR. McHALE: These will capture
18 and hold -- maintain that water for infiltration
19 purposes and such.
20 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: It won't be
21 concentrating at any one time or at any one point.
22 That's part of the concern DEP has, you know, with
23 a large wetland complex down here. You take that,
24 you put it in the pipe and you bring it out here
25 and you have a tendency to dry up the areas over
44
1 here, over here and inundate the central portion.
2 So the idea was, again, keep it out of the pipe to
3 the extent possible or in the area where we do have
4 to have a pipe to get it off of the site,
5 redistribute it all along the perimeter of the
6 wetland area. There are a few outfall pipe
7 structures just for the 100 -- the extreme flows,
8 just so these berms don't become so inundated that
9 they begin to erode or cause other problems.
10 MR. McHALE: We did receive
11 today a copy of an application that went into the
12 Monroe County Conservation District, which then,
13 along with the requested waivers and such, brings
14 it to a point where the plan can be considered as a
15 complete application at this point.
16 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: Correct.
17 And I just look for acknowledgement that our
18 application is in fact complete, officially
19 starting, you know, the time clock on it. I know
20 that was an issue on this job. We had submitted an
21 acknowledgement that we submitted a partially
22 complete plan. Part of that was to get a lot of
23 this storm water stuff in front of Bob and give him
24 a chance to look through it. Again, we've
25 addressed some of the initial comments, made our
45
1 submission to the district. I know Bob is going
2 through it. We talked today and we'll follow up
3 and look forward to seeing his letter here in the
4 not too distant future.
5 MR. McHALE: PennDOT, they've
6 already submitted a traffic impact study to the
7 township and to PennDOT. You have received now, as
8 of today, one set of comments on the traffic study
9 from PennDOT. So, Mark, if you want to give a
10 short overview of what you're looking at.
11 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: We are
12 proposing some improvements out here, a right turn
13 lane, a through lane on the north bound of 115,
14 left turn, south bound, left and right, coming out
15 of the facility. We did the study and submitted to
16 PennDOT. We got some comments back. They asked us
17 to examine alternatives to this particular driveway
18 location. We scheduled a meeting. We are going to
19 go through that. They wanted us to consider the
20 possibility of creating a new entrance to the
21 north. I don't believe they necessarily have all
22 the information in front of them. We'll supply it
23 to them. We are in the process of setting up a
24 meeting with them right now.
25 Moving to the north we have two
46
1 unoccupied lots. We don't have the ability to go
2 through with any sort of a driveway. Once we get
3 this lot, this lot slopes steeply to 115, brings us
4 into a curve at 115. We have a poor road line up
5 here, if we do that. It puts us adjacent to the
6 bridge right here, which would limit the ability to
7 add lanes and taper some things we need to make --
8 to bring the level of service. PennDOT's concern
9 was the proximity here. Apparently there is some
10 talk of signalizing these off ramps. Apparently
11 the racetrack has an issue. So we'll discuss the
12 alternatives with PennDOT. This looks like
13 something we'll deal more with technology. The
14 signals may need to be coordinated, something like
15 that, to be able to bring it down here. I don't
16 see that we have an option if we go to the north,
17 given the land uses we have there and the
18 topography layout up further north. Again, we'll
19 hash that out with PennDOT.
20 MR. McHALE: This is your
21 assessment for the --
22 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: Correct.
23 That was submitted in response to your comment
24 request that we look at the environmental impact
25 associated with the truck traffic and that's
47
1 focused on the truck traffic alone. There wasn't
2 really a guidance or any guidelines in your
3 ordinance for how that should be prepared. So we
4 took the performance standards from the zoning and
5 just point by point followed that and outlined the,
6 you know, provided the assessment based on each one
7 of those points.
8 Any other questions or comments?
9 MR. MILLER: Any comments from
10 the board?
11 MRS. LAMBERTON: No.
12 MR. VANDERVLIET: No.
13 MR. ARMSTRONG: The time
14 extension, do you have those for this evening?
15 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: I'm going
16 to bring Sean up to speak to the issue of the time
17 extension.
18 MR. SHAWN LANGEN: Hi. How are
19 you doing? Shawn Langen. I was here a couple
20 meetings ago. I just wanted to pop in, since I
21 wasn't here last month. I just had a quick
22 question for the solicitor, the extension. We
23 haven't been formally accepted yet. Tonight, if we
24 are accepted, then the clock would start clicking.
25 I was just a little unfamiliar with extensions.
48
1 The plan hasn't been accepted yet.
2 MR. ARMSTRONG: Well, you did
3 submit the plan. Whether or not it was completed
4 or not, depending on your reading of the MPC, we
5 still need, for the protection of the township --
6 MR. SHAWN LANGEN: I wasn't here
7 the last time when they reviewed it. I was puzzled
8 by the term. I mean, not normally, but go ahead if
9 you need to.
10 MR. ARMSTRONG: From the
11 township's position we need that time extension if
12 we are not going to make a recommendation tonight.
13 And I don't know if you wanted to make a
14 recommendation because the latest review letter we
15 have from our engineer was October of '07. That
16 being said, even if what you're saying, the time
17 clock would start tonight, it's a 90 day time
18 clock, and I think that time extension is the 90
19 day time extension.
20 MR. SHAWN LANGEN: Where does
21 that take us out to, the planning commission
22 meeting or --
23 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: It was, in
24 general, a 90 day extension. I believe it extended
25 to the 4th day of May.
49
1 MR. SHAWN LANGEN: What is your
2 meeting in May?
3 MR. ARMSTRONG: Our meeting
4 would be the first Thursday, but, mind you, the
5 planning commission can only make a recommendation.
6 MR. SHAWN LANGEN: What I didn't
7 want to do is grant an extension if we didn't need
8 to do it and that would push us out past your May
9 meeting, which would cost us another three weeks
10 getting to the supervisors for the next -- you
11 know, what I mean? Because I hope to have this all
12 tied up by then.
13 MR. ARMSTRONG: Well, I'm not
14 sure if I'm understanding what you're saying.
15 MR. SHAWN LANGEN: I mean, if
16 the three month extension went past -- didn't line
17 up with your planning commission meeting, it would
18 push me past the next supervisors meeting. Follow
19 me?
20 MR. McHALE: The first Monday is
21 a work session, the second Monday is a regular
22 meeting. So it depends on how the days fall.
23 MR. SHAWN LANGEN: I need the
24 calender. You're saying our plan is accepted --
25 MR. ARMSTRONG: Not necessarily
50
1 accepted, but a reading of the MPC is you submitted
2 plans. For the protection of the township, I need
3 to start that time clock. And having done that, we
4 need -- the current time extension I think is until
5 the end of February.
6 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: February
7 28, I believe.
8 MR. ARMSTRONG: But this one
9 would just take us another 90 days, which would be
10 May 4th, I believe. If you want to change the date
11 on that extension, you can. But even if what
12 you're saying -- if your reading of the MPC would
13 be the 90 days --
14 MR. SHAWN LANGEN: Until it's
15 deemed complete.
16 MR. ARMSTRONG: But if that's
17 what you're saying, the 90 days would start from
18 tonight. So either way, it's 90 days.
19 MR. SHAWN LANGEN: That's why I
20 was saying, why are we doing extensions if the
21 clock didn't start yet?
22 MR. ARMSTRONG: I'm saying it
23 probably has, that's why we have these extensions.
24 There could be a reading of the MPC where you
25 submitted the plans -- I'm not saying that's
51
1 necessarily correct, but I have to protect the
2 township's interest in this situation.
3 MR. SHAWN LANGEN: Okay. What
4 is the date of the meeting?
5 MS. HAASE: For the planning
6 commission or the board of supervisors?
7 MR. SHAWN LANGEN: The planning
8 commission.
9 MS. HAASE: The planning
10 commission would be May 1st.
11 MR. SHAWN LANGEN: April, what
12 was April?
13 MS. HAASE: April would be April
14 3rd.
15 MR. SHAWN LANGEN: Why don't we
16 do it to May 1?
17 MR. ARMSTRONG: To May 1.
18 MR. McHALE: The board doesn't
19 meet till the 12th.
20 MR. SHAWN LANGEN: We want to
21 mirror your calender.
22 MR. McHALE: The 90 days is for
23 the board of supervisors.
24 MR. ARMSTRONG: Right. The 90
25 days is for the board of supervisors. The 90 day
52
1 extension is for action on your plan.
2 MR. SHAWN LANGEN: I thought I'm
3 granting the planning commission 90 days.
4 MR. ARMSTRONG: No, no. Let me
5 explain something to you.
6 MR. SHAWN LANGEN: We are fine.
7 We are good. May, that's fine. I'm in agreement.
8 That's fine.
9 MR. CHRISTOPHER McDERMOTT:
10 We'll sign the extension.
11 MR. ARMSTRONG: That extension
12 is for action. This commission can make a
13 recommendation, they can't take action. The board
14 of supervisors takes action.
15 MR. SHAWN LANGEN: I would be
16 looking for April. That would be the goal time
17 line. I'll sign the extension.
18 MR. ARMSTRONG: May I recommend
19 this. If you're looking to try to get before the
20 board of supervisors in their May, is that what
21 you're telling me? In May?
22 MR. SHAWN LANGEN: Yes. Based
23 on where we are at.
24 MR. ARMSTRONG: If you want to
25 play with that extension, I know it says May 4th,
53
1 but it looks like their meeting is on the 12th of
2 May. If you want to change that to make it May
3 12th so we don't have to, you know, come April and
4 you're before the planning commission, and they
5 make a recommendation but they're going to need
6 another extension because the board of supervisors
7 won't be meeting until --
8 MS. HAASE: May 12th.
9 MR. ARMSTRONG: They meet on the
10 second Monday.
11 MS. HAASE: May 12 at 7 o'clock.
12 MR. ARMSTRONG: So if you want
13 to -- I know it says May 4th, but if you want to
14 just clarify that in your extension and just put
15 May 12.
16 MR. CHRISTOPHER McDERMOTT:
17 Ninety-six, 97 days.
18 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: Are there
19 any other issues or comments at this point?
20 MR. ARMSTRONG: Right now you're
21 waiting for Bob's review letter.
22 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: Correct.
23 MR. ARMSTRONG: For your latest
24 revisions.
25 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: Correct.
54
1 And I don't know what your time schedule is.
2 Obviously we are always looking for it sooner. You
3 will have it done by? No, I realize it's a thick
4 set of plans you're working through. And, again,
5 Bob's been in contact on different issues.
6 MR. ARMSTRONG: Since the last
7 time you guys were in here, did you change anything
8 significantly like locationwise or anything to the
9 plan, landscaping, buffer?
10 MR. CHRISTOPHER McDERMOTT: No.
11 The plan is the same plan that was -- that we spoke
12 to last month. Bob had gotten that a week or so
13 before the meeting and didn't have a chance to look
14 at it for that meeting. So for this meeting he's
15 had a chance to look at it. We appreciate the
16 opportunity to start this process, especially with
17 the size of the drainage facilities on this. I
18 think that, you know, we are now through those
19 first couple cycles of looking at this. Bob's
20 familiar with it. I think we are more locked into
21 where we are going. I think things can really
22 accelerate from this point. We can get down to the
23 nitty gritty issues. The big planning issues are
24 really over.
25 PennDOT has brought up an issue
55
1 that I think we are going to resolve that rather
2 quickly because once they have all the facts, they
3 are going to see that there really isn't a feasible
4 alternate access. Really, in a lot of ways, that
5 wouldn't affect the plan that's in front of you.
6 MR. McHALE: You all generally
7 do a pretty good job of giving us an update. And
8 if you would also include in that update the status
9 of the permit for the crossings in the wetland area
10 because that's going to affect your roadway access
11 into Lot 110.
12 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: Right, and
13 we said before, we expect that we've been to DEP
14 saying, oh, yeah, we are down to the final things
15 and the paper doesn't show up, so -- but we look
16 forward to those coming shortly, but the access to
17 these lots is contingent on those issues which are
18 previous preexisting issues.
19 MR. SINCAVAGE: Mark, if I can
20 just speak to that a little bit.
21 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: Sure.
22 MR. SINCAVAGE: It's kind of my
23 permit because I have to get that one. The Army
24 Corp has finally agreed with us that the roadway
25 should go there. So that was like a huge hurdle to
56
1 get over.
2 MR. ARMSTRONG: Where was it to
3 go?
4 MR. SINCAVAGE: They wanted it
5 to go down here. It was weird. They have agreed
6 to this. Now we are down to a mitigation area. We
7 had proposed a mitigation area. We had a site
8 meeting with DEP and Army Corp yesterday. They are
9 dissatisfied with our mitigation area, after
10 they've had it for eight months. But, anyhow,
11 we've agreed that we are going to -- instead of
12 creating a new wetland, we are going to restore a
13 wetland, which is right here, which was filled by
14 the department of transportation back in the early
15 '80s. They dumped a bunch of concrete into the
16 wetlands and filled in the wetlands, which they can
17 do, because they are not a private person. And we
18 had agreed that we are going to take this out and
19 restore it. This makes everyone really happy
20 because it's all part of the same system, because
21 the roadway is here. This is very close to that.
22 And also we are doing a restoration instead of
23 creating a wetland.
24 This will rejuvenate much more
25 quickly, which we agree it's a huge cost to take
57
1 the concrete out. If it's going to make everyone
2 happy, we are all happy. So we anticipate having
3 that permit within, I would say, by the end of
4 March. I certainly hope by the end of March.
5 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: Thank you
6 for your time.
7 MR. MILLER: Do I hear a motion
8 to accept the plans for New Ventures Park, Lot 100
9 and 110 and then motion to table.
10 MR. VANDERVLIET: So moved.
11 MR. MILLER: All in one?
12 MR. VANDERVLIET: All in one.
13 MR. MILLER: Do I hear a second?
14 MRS. LAMBERTON: I second it.
15 MR. MILLER: All in favor?
16 MR. VANDERVLIET: Aye.
17 MRS. LAMBERTON: Aye.
18 MR. MILLER: Aye.
19 MR. SINCAVAGE: And I'll
20 abstain.
21 MR. ARMSTRONG: Was the motion
22 for both lots?
23 MR. MILLER: Yes.
24 MR. CHRISTOPHER McDERMOTT:
25 Thank you for your time.
58
1 MR. SINCAVAGE: Next item on our
2 agenda is Brick City. Anyone here representing
3 Brick City?
4 Bob, do you have anything to
5 report on this?
6 MR. McHALE: Yes, the original
7 stormwater calculations that they had submitted to
8 us had indicated onsite underground detention.
9 They had infiltration trenches and such. The
10 majority of that will stay as it was. The only
11 difference is going to be that the discharge point
12 was out into the PennDOT right-of-way, and PennDOT
13 was asking for their form of the drainage study as
14 well.
15 We've been discussing other
16 alternatives. The property as it exists today
17 naturally drains toward the west by northwest and
18 there is an inlet that exists on the eastside of
19 Spruce Drive. We've had some discussions, and what
20 they are planning on doing now is directing that
21 water from their release point at their property in
22 a small storm sewer line that will parallel and go
23 down Spruce Drive and tie into the existing inlet.
24 It will be a much simpler process as far as
25 stormwater management goes to work in that
59
1 direction.
2 I did receive an email back from
3 Russ Kresge in regard to -- and I'll just read it.
4 It says, "I confirmed with the
5 Coolbaugh Township road foreman that Coolbaugh
6 Township maintains this entire road, even though it
7 is partially within Tobyhanna Township and that
8 there would be no objection to maintaining a storm
9 sewer within the right of way if it is properly
10 designed and constructed. Coolbaugh has a similar
11 situation with Arcadia North's storm sewer within
12 State Route 611, which will be maintained by the
13 township. A fee was paid to a maintenance fund for
14 this arrangement and I suspect that a similar
15 arrangement could be made for Brick City.
16 Ultimately, this will be an issue before the board
17 of supervisors to address."
18 So that was from the Coolbaugh
19 Township Engineer, Russ Kresge. So we are at least
20 on the same page. There were some questions as far
21 as who has jurisdiction. It's in our municipality.
22 There is liquid fuels that come into play and all
23 those kind of things. Right now, that's the
24 direction we are going.
25 MR. SINCAVAGE: So we don't need
60
1 any action?
2 MR. ARMSTRONG: Actually, Brick
3 City was granted land development waiver with
4 conditions. And one of the conditions is this
5 stormwater review that Bob has --
6 MR. SINCAVAGE: So we are not
7 going to take any action on it?
8 MR. ARMSTRONG: There is nothing
9 before you to take action.
10 MR. SINCAVAGE: Okay. Very
11 good.
12 Wee-Wons Day Care Expansion.
13 Anything to report on that?
14 MR. ARMSTRONG: No. We just
15 received another time waiver. I think they are in
16 the process of revising their plans.
17 MR. SINCAVAGE: So we have a
18 time waiver. We are okay?
19 MR. ARMSTRONG: Yes.
20 MR. SINCAVAGE: I need a motion
21 to table Wee-Wons Day Care Expansion.
22 MR. VANDERVLIET: So moved.
23 MR. SINCAVAGE: Motion. Second
24 to the motion?
25 MR. MILLER: Second.
61
1 MR. SINCAVAGE: Motion and
2 second. All those in favor, please say aye.
3 MR. VANDERVLIET: Aye.
4 MR. MILLER: Aye.
5 MRS. LAMBERTON: Aye.
6 MR. SINCAVAGE: Aye.
7 Glorious Church.
8 MR. ARMSTRONG: Glorious Church
9 land development and the conditional use
10 application. I spoke with their attorney and he's
11 going to probably be asking to get put on the
12 agenda both on the planning commission as well as
13 the board of supervisors, because Glorious Church
14 is considering filing a petition for a zoning
15 change with respect to church uses. So that being
16 said, those two plans -- that's probably my
17 understanding of why they have been on hold for so
18 long, because they were contemplating this petition
19 for a zoning ordinance change. And I foresee him
20 requesting to be put on the agenda the next month
21 or so. I don't know if the township has heard
22 anything from Mr. Wolfe or not. That's where those
23 two plans -- that's where Glorious Church stands.
24 MR. SINCAVAGE: We need to table
25 those two items?
62
1 MR. ARMSTRONG: You don't need
2 to. You can. Go ahead.
3 MR. SINCAVAGE: I'll entertain a
4 motion to table Glorious Church land development
5 plan.
6 MR. MILLER: I'll make that
7 motion.
8 MR. SINCAVAGE: Second to the
9 motion?
10 MR. VANDERVLIET: Second.
11 MR. SINCAVAGE: Motion and
12 second. All those in favor, please say aye.
13 MR. MILLER: Aye.
14 MR. VANDERVLIET: Aye.
15 MRS. LAMBERTON: Aye.
16 MR. SINCAVAGE: Aye.
17 Entertain a motion to table
18 Glorious Church conditional use application.
19 MR. MILLER: So moved.
20 MR. SINCAVAGE: Motion. Second
21 to the motion?
22 MR. VANDERVLIET: Second.
23 MR. SINCAVAGE: Motion and
24 second. All those in favor, please say aye.
25 MR. MILLER: Aye.
63
1 MR. VANDERVLIET: Aye.
2 MRS. LAMBERTON: Aye.
3 MR. SINCAVAGE: Aye.
4 Lands of Elaine Brockett. I
5 believe we received a letter.
6 MR. ARMSTRONG: We are okay on
7 time. I had contemplated sending a very similar
8 status letter out to that applicant as I did to
9 Locust Ridge Quarry, but before I did that I was
10 informed by someone at the township that they had
11 been in communication and the applicant was having
12 concerns with respect to their representatives. So
13 they are in the process of finding someone else to
14 represent them. I mean, it sounds like the
15 applicant is trying to move the plan forward, it's
16 just that they were unlucky with respect to whoever
17 they had.
18 MR. SINCAVAGE: Timewise we are
19 okay?
20 MR. ARMSTRONG: Timewise we are
21 okay.
22 MR. SINCAVAGE: I'll entertain a
23 motion to table lands of Elaine Brockett final land
24 development plan.
25 MR. VANDERVLIET: So moved.
64
1 MR. SINCAVAGE: Motion. Second
2 to the motion?
3 MRS. LAMBERTON: Second.
4 MR. SINCAVAGE: All those in
5 favor, please say aye.
6 MR. VANDERVLIET: Aye.
7 MRS. LAMBERTON: Aye.
8 MR. MILLER: Aye.
9 MR. SINCAVAGE: Aye.
10 Land development plan for L & B
11 Partnership. Anyone here representing them?
12 Bob, I see you have the review
13 letter. I guess they are just responding to this.
14 MR. McHALE: There is a number
15 of items to be addressed, correct?
16 MRS. LAMBERTON: Where is that?
17 MR. SINCAVAGE: Where is it?
18 MR. McHALE: Pocono Summit.
19 MRS. LAMBERTON: Where is that
20 road?
21 MR. McHALE: It's where the
22 signal is, Harvest Lane, Spruce Drive, right where
23 Brick City is, on the northeast corner. If you go
24 back towards the flower mill, it's that road.
25 MR. MILLER: On the other side
65
1 there.
2 MR. McHALE: You know where
3 Venezia Trucking is? It's kind of like the
4 opposite side of that loop.
5 MRS. LAMBERTON: I just wasn't
6 familiar.
7 MR. McHALE: C-I District.
8 MR. SINCAVAGE: We don't have
9 any plans. Why don't we have plans? We didn't get
10 any plans on this?
11 MS. HAASE: I believe you were
12 given them last month.
13 MR. SINCAVAGE: That's what I
14 thought, but I went back to find my plans, but I
15 don't have --
16 MR. McHALE: They came in
17 January 4th.
18 MS. HAASE: Last month they were
19 given to us. It was on the agenda as a sketch
20 plan. The applicant left prior to presenting it to
21 the township.
22 MR. ARMSTRONG: January 4th was
23 the Friday after your --
24 MS. HAASE: Our meeting was
25 January 10th.
66
1 MR. SINCAVAGE: So, Bob, they
2 are proposing a building that looks like 12,000
3 square foot and it's for warehousing?
4 MR. McHALE: It's a contractor
5 that's looking to make some of it for office space
6 and some of it for warehouse. They have some
7 parking. They need to revise some things. They're
8 right up against the property line. The basin is
9 not sized properly. They've got to make some
10 modifications to the lay out.
11 MR. SINCAVAGE: Do they need an
12 NPDS permit?
13 MR. McHALE: I believe they are
14 over an acre. Yes. They are showing some of their
15 locations for the septic, on lot sewage disposal.
16 They will have a well. They have a lighting plan,
17 in addition to the site layout. Grading.
18 MR. SINCAVAGE: Any questions?
19 Okay. They have some work to do on those plans.
20 I'll entertain a motion to table the Land
21 Development plan for L & B Partnership.
22 MR. MILLER: So moved.
23 MR. SINCAVAGE: Second to the
24 motion?
25 MRS. LAMBERTON: Second.
67
1 MR. SINCAVAGE: Motion and
2 second. Those in favor, please say aye.
3 MR. MILLER: Aye.
4 MRS. LAMBERTON: Aye.
5 MR. VANDERVLIET: Aye.
6 MR. SINCAVAGE: Aye.
7 Time waivers were received for
8 Wee-Wons, Blakeslee Pharmacy, Arcadia Lot 100 and
9 110. Those were received tonight.
10 Next item on our agenda is the
11 church and fireworks ordinance.
12 MR. ARMSTRONG: The church
13 ordinance we are going to hold off on because of
14 what I indicated, Glorious Church coming in with a
15 possible petition for their zoning ordinance
16 suggestion. But we do have the flea market
17 ordinance.
18 I believe last month or the
19 month before, probably last month, we were looking
20 at the county's planning commission suggestions. I
21 made the revisions to the ordinance. So right now
22 it looks like it's ready to go up to the board of
23 supervisors to review and if they are okay with it,
24 to authorize its advertisement and for a public
25 hearing. So I guess -- have you all had a chance
68
1 to look at the most revised version of the flea
2 market ordinance? Is everyone okay with it?
3 I mean, at the end of the day,
4 it will probably come back before you. After the
5 board of supervisors authorize it for
6 advertisement, they will probably send it back to
7 you to just look at before the actual public
8 hearing on the ordinance itself.
9 MRS. LAMBERTON: With no
10 changes.
11 MR. ARMSTRONG: Well, the board
12 of supervisors might want to make changes to it.
13 MR. MILLER: Is this a pretty
14 standard ordinance or do we have anything special
15 here that pertains to Tobyhanna Township?
16 MR. ARMSTRONG: You don't see
17 many flea market ordinances. That's not to say
18 there is not a lot out there. This one, you know,
19 it seems pretty straight forward. I believe we
20 looked at maybe one neighboring township's flea
21 market ordinance. We took into consideration some
22 of their provisions and we added some additional
23 ones.
24 MR. McHALE: You received some
25 preliminary comments from the county.
69
1 MS. HAASE: Yes, we did.
2 MR. ARMSTRONG: And pursuant to
3 those comments from the county are the revisions
4 that I've made since last month.
5 MS. HAASE: We'll need to send
6 this back to the county?
7 MR. ARMSTRONG: Right.
8 MR. SINCAVAGE: We are ready to
9 take action? We don't have to wait for the county?
10 MR. ARMSTRONG: No, what will
11 happen is, when the board of supervisors looks at
12 it, if we are okay with it, or if they want to make
13 some changes, they can. And then they'll authorize
14 it for advertisement for public hearing and then
15 also submit it to the county planning commission as
16 w