Before
THE TOBYHANNA TOWNSHIP BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
---
In Re: Special Meeting
---
Tobyhanna Township Government Center Building
State Avenue
Pocono Pines, Pennsylvania 18350
Monday, August 30, 2004, beginning at 7:37 p.m.
---
PRESENT:
JOHN E. KERRICK, Chairperson
HEIDI A. PICKARD, Vice-Chairperson
HUGH LAMBERTON, Board Member
JON BERRY, Board Member
RAYMOND WEISHUHN, Board Member
KELLY BIDDLE COOK,
Township Manager/Secretary
EMANUEL KAPELSOHN, ESQUIRE, Solicitor
---
Panko Reporting
537 Sarah Street, 2nd Floor
Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania 18360
(570) 421-3620
2
1 MR. KERRICK: I'd like to call the
2 meeting to order, special meeting, August 30, 2004. First
3 I'd like to apologize for the time. Our solicitor was tied
4 up in traffic. Pledge of Allegiance, please.
5 (Pledge of Allegiance.)
6 MR. KERRICK: Manager matters.
7 MRS. COOK: I have one item. There is
8 a John Williams here that would like to address the board.
9 MR. JOHN WILLIAMS: My name is John
10 Williams and I live at 15 Minsi Trails West, Long Pond. I
11 would like to thank you for letting me speak to you
12 tonight. I am from Cub Pack 90.
13 This summer, while in the enrichment
14 program in Clearview Elementary Center, we had a community
15 awareness day. One of the dogs from the canine unit from
16 Pocono Mountain Regional Police was there. His handler was
17 talking to us about the unit and that the dogs were very
18 good dogs, but they could always use help from the
19 community. I talked to my mom and my scout leader about
20 doing something for them. When we talked to the police
21 chief we found out that there are bullet proof vests that
22 were already purchased, but the dogs and their handlers had
23 to go to training often. And I thought that this would be
24 a good think to help them with. So I am here to ask you
25 for your support by asking if you could spread the word
3
1 about my dinner.
2 I hope you and you're families would
3 support us by coming to the spaghetti dinner on the 18th of
4 September. All the information is in the flyer. The
5 police chief said that one or both of the dogs will be
6 there with their handlers, so you would be able to see the
7 dogs and find out some things about them.
8 This cause would benefit the
9 communities that the regional police serve. The times are
10 from 5 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. on Saturday, September 18th. It
11 will be held at the Pocono Lake United Methodist Church on
12 Route 940. The cost is six dollars for adults and three
13 dollars for kids under the age 10.
14 Again, thank you for your time. I or
15 my mom can answer any questions. We would be glad to. We
16 would be happy to.
17 MR. KERRICK: John, I've got to say,
18 you came to the wrong meeting. First of all we were an
19 hour late. Three weeks ago there was only a third of the
20 people here. We'll be happy to support this. Thank you.
21 MRS. COOK: Thank you.
22 MS. PICKARD: Thank you.
23 MR. KERRICK: First on the agenda,
24 we're going to switch it around a little bit. Pinecrest
25 Lake, Phase 2, Section 3, land development. Anybody here
4
1 from Pinecrest?
2 Mr. DeLucca.
3 MR. NEIL DELUCCA: Mr. Chairman,
4 members of the board, Mrs. Cook, my name is Neil DeLucca.
5 I'm here on behalf of Pinecrest Lake Development, Phase 2,
6 Section 3.
7 We were here at your last regularly
8 scheduled meeting with recommendations from the township
9 engineer, Mr. McHale, for approval. However, two of the
10 items in Mr. McHale's letter had not yet been forwarded to
11 the township, and as a result, the board was unable to give
12 approval. Those items were the stormwater maintenance
13 agreement which we have submitted and a bond for the
14 proposed infrastructure on roads DD and EE.
15 That bond was submitted to the
16 township. However, I spoke to Ms. Cook today and although
17 the bond amount is accurate, during the initial
18 infrastructure estimate, it was approved by Mr. McHale, and
19 then upon further study, Mr. McHale decided that he wanted
20 one additional stormwater detention basin. That bond
21 language I have here for the township solicitor's review.
22 That has been corrected. The bond amount remains the same,
23 as Ms. Cook has discussed with me this morning. And if the
24 township solicitor agrees with the change, our company will
25 make the appropriate modifications to Ms. Cook tomorrow.
5
1 So I have that for the solicitor's review. Ms. Cook, as
2 you suggested with the four, not three. The bond amount
3 stays the same. We respectfully request that you approve
4 Phase 2, Section 3 at this special meeting.
5 MR. KERRICK: Manny, there was one
6 part in the middle of the page where they typed in the
7 engineer's estimate. See attached. Mr. McHale would like
8 some notation added there that it would follow the
9 subdivision plan that we approved and not just his
10 estimate.
11 MRS. COOK: That's what Neil got.
12 MR. NEIL DELUCCA: Mr. Wolfe is here.
13 He can talk to the solicitor about it. You want to talk to
14 him first?
15 MR. KAPELSOHN: Can I take this under
16 advisement for a few minutes and figure out whether we are
17 all in order? Can we table it for a few minutes while I do
18 that?
19 MR. KERRICK: You want to go on to
20 something else?
21 MR. KAPELSOHN: I would say let's do
22 that. Let me talk with Mr. Wolfe in the meantime.
23 MR. KERRICK: We'll take a short
24 recess.
25 (Recess taken from 7:55 p.m. to 7:59
6
1 p.m.)
2 MR. KERRICK: We are on the record.
3 MR. KAPELSOHN: Very good. I would
4 make a motion then that the board approve the Pinecrest
5 Lake, Phase 2, Section 3, storm water management agreement
6 with the subdivision performance bond provided by First
7 Indemnity of American Insurance Company, Bond No. A20006,
8 provided that language is added as an endorsement to the
9 bond, which language has been provided by the township
10 engineer and I have marked it here as Township Exhibit No.
11 1, and we'll provide a copy of that for the record and
12 we'll provide a copy of that for the applicant.
13 MRS. COOK: They have it.
14 MR. NEIL DELUCCA: The applicant has
15 received a copy.
16 MS. PICKARD: That's a whole land
17 development plan as well as the two items?
18 MRS. COOK: Right.
19 MR. KAPELSOHN: Correct.
20 MS. PICKARD: So moved.
21 MR. KERRICK: We have a motion on the
22 floor. Do we have a second?
23 MR. LAMBERTON: Second.
24 MR. KERRICK: Motion and second. Any
25 discussion from the board?
7
1 Questions or comments from the public?
2 Call the vote. Jon?
3 MR. BERRY: I vote in favor.
4 MR. KERRICK: Ray?
5 MR. WEISHUHN: Yes.
6 MR. KERRICK: Hugh?
7 MR. LAMBERTON: I vote in favor.
8 MR. KERRICK: Heidi?
9 MS. PICKARD: I vote in favor.
10 MR. KERRICK: I'll vote in favor.
11 Thank you, gentlemen.
12 MRS. COOK: Neil, can you execute the
13 stormwater maintenance agreement and get back to me?
14 MR. NEIL DELUCCA: Can I come to the
15 office and sign it?
16 MRS. COOK: Fine. You have the
17 original?
18 MR. NEIL DELUCCA: I have it.
19 MRS. COOK: Just bring a couple.
20 MR. KERRICK: Next, 84 Lumber land
21 development plan.
22 MR. LOUIS COZZA: Good evening, ladies
23 and gentlemen. My name is Lou Cozza with Nicklaus
24 Engineering. I have with me tonight Christina Torres
25 representing 84 Lumber; Marc Wolfe, our local counsel; and
8
1 Marie Pantalone form Mc Mann Associates, our traffic
2 consultant.
3 We are in receipt of Mr. McHale's
4 letter dated August 25th. I don't know if you want to go
5 through these items one at a time? Ninety-nine percent of
6 them -- just his last statement to the bullet item is,
7 "This issue is resolved."
8 To be brief, I'll just hit the ones
9 that are still outstanding and if you have any additional
10 questions, we'll be glad to answer them and address them at
11 that time.
12 Item 2 on page 4: The applicant's
13 engineer indicates that a copy of the US Army Corp of
14 Engineers wetland jurisdictional determination, revised,
15 will be provided. The field view with the Corp of
16 Engineers is scheduled for September 15th, just to keep you
17 apprised of where that is.
18 We do have a waiver request for
19 existing facilities, existing man-made features within 500
20 feet of the tract.
21 Construction cost estimate has been
22 reviewed and approved by Mr. McHale and a maintenance
23 agreement and bond have been finalized this evening. And
24 that's the highlights of Mr. McHale's letter.
25 MR. KERRICK: How about if we
9
1 highlight back to page number three.
2 MR. LOUIS COZZA: Sure.
3 MR. KERRICK -- number 4, Summit
4 Avenue.
5 MR. LOUIS COZZA: I'd like to defer
6 those to Marie Pantalone from Mc Mann Associates, our
7 traffic consultants. It's up to you, however you want to
8 do it. If you want to address traffic now or --
9 MR. KERRICK: That would be fine.
10 MS. MARIE PANTALONE: A revised impact
11 study was provided for Bob McHale's review, and within that
12 traffic study, it showed the intersections of Summit Avenue
13 with 314 and Summit Avenue with Development Park Drive
14 would necessitate widening in order to accommodate the
15 design vehicles from 84 Lumber, such that it would not
16 encroach on conflicting adjacent lane of traffic. I mean,
17 the designs have been provided in the traffic study.
18 MR. KERRICK: Have been provided, but
19 there is no documentation to my knowledge that 84 Lumber
20 will do that work. Is that true?
21 MS. MARIE PANTALONE: It is my
22 understanding --
23 MR. MARC WOLFE: It was proposed,
24 Mr. Chairman, that 84 Lumber would make a financial
25 contribution to the township which more than exceeds the
10
1 value of this work. It could be done either way, either 84
2 Lumber can do the work or and deduct the balance or they
3 would prefer to write a check to the township and have the
4 township spend the money as appropriate for these
5 improvements.
6 MR. KERRICK: Well, it was my
7 understanding that they did offer some money for road
8 improvements and it would be -- I would hope that they
9 would keep that separate from this and address these two
10 issues that we have in front of us. We have another
11 project that could get very expensive -- and that's only my
12 feeling. I don't know how the rest of the board feels.
13 They offered $60,000. If we can keep that for engineering
14 fees for the access off of Route 940 and if -- would 84 be
15 willing to address these two items now at this time?
16 MR. MARC WOLFE: On top of $60,000?
17 MR. KERRICK: That's what I'm asking.
18 MS. CHRISTINA TORRES: Can we go off
19 the record a minute?
20 MR. KERRICK: Sure.
21 (A recess was taken.)
22 MR. WOLFE: Mr. Chairman, I think
23 before 84 Lumber can respond to that request, they'd have
24 to know if there are any other requests that would come
25 from your side of the table.
11
1 MR. KERRICK: The only request that I
2 see in Mr. McHale's report are those two intersections
3 that, the way I read it, need to be widened.
4 MR. MARC WOLFE: If that is the sum
5 total request that the township supervisors are
6 considering, then 84 Lumber Company would commit to the
7 request --
8 MR. KERRICK: I spoke for you people.
9 Do you have anything else you want to talk about?
10 MS. PICKARD: We had talked previous
11 about if we need to keep the traffic on Summit Avenue
12 whether there would be some improvements to widening Summit
13 Avenue.
14 MS. MARIE PANTALONE: It was my
15 understanding that Summit Avenue is not going to be
16 widened. The only widening that would be required in order
17 to accommodate the traffic coming from the site would be to
18 accommodate the turning movements at the intersections.
19 The widening which I think you're referring to --
20 MS. PICKARD: There were a couple of
21 plans that we were looking at --
22 MS. MARIE PANTALONE: Right. To
23 provide an amenity to the residence, you know, for
24 pedestrian use or bicycle use. But it's my understanding
25 that that wasn't what the township was looking for.
12
1 MS. PICKARD: Our ultimate goal was to
2 get access off 940. In the event that does not occur, then
3 the traffic is on Summit Avenue.
4 MS. MARIE PANTALONE: There was no
5 need to widen Summit Avenue to accommodate the traffic.
6 No.
7 MS. CHRISTINA TORRES: If I can
8 comment further, Christina Torres, Counsel for 84 Lumber
9 Company.
10 The letter that was sent to the
11 chairman of the task force for the improvements to be made
12 to what we would call the 314 corridor, specifically stated
13 that we are contributing $60,000. You spend this money how
14 you see fit to make the improvements that you see fit to
15 this corridor. So to answer you're question specifically,
16 you don't see improvements to Summit Avenue because that
17 decision is not up to us. We committed the funds and it's
18 up to the chair people and the committee people on that
19 task force to decide how to spend the contribution.
20 MS. PICKARD: Thank you.
21 MS. MARIE PANTALONE: I was speaking
22 just from a purely traffic impact stance. I'm here on
23 behalf of 84 Lumber. There is truck traffic that uses that
24 corridor today from businesses, and like Christina said,
25 that task force is set up to identify existing as well as
13
1 future needs.
2 MR. KAPELSOHN: It appears to me from
3 Engineer McHale's letter that there are three other items
4 that are to be addressed. One was the agreement of 84
5 Lumber that if PennDOT ultimately agrees to access at SR
6 940, that 84 Lumber would agree then to provide and
7 dedicate a right of way for that access if it's needed.
8 And that I have provided in a condition to the approval
9 that says 84 Lumber agrees that in the event the
10 Pennsylvania Department of Transportation approves access
11 to the site from SR 940, 84 Lumber will provide and
12 dedicate a future right of way if needed for such access.
13 The other condition has to do with the
14 discussion we had at the last meeting of whether 84 Lumber
15 could and would require its drivers, including its contract
16 drivers that come and go from the site, to use the
17 particular route that the traffic study envisions, which is
18 SR 314/Woodland to Summit Avenue to Development Park Drive.
19 Then the reverse when leaving the site. 84 Lumber has
20 represented to us that it can require that of its own
21 drivers and its contract drivers. That as to third party
22 carriers, other companies that are making deliveries to 84
23 Lumber of inventory, 84 Lumber could request that they use
24 that route, but it has no ability to enforce them using
25 that route.
14
1 I have drafted a condition which says
2 as follows: 84 Lumber will require its drivers, including
3 both employees and contract truck drivers, and will request
4 third party carriers making deliveries to the location to
5 use the following route, SR 314 Woodland to Summit Avenue
6 to Development Park Drive and reverse. And my
7 understanding is that Ms. Torres has looked at these two
8 conditions this evening and has found them acceptable. So
9 the first thing is that if this land development plan is
10 approved, I believe it should be approved with these two
11 conditions as part of the development plan, so that at a
12 later date they can be enforced by the township, if
13 necessary.
14 Would you like to address that before
15 I go further?
16 MR. MARC WOLFE: We would merely seek
17 clarification of the second condition about the dedication
18 to 940. We would like that put on a time constraint so
19 that it is not open ended. In other words, if that occurs
20 during the development of the project, it creates an
21 implication, who builds the connection? In other words
22 we'd like a time constraint.
23 MR. KAPELSOHN: What about two years?
24 MR. MARC WOLFE: Two years will be
25 fine.
15
1 MR. KERRICK: So on the time
2 restraint, we are not asking them to build. We are trying
3 to get access. What if it takes two and a half years?
4 That's my feeling.
5 MR. KAPELSOHN: To get PennDOT's
6 approval?
7 MR. KERRICK: Yes. I don't really --
8 that's only my opinion. I'm not looking for a time
9 restraint on that.
10 MR. LAMBERTON: Why do you require a
11 time restraint?
12 MR. MARC WOLFE: Just so it's not open
13 ended. Either PennDOT is going to approve or not approve.
14 We are only asking for a reasonable time restraint.
15 MR. KERRICK: We have not only
16 PennDOT's approval, we have to get federal approval. And
17 for some reason they don't move too fast.
18 MR. KAPELSOHN: May I ask you, would
19 84 Lumber agree to a three year period?
20 MR. MARC WOLFE: Yes.
21 A VOICE: What if it takes four years?
22 MR. KAPELSOHN: My thought, and I
23 can't speak for the board, and I'm not speaking for the
24 board, I'm just thinking out loud, if you will -- let me
25 speak, if you will. I don't know that it's fair, in my way
16
1 of thinking, to ask 84 Lumber to leave a right of way open
2 indefinitely into the future. What if it's 20 years?
3 A VOICE: What if it's 30 years? I'm
4 going to still be there. That traffic does not belong on
5 that road, period.
6 MR. KAPELSOHN: That's you're
7 position. And my feeling is that the board should at least
8 consider whether it is fair to ask a land owner to leave
9 its land open indefinitely in case PennDOT might ever, 50
10 years from now, 100 years from now, agree to grant access
11 on 940. I guess my own feeling is that it's not
12 necessarily fair to ask the land owner to do that, any land
13 owner.
14 MR. KERRICK: Can we have your name?
15 MR. JERRY SPOTT: My name is Jerry
16 Spott. I live in Pocono Summit. I live on Summit Avenue.
17 MR. KERRICK: Do you people feel it's
18 a problem to leave it in ten years or -- why do we have to
19 put a time limit on it?
20 MR. MARC WOLFE: It ties up the land.
21 84 Lumber may --
22 MS. PICKARD: Fifty feet?
23 MR. MARC WOLFE: Well, the condition
24 as read is not 50 feet. The condition as read was that we
25 would leave open this piece of land for dedication of a
17
1 right of way to SR 940. At least that's how I heard it.
2 If I misheard it, I apologize to the board.
3 MR. KERRICK: What we envision,
4 Mr. Wolfe, is 50 feet along the property line to 940. I
5 really don't know what they would build in that 50 feet and
6 why there has to be a time limit.
7 MR. MARC WOLFE: Well, just
8 hypothetically, suppose PennDOT and the feds ultimately
9 tell the township it would never be approved?
10 MR. KERRICK: Then there is nothing we
11 could do.
12 MR. MARC WOLFE: Does the right of way
13 reverse then -- is it extinguished at that time?
14 MR. KERRICK: In my mind it would be,
15 because what good would it be at that point?
16 MR. MARC WOLFE: Exactly. That's why
17 we were asking for a reasonable time constraint. Now, what
18 is a reasonable time constraint?
19 A VOICE: How about a final
20 determination by PennDOT?
21 MR. KAPELSOHN: What if we say pending
22 a final determination by PennDOT and federal authorities
23 and make it five years? Would that be acceptable?
24 MR. MARC WOLFE: That would be
25 acceptable.
18
1 MR. KAPELSOHN: Let me work on the
2 language.
3 MR. JERRY SPOTT: Did you say five
4 years?
5 MR. KAPELSOHN: Yes.
6 MR. KERRICK: I personally -- I'm not
7 going to vote for any time constraint. When it's
8 exhausted, state and federal, then I'm exhausted.
9 MR. KAPELSOHN: Pending a final
10 determination.
11 MR. KERRICK: How does the rest of the
12 board feel?
13 MS. PICKARD: If they say a final
14 determination, they have said that before and we are still
15 working towards it.
16 MR. KERRICK: They didn't give us a
17 final determination. Final is when you get a letter back
18 that says no. We have a maybe.
19 MRS. COOK: Yeah, they haven't issued
20 any letters.
21 MR. MARC WOLFE: Mr. Chairman,
22 members of the board, now, I understand you're goal. I
23 understand that in order to achieve your goal, if it is
24 achievable at all, you would have to do a point of access
25 study and in fairness to the land owner, you would have to
19
1 pursue the matter. It just couldn't be open ended forever.
2 You'd have to prosecute the application in a reasonable
3 manner, not that you have to give it top urgency, but that
4 you couldn't let it lie fallow forever.
5 MR. KERRICK: That's not our intent.
6 The intent the past three weeks has been working
7 diligently, trying -- you know that we've tried and tried
8 and we are really not that far, but the timetable scares
9 me.
10 Can we open it up to the floor?
11 MR. KAPELSOHN: Just keep in mind I
12 have two other points to talk about.
13 MR. BERRY: Did we get a letter at one
14 point in time that said no years ago?
15 MR. KERRICK: We never got a no. We
16 got a maybe.
17 MR. BERRY: Recently?
18 MR. KERRICK: Did we ever have a no
19 years ago?
20 MRS. COOK: Not that I've ever seen a
21 letter.
22 MR. BERRY: Okay.
23 MR. MARC WOLFE: Mr. Chairman, perhaps
24 the township would consider an offer by 84 Lumber Company
25 to dedicate a 50 foot right of way if the township obtains
20
1 PennDOT and federal highway approval of the connection to
2 940, on the condition that 84 Lumber Company is not
3 obligated to pay for any improvements -- for the
4 improvement of that right of way or for connection to SR
5 0940.
6 MR. WEISHUHN: I think I might like
7 the time limit better.
8 MR. MARC WOLFE: You said you just
9 wanted the right of way. We are prepared to give you the
10 right of way, just that we don't pay for improvements.
11 MR. KERRICK: If this can be achieved,
12 it's only going to enhance your property, so I don't know
13 why we have to obligate ourselves to a 50 foot right of way
14 or a timetable or the improvements. I just don't see why
15 we have to tie ourselves up. We are trying to do this for
16 the residence. And it may take five years, ten years, I
17 don't know. I don't know why that's an issue, 50 feet.
18 That's only my opinion.
19 MR. MARC WOLFE: We are prepared to
20 give you the 50 feet.
21 MR. KERRICK: But I might come back
22 and ask for more money.
23 MR. MARC WOLFE: Well, we have to --
24 MR. KERRICK: I know, there are
25 several things. We are very preliminary with this, but I
21
1 don't want to lock anything out.
2 MR. MARC WOLFE: At some point there
3 has to be some finality to it.
4 MR. KERRICK: I understand that. If
5 you get your point of access study to PennDOT and the
6 Federal Highway Commission and they both reject it, then we
7 are dead in the water. Then it's over. That could happen
8 in a year, that could happen in five years. But if you --
9 we put a three year time limit on it and it takes four
10 years and after three years it expires, then what? Then we
11 finally get it and then you take the 50 foot right of way
12 back.
13 MR. MARC WOLFE: In the last iteration
14 provided to you, we took the time frame out. We had said
15 if you get it, we are not obligated to build it.
16 MS. PICKARD: The bottom line is
17 you're saying on condition of offering no money. Is there
18 another point in time where you're going to be developing
19 another piece of the property and putting a hotel or
20 restaurant there --
21 MR. MARC WOLFE: At that point, we are
22 back before you and certainly at that point it's a new land
23 development plan, perhaps subdivision plan. At that point
24 that application will have to rise and fall on its own
25 merits.
22
1 MR. BERRY: Is there a reason you
2 wouldn't want the access on 940?
3 MR. MARC WOLFE: Is there a reason why
4 we wouldn't -- 84 Lumber Company is doing the project now.
5 If it's approved in five years, ten years, it doesn't want
6 to have -- it's a large company. You can't have an open
7 ended obligation. It needs finality to financial
8 commitment. So, yes, if you get the approval today, it's
9 one case. You get the approval ten years from now, it's a
10 completely different case. The company is going to be
11 doing business hopefully and it just needs that finality.
12 MR. BERRY: But the lack of interest
13 to contribute financially to the intersection, seems like
14 maybe you don't --
15 MR. MARC WOLFE: 84 Lumber Company has
16 agreed to go outside the four corners of the ordinance. It
17 has agreed to contribute $60,000. That should not be
18 overlooked in this process. But it has also greed to make
19 offsite road improvements to the two intersections that the
20 chairman identified. That too should not be overlooked.
21 And the traffic study indicates that what is being
22 contributed financially, more than exceeds, more than
23 exceeds the required remediation -- doing the fair share
24 analysis, more than exceeds the fair share of contribution
25 that 84 Lumber Company would be obligated to do, had you
23
1 adopted an ordinance under 209.
2 So, no matter how you look at this,
3 under the relevant standards, 84 Lumber Company has gone
4 above and beyond its legal obligations.
5 MR. KAPELSOHN: At the same time, a
6 major point of opposition by many of the township's tax
7 payers and residence to this project, has to do with the
8 traffic flow in and around this proposed development. And
9 that is the basis on which the SR 940 access was brought up
10 as a possible means of alleviating the traffic problems and
11 the neighborhood problems that some residence and tax
12 payers feel would be caused by this.
13 At the last meeting, we all discussed
14 the possibility of moving the building on the tract so as
15 to make possible 940 access if in fact the township could
16 succeed in getting PennDOT to agree to that access. And 84
17 Lumber took that step of moving the buildings horizontally
18 on the tract for that purpose. So whether 84 Lumber has or
19 has not exceeded the legal requirements, it seems to me
20 that the issue really is one of whether this possible 940
21 access can actually be effectuated if PennDOT approves it
22 or not and the federal government approves it or not. And
23 that's why this discussion is being had. It's because
24 there is an opposition to this project. And that
25 opposition, just like you're position, has an affect on the
24
1 board. And 84 Lumber's position with regard to this access
2 may have an affect on the board's decision on this
3 proposal.
4 MR. MARC WOLFE: We are trying to be
5 very practical in our approach. We are not trying to be
6 legalistic in our approach. My point in mentioning that
7 the contribution that 84 Lumber Company has put on the
8 table exceeds the ordinance standards, is to show that it's
9 being very generous in trying to solve these problems. 84
10 Lumber Company, in addition, is willing to dedicate 50
11 feet, however, much quantity of land is involved in that
12 right of way for one dollar. For no consideration. That
13 too is a valuable contribution to the township and not
14 required by the ordinance. So I think you have a very fair
15 proposal on the table from the lumber company, in addition
16 to compliance with the ordinance.
17 MS. CHRISTINA TORRES: If I can just
18 add, I'm Christina Torres, again. I think we've done
19 everything that you've asked us to do. I don't know of one
20 item that we haven't complied with. The task force, the
21 contribution, the widening to the intersection, the
22 resurfacing of Development Park Drive. We have complied
23 with everything you've asked for. And I don't think it's
24 being unreasonable to sit here and say to you, if you get
25 this approval ten years down the road, it will be a one
25
1 million dollar improvement connection to 940, you know, I
2 can't sit here today and tell you we are going to help pay
3 for that? We looked into this in 1996, the first time
4 around. The ball park estimate was around a million
5 dollars for a 940 connector. And I'm very uncomfortable
6 with sitting here tonight and having this very open ended.
7 MR. KERRICK: Could I ask you're
8 traffic engineer what a ball park figure is in your mind,
9 to do that intersection?
10 MS. MARIE PANTALONE: I don't have the
11 engineering survey. I can't answer that.
12 MR. KERRICK: We are not talking about
13 a million dollars. We are talking a half million dollars.
14 And I can't answer that one hundred percent. That's only
15 preliminary. And I wouldn't expect you to keep it open
16 ended, but do you understand -- you and I had conversations
17 that we'd work together to try to get this off the
18 intersection at 940, but I'm blind sided by the time limit.
19 That was never discussed.
20 MS. CHRISTINA TORRES: We have taken
21 that time table off the table. I think Marc has made that
22 clear.
23 MR. KERRICK: I understand you have,
24 you've taken it off the table, but you stated we can't come
25 back to you. What if we are ten thousand dollars short
26
1 with the project, we can't come back then?
2 MS. CHRISTINA TORRES: I'm not saying
3 that. You can come back to us, but I don't want there to
4 be an inference that we have tacitly agreed this evening
5 that when you come back to us we are going to say yes,
6 sure, we are going to give you X. I can't tell you that.
7 MR. KERRICK: I'm not asking you that.
8 I wasn't asking you that. Are you people asking? We just
9 want the option to come back. If we need some more money,
10 would you consider it? That' all we are asking.
11 MS. CHRISTINA TORRES: As long as we
12 are not agreeing tonight up front to X amount, yes, you can
13 certainly come back to us. If we decide we want to help
14 out some more, we will. At that point we have a choice, I
15 guess. I want to preserve that choice is what I'm saying.
16 MR. KERRICK: Okay. We have a couple
17 of other issues that we need to resolve before we open it
18 up to the public. Is that all right?
19 MR. KAPELSOHN: Marc, if I can just
20 ask then, on the written condition, which says -- I'm just
21 reading the last phrase of it, "84 Lumber will provide and
22 dedicate a future right of way, if needed for such access."
23 Do we want to put in a provision then
24 that says, this obligation on 84 Lumber's part will
25 terminate in the event PennDOT or the federal authorities
27
1 definitively say that such access will not be permitted, so
2 it doesn't have to stay open, you know, for time and
3 memorial if we get an absolute no from the state or the
4 federal government.
5 MR. WEISHUHN: That's fine with me.
6 MR. MARC WOLFE: Could that written
7 condition specify a 50 foot wide right of way?
8 MR. JERRY SPOTT: I'd welcome -- I
9 don't know if I speak for everybody in this room, but for
10 myself, I welcome 84 Lumber as a neighbor. I don't have
11 any problem with what they are looking to do with the
12 property. That road we have is a problem. I have
13 addressed that with the Tobyhanna Township Board of
14 Supervisors before. I have addressed it with Pocono
15 Regional. It's a real problem.
16 In 1985 the Tobyhanna Township Board
17 of Supervisors approved commercial traffic to go down that
18 road. Previous to that it was not allowed in that
19 residential neighborhood. We are kind of pinned into a
20 corner there now. We are stuck with that and we are living
21 with it. Anything that you guys write into that now, we
22 are going to have to live with for the rest of our lives.
23 If you say -- I'd like to see 84 Lumber working towards
24 getting us a 940 intersection in. I'd like to see this
25 worded and written in such a way that it promotes that and
28
1 gives them incentives to do that. Right now, if you say a
2 definite no, it takes it all off the table. What is to
3 stop 84 Lumber from trying to discourage this thing from
4 going through. It can save them a lot of money if it
5 doesn't happen. If it's left a little open ended or even
6 some kind of -- worded in such a way that it will encourage
7 them and promote them working towards that, then everybody
8 wins. I'd just like you to try and consider that. We are
9 living with a real problem there, with a real traffic
10 problem that never should have occurred and I don't want to
11 see it compounded and make it worse. You seem to be
12 working with us in mind, but I think we all need to work
13 smarter and try to work together to get this accomplished.
14 MS. CHRISTINA TORRES: Let me just
15 make one comment and I'm not going to continue to comment
16 this evening, but I approached Mr. Kerrick prior to the
17 meeting and had offered to do everything we can to help him
18 achieve the 940 access. We are not going to try to
19 discourage the 940 access. We are not going to work
20 actively against it, but it is in the township's hands. If
21 he needs assistance, I'm here to help. I have offered the
22 services of Mc Mann and Associates, our traffic engineer,
23 to participate in an initial evaluatory meeting with John
24 and whoever else, to see what a point of access study would
25 involve, all on our nickel, initial meeting to set forth
29
1 what the strategy would be. So we are not going to try to
2 discourage the 940 access. I just want all of you to
3 understand that.
4 MR. KERRICK: I didn't know that was
5 on you're nickel.
6 MS. CHRISTINA TORRES: Well, yeah. I
7 offered her services for an initial meeting to sit down and
8 evaluate that.
9 MR KERRICK: We appreciate that.
10 Thank you.
11 MR LAMBERTON: Mr. Spott, I don't feel
12 it's 84 Lumber's responsibility to gain access to 940.
13 That's our responsibility, not 84.
14 MRS. JANET SPOTT: I disagree.
15 MR. JERRY SPOTT: 84 Lumber wants to
16 bring those commercial trucks in there. They are driving
17 them through my front yard.
18 MR. KERRICK: Unfortunately, we had a
19 bad situation that occurred in '85 and we are trying to
20 correct it.
21 MRS. JANET SPOTT: And you know there
22 are no street lights on that road. I don't know what the
23 hours of operation are going to be. In the wintertime it's
24 dark by 5 o'clock. There is no street lights on that road.
25 We walk our dog. Kids wait for the bus on that road. We
30
1 have tractor trailers now that cause the problem because
2 they don't drive 25 miles per hour, which is a posted speed
3 limit. My 12 year old son has to walk along the side of
4 the road, no sidewalks, and walks a block and a half to the
5 bus stop. Nothing is posted. There is no bus shelter.
6 And now we are talking about more trucks.
7 MR. JERRY SPOTT: Is the 84 Lumber
8 going to open at 7 o'clock, 8 o'clock in the morning? Are
9 we going to have people late for work trying to get there
10 first thing, speeding down Summit Avenue while our kids are
11 waiting there for the bus? Yes, that's 84 Lumber's
12 problem.
13 MR. KERRICK: Before we open it up to
14 the public, we have two more items. We can go back and
15 talk about it, but I wanted to add one thing. 84 did have
16 a proposal where they widened Summit Avenue. There is
17 eight and a half feet on the industrial side that was
18 dedicated for road widening. We weren't sure that the
19 residence would want it any wider than it is. That's an
20 avenue we can approach too. But that's what we have the
21 task force for.
22 A VOICE: What would the speed limit
23 be then? Sixty-five?
24 MR. KERRICK: That's something we can
25 discuss at a later time.
31
1 Let's clear those two items up and
2 then we'll open it up to the floor. Manny?
3 MR. KAPELSOHN: The two other items
4 are the bond for the stormwater management and the bond has
5 been faxed here tonight by 84 Lumber and the only thing it
6 is lacking is the specific listing of drawings and
7 specifications. And I have recommended to the board that
8 this bond is acceptable provided that language is put in,
9 and the insurance agent who faxed the bond here tonight
10 indicated that that language could be added to the bond
11 tomorrow. I need to get the listing of specifications and
12 drawings from Bob McHale. I think that's fine if the board
13 would choose to conditionally approve it, conditioned on
14 the language being added to the bond, which I'm told can be
15 done.
16 And the other item is the actual
17 stormwater management agreement. And 84 Lumber has tonight
18 provided a partially typed and partially marked up
19 agreement which I believe I need to take under advisement
20 and talk to Bob McHale about and make sure that the
21 provisions of it cover everything that needs to be covered.
22 What I would recommend to the board with regard to both the
23 bond language that needs to be added tomorrow morning and
24 that I think can easily be added tomorrow morning, and the
25 stormwater management agreement, I would recommend that if
32
1 the board chooses to approve 84 Lumber's land development
2 plan, that it approve it effective as of the close of
3 business this Wednesday, conditioned on us finalizing the
4 stormwater management agreement and the plan and
5 specification language being added to the bond. And I
6 believe that both of those things can easily be
7 accomplished between now and the end of the day on
8 Wednesday.
9 MR. KERRICK: Anything else from 84 at
10 this time?
11 Take some public comments.
12 MS. LINDA GARGIULO: My concern is,
13 has anybody taken into consideration the fact that the fire
14 department has one way out and that's the exact same route
15 that all the trucks are going to take? So with all the
16 traffic and the children on the street and Summit Avenue
17 not being widened, other than the two turns, how does that
18 affect the fire department? There are people -- a lot of
19 people are concerned about that.
20 MR. LAMBERTON: That's why we talked
21 to PennDOT to get access to 940. If you people feel that
22 strong about it, get a petition to PennDOT. That's my
23 recommendation.
24 MS. LINDA GARGIULO: How many names do
25 we need on it. We've done that before and it goes nowhere.
33
1 A VOICE: Why should we do that for 84
2 Lumber?
3 MR. KERRICK: You're not doing it for
4 84 Lumber. You're doing it for yourselves.
5 MR. LAMBERTON: This road will give
6 access for the fire company.
7 A VOICE: All right. So while this
8 building is on fire, you got a truck coming down and the
9 fire department can't get here, then you're out of luck.
10 A VOICE: What about the noise? Has
11 anybody discussed the noise of these trucks and what time
12 these trucks will be running? I mean, it's 2:30 in the
13 morning and a tractor trailer comes down Summit Avenue,
14 hits its brakes on the corner. That's kind of a rude
15 awakening.
16 MR. JERRY SPOTT: A tractor trailer
17 can sit there and idle all night waiting for 84 Lumber to
18 open. And that's not unreasonable. That could happen.
19 Please get that traffic off our road.
20 MR. LOUIS COZZA: Page 1 of your land
21 development plan required by you're township engineer will
22 be filed in the county courthouse as a legal document.
23 Hours of operation are as follows. April 1st through
24 October 1st, 7a.m. to 8 p.m. Monday through Friday; 8 a.m.
25 to 5 p.m. Saturday; 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. Sunday. November 1st
34
1 through March 31st, 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. Monday through Friday;
2 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Saturday; 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. Sunday.
3 A VOICE: Does that include
4 deliveries?
5 MR. LOUIS COZZA: Hours of operation?
6 MS. CHRISTINA TORRES: Deliveries
7 couldn't occur in the morning and even right before the
8 facilities open because personnel is not there until -- we
9 open at 7 a.m., personnel is between 6:30 and 6:45 to
10 unload trucks and get the yard ready for the day.
11 MRS. SPOTT: Do you know what time the
12 school bus gets there? The school bus picks up our
13 children at 10 to 7 in the morning. Then 10 to 8 the
14 second bus comes, a quarter mile from where their access
15 road -- where they are going to be turning is where the bus
16 stop is.
17 MR. KERRICK: In the back.
18 MR. GARY STIDHAM: Gary Stidham,
19 Pocono Summit.
20 I have so many questions on this
21 project, it's hard to figure out where to start.
22 Apparently there's going to be a lot
23 of trucks. According to the paper there was more than 100
24 trucks per day for deliveries on this project? Is that
25 true?
35
1 MS. MARIE PANTALONE: 100 trips per
2 day.
3 MR. GARY STIDHAM: Wasn't there 79 in
4 the afternoon or something?
5 Now you have a two lane road that's
6 going to accept all that traffic. The fact is, if you
7 widen that road, you still have all those trucks. And I
8 don't know how many of you, even if you put an access on
9 940 -- I spoke to PennDOT approximately nine years ago on a
10 piece of property there, about access to 940. The person I
11 spoke to said absolutely not, there will never be access on
12 940. I was going to buy a piece of property across the
13 street. So because of no access, no sense buying it. The
14 property should not have even been made commercial
15 property.
16 The fact is, if anyone has driven --
17 tried to come off of 380 between the traffic lights,
18 between the busy hours, you can't get through those lights.
19 The person that comes off 380 to try to turn to try to make
20 the left to come to Pocono Summit -- everyone knows what
21 I'm talking about -- takes his life into his hands because
22 he has to cut across blind traffic to get there. If you
23 make access to 940, which would be a great idea, but even
24 if you make the access to 940, you have a ramp pulling on
25 from 940, you have the access ramp to 380. If you put a
36
1 light there and people try to get on the entrance to 940,
2 you're still going to have a traffic problem there. So no
3 matter what you do, there will be a major traffic problem.
4 I think that there has to be a lot
5 of things done and this plan thought up very well before
6 this project, if it does go forward, goes forward. Before
7 you put us in a situation where they have two things: If
8 they redo the project, buy up all the property from all the
9 residential people there, pay all their moving expenses and
10 let 84 Lumber have all the property there so they can do
11 what they want with it, because it won't be worth living in
12 Pocono Summit. You will totally destroy it. So you either
13 want commercial or you want residential. There can't be
14 the two together there. It's just not an area that you can
15 do it. You will cause a problem that you will not go back
16 on. That's happened before. So think about it very well.
17 It seems like we've got some supervisors that understand
18 what the people are going through and we hope that you're
19 on our side because once you make that step, there is no
20 turning back from saying well, we made a mistake again.
21 It's just not the area that should be, you know, done,
22 because you're going to destroy it for -- especially for
23 people with young kids. The speed limit is 25. If you sat
24 there, I bet you one out of 100 may do 25. You will not
25 find people doing 25 miles an hour. You see dead deer
37
1 along that road. If you're doing 25, I would think you'd
2 have a reasonable amount to stop before you hit that deer.
3 MR. MICHAEL SOPACK: I got a dead deer
4 right now in my front yard over there.
5 MR. GARY STIDHAM: So if 84 Lumber
6 wants to be a good neighbor, if they really think this
7 project out well, if you can't get access to 940, think
8 about the access to 940. It will create another 380
9 problem, just like getting across 380. Been there. Seen
10 plenty, plenty of accidents. Don't jam up that area so
11 much because the more traffic, it can't handle it. I get
12 to see it first hand because I see so much traffic and I
13 see the results of so much traffic. So think about it very
14 well before you go ahead with this project and destroy
15 something that a lot of these people have worked all their
16 lives for and they are very proud to have their homes in
17 Pocono Summit. Don't destroy it.
18 MR. KERRICK: Mr. Sopack.
19 MR. SOPACK: Well, let's start with I
20 wrote you another letter and you got a copy of it. And
21 Mr. Podolak wrote a letter to you. He asked that you read
22 it at the beginning of the meeting, read both of them and
23 you haven't taken the time to read those letters. It would
24 explain a lot of these issues to everybody that's here
25 tonight. May I ask if you can read those letters now to
38
1 get all these issues out in one shot?
2 MR. KERRICK: It's not our policy to
3 read letters into the minutes. We'll reference those
4 letters later on in the meeting that we did receive them
5 and we took them under advisement. You're here tonight.
6 If you wish to read it feel free.
7 MR. SOPACK: I'll come back to that
8 later.
9 I want to say it was very generous of
10 them to offer you $60,000 for you to spend anyway you want,
11 but what makes them think you can get any road work done
12 for that piddling amount today. Who is supposed to foot
13 the balance of that money out? Kept repeating $60,000.
14 Spend it anyway you want. As far as I'm concerned, it
15 wouldn't do one one half of the work there, so -- and then
16 we get back to the road.
17 Right now there is a dead deer laying
18 in my front yard. Why? We got a 25 mile an hour speed
19 limit there. I kept calling up and complaining to the
20 police department about speeders, and so far I seen nothing
21 done. They still go up that road at 60 miles an hour. It
22 was 35. We had it lowered to 25 because they were
23 speeding. And the 25 mile limit didn't have any effect at
24 all. They are still doing it. The beer delivery truck,
25 everyday he runs up and down like he's going up to the
39
1 racetrack when he comes through there. Not everyday, but
2 when he does go. And nothing is being done that I see.
3 All we need is another 200 trucks plus all the independent
4 contractors that will be running up in there in a hurry to
5 get back to the job. Like I say, last week it was a dead
6 fox in the road; tonight there is a dead deer in my front
7 yard.
8 Now, you're talking about widening the
9 road. Where is the room to widen? The houses are close to
10 the road. Are you going to take the houses down? Are you
11 going to --
12 MS. PICKARD: They said on the other
13 side.
14 MR. SOPACK: I'm on the other side.
15 MRS. JANET SPOTT: That's his side.
16 MR. MICHAEL SOPACK: There is two
17 sides to that road, but I'm on the narrow side. I'm on the
18 bottom of that industrial tract there. I'm right on the
19 corner. If you're going to widen that road, you will take
20 away my whole front yard in order to do that. As far as
21 I'm concerned, we don't need that Lumber 84 here anymore
22 than we need another hole in our heads. If they can't do
23 it correctly, I tell you, let them go some place else.
24 They are going to ruin our lives, so that they can sell
25 more lumber? We don't need them and their lumber yard in
40
1 our front yards here. As far as I'm concerned let them
2 find another spot where they are welcome. They are not
3 welcome here unless they can get over on to 940.
4 When this place was developed, the
5 township promised that they would put an entrance over to
6 940. They let Stillwater Lakes go -- have and entrance up
7 there by the firehouse. When Cramer's got the okay to make
8 another commercial property, the same boloney they gave us.
9 They are going to put an entrance on 940. And now what?
10 It's the same thing. We are going to see about it again.
11 And in the meantime, we got two fleets of trucks and all
12 kinds of contractors running up and down there all day.
13 Two Saturday's ago there were six three axle dump trucks
14 running back and forth all day long. Boloney. This
15 Saturday there were three of them running over there, all
16 morning. And somebody saw that I was sitting up there
17 watching them and then they stopped about 1:30. Those
18 trucks are running up there.
19 Triple A was supposed to have storage
20 lockers. They were running a fleet of trucks up there that
21 you wouldn't believe. So we have all that, plus the Basek
22 property was supposed to have a garage there and a garbage
23 yard and he's got all kinds of trucks coming up and down
24 there. He's got the one contractor working over there
25 that's got trucks coming up and down everyday and Saturdays
41
1 included. Great big dump trucks and payloaders and what
2 have you. And there is supposed to be a residential road.
3 They promised they will put an entrance onto 940. We are
4 still waiting for that. But we got all these trucks and I
5 don't know who gave them permission? Who gave permission
6 to run that sand and gravel soil depot, over there, running
7 their dump trucks back and forth all the time. Do they
8 have permission? They are using the Basek property. They
9 don't have permission as far as I know. Plus you got all
10 these contractors coming up and down with tractor trailers
11 loading up with bulldozers and payloaders and what have
12 you, day in and day out. Then you have Triple A. They were
13 supposed to be storage lockers. You take a look at the
14 fleet of trucks they are running all the time up and down
15 that road. And in the meantime, the older people died off
16 and the younger people moved in there and they are having
17 children. Those children are crossing that road right now.
18 The children are playing with Vinni's (phonetic) children
19 over there and they are crossing the road. And I'll tell
20 you, if one of them gets hit, I'm going to supply the money
21 for a lawyer. I will supply the lawyer.
22 MR. KERRICK: Thank you, Mr. Sopack.
23 Yes, sir?
24 MR. WEICZROEK: Two of the biggest
25 concerns that I would think address some of the hours of
42
1 operation. They talked about the kids in the neighborhood.
2 I travel up and down and live there. There are a lot of
3 times, especially with kids, especially the bowling, you
4 know, the bowling alley's become a drop off place for kids
5 and they kind of run around in our neighborhood. They are
6 running on that street. And on more than one occasion,
7 going up and down that road in the evening, I mean, those
8 kids are tough to see. And, you know, unfortunately, it's
9 not real quick sometimes to get out of the way. You know,
10 they expect you to see them.
11 And I think the thing that concerns me
12 the most is the amount of the heavy traffic running up and
13 down that road. You know, from where I live, certain times
14 of the year, you could hear road traffic from 380, okay.
15 And, although it's something that, you know, we live with,
16 we knew it when we got there, the idea of running heavy
17 trucks up and down that road at different hours of the
18 night, you know -- I know you say your operating hours are
19 from such to such, but I work in an industry that we move a
20 lot of heavy traffic, heavy trucks and stuff. Our guys get
21 there. You may be open at seven but they are there at six,
22 which means they are coming from different areas. They are
23 not planning their arrival. They want to be there when the
24 place opens up. They want to get unloaded and they want to
25 get moving. So they are there after or before. And like
43
1 you said, there will be instances when these trucks are
2 running and, I mean, the houses are close to this road.
3 You come down there and it's going to be noisy. I just
4 don't think it's fair in a residential area to put the
5 residences up to that.
6 Thank you.
7 MR. KERRICK: Yes, ma'am.
8 MS. LINDA MUSSELMAN: Besides the
9 people that live on that road, there is a 950 lot
10 development there that accesses -- it's their ingress and
11 egress spot to come out right on Summit Avenue. So with
12 all the heavy traffic that's going to be coming there -- I
13 mean, I'm not the manager for Stillwater Lakes Civic
14 Association, but it's something you should be considering.
15 They probably mostly are in Coolbaugh Township, but there
16 are still residents there that have to come out of that
17 road.
18 MR. KERRICK: Gary?
19 MR. GARY STIDHAM: I just want to ask
20 a couple of questions to some of the people that I know are
21 residents back here.
22 George Planchock, what time do you get
23 up in the morning?
24 MR. GEORGE PLANCHOCK: Quarter to
25 seven.
44
1 MR. GARY STIDHAM: Jerry, what time do
2 you get up?
3 A VOICE: Six o'clock.
4 MR. GARY STIDHAM: What time do you go
5 to work?
6 A VOICE: Six.
7 MR. GARY STIDHAM: I think that all of
8 us go to work about pretty much the same time. And if
9 there is that much traffic on that road, don't we have a
10 right to get to our jobs?
11 The people that are with 84 Lumber,
12 how far do you live from work?
13 MS. MARIE PANTALONE: I'm not sure
14 what you're question is, because the traffic impact study
15 measured -- they didn't find that there would be any
16 decrease in the efficiency of the studied intersection with
17 the traffic that was found on the existing --
18 MR. GARY STIDHAM: Why don't you come
19 up there and sit there for a couple of days and then tell
20 us that this traffic study -- you know what? Why doesn't
21 common sense come into play instead of your traffic studies
22 and stuff? They are never right. I could give you a good
23 example in Tannersville. There was a traffic study down
24 there. The traffic study they are doing down there, you
25 better start going to Scranton for shopping because you're
45
1 not going to get through Tannersville.
2 So, hopefully, somebody uses their
3 head here and uses common sense instead of these studies
4 because if you're going to work at the same time as those
5 trucks are coming in, and you just admitted that the
6 deliveries will be before opening time, and the opening
7 time is 7 o'clock, to me, that's a lot of trucks coming
8 down that road at work time. And I think we have a right
9 to get out of our houses, go to our jobs and sustain our
10 families just like everybody else. Thank you.
11 MRS. JANET SPOTT: Janet Spott. I
12 live on Summit Avenue. Two times in one day, backing out
13 of my driveway, I, one, was almost hit because somebody
14 came flying down the road; two, somebody coming from the
15 bowling alley, I believe it was probably the landscaping
16 company, I was backing out and they were down by the
17 bowling alley when they started blowing their horn at me
18 because I was backing out of my driveway. So all this
19 extra traffic that you're saying is going to be nice and
20 safe at whatever hours they are going to be, I'm still
21 going to have to back out of my driveway onto Summit Avenue
22 to leave to go to work, to leave to go to the store or for
23 whatever reason.
24 And I find also, the speed limit is
25 25, which is what I drive coming home down Summit Avenue.
46
1 Well, the cars behind me think that I should be driving
2 faster so they are right on my bumper. Well, I put on my
3 turn signal to pull into my drive and I'm almost hit,
4 almost on a daily basis, trying to get into my driveway.
5 So now we are going to have 60 more cars in the morning and
6 190 more vehicles, 90 percent being trucks in the
7 afternoon. So what's going to happen when I get rearended?
8 Who is going to pay for that bill? Do I sue 84 Lumber? Do
9 I sue the truck driver? Do I sue the township? Or when my
10 child gets hit because they are riding their bicycle --
11 there is no street lights, there is no sidewalk, there is
12 nothing there, there is no children at play signs by my
13 house.
14 MR. JERRY SPOTT: Which we've asked
15 for.
16 MRS. JANET SPOTT: Which we've asked
17 for.
18 MR. JERRY SPOTT: We've been asking
19 for them for years.
20 MRS. JANET SPOTT: Am I going to have
21 to go to Mr. Sopack for my lawyer fees when my child is
22 killed because one of these big trucks is coming down the
23 road? You don't live there. I suggest you come over and
24 sit on our road for a few hours every night and see what
25 our traffic is like and then give them their permission.
47
1 MS. LINDA GARGIULO: Can't their
2 development just depend upon the 940 access?
3 MR. KERRICK: No.
4 MS. LINDA GARGIULO: Last time I was
5 here, I mentioned about the fire department. Nobody's
6 answered the question, so I won't put it in a question. We
7 want the fire department to be clear to get through to the
8 other side of 380, to the other side of 940, Long Pond. We
9 don't want them stuck on a road with more trucks. They
10 have got enough problems as it is. I hear that it's hard
11 to pass two fire trucks along side each other on this road
12 the way it is. Why aren't we looking for -- you said I
13 should write a petition. If we are waiting for access to
14 940 to come through and it takes three years, what happens
15 during the three years. This is the question. I don't
16 live on Summit Avenue. I live on the other side of 380.
17 That's my fire department. They got there once to my house
18 for an emergency before an ambulance did. I don't think
19 that is going to be possible now.
20 And I think to say we should write a
21 petition is ridiculous. I have done that for a different
22 reason. The petition, forget it. I don't know how many
23 names you need on it, but you go on a list state wide where
24 you end up at the bottom. So that doesn't help. But
25 you've got to consider who lives in the area. And I think
48
1 the fire department responds to explosions, fires,
2 suicides, car crashes, everything. They're right there.
3 The thing is, that's their only access. Now last time I
4 was here I asked that question and one of you, I don't want
5 to say who, but one of you said Blueberry Hill Road was
6 supposed to go through to 940. You can look in the minutes
7 when they get printed up. Somebody said that. That was a
8 plan that was said no to a long, long time ago. So why
9 doesn't the fire department need access to 940, or why
10 should 84 Lumber have access to 940. But I don't know if
11 we can wait three years or five years or ten years or
12 never. Maybe it never comes through. And all these
13 people's homes are affected. And the kids are riding motor
14 bikes over to the bowling alley all the time. ATV's and
15 motor bikes. The police are trying to stop them. They
16 can't. The point is they all live in Stillwater Lakes
17 Civic Association directly across from the bowling alley.
18 So they are riding all these little scooters and things
19 constantly on that road. It's an unsafe situation. It
20 jeopardizes too many people without access. All we need is
21 proper access to it. If you could get them -- whoever you
22 have to get. You got to get the federal government there
23 and the state -- they don't take petitions too seriously.
24 They need to know that this is what is needed for these
25 people to use their land. And I think they should be able
49
1 to use their land. I think it should go right onto 940 and
2 that would solve everybody's problem. But to say that
3 might happen in the future, so we'll let them put it in now
4 and we'll keep trying to get permission, it's sort of
5 ridiculous. By the time they ever get permission, if they
6 do, the area is ruined. I'm hoping that you help us with
7 this. Instead of just saying yes, we'll wait and see what
8 happens.
9 MR. JERRY SPOTT: Mr. Kerrick, we'll
10 help anyway we can. If you need us to contact state people
11 or whatever, we'll do it. We are desperate here.
12 MRS. JANET SPOTT: Don't just say get
13 a petition and send it to PennDOT. That doesn't help us.
14 We don't know where it goes to. Put some stop signs on our
15 road, maybe slow the traffic down. Put some street lights
16 up so it's a little brighter. Our neighbor walks his dog
17 everyday. Well, he's got to make sure he walks during the
18 daytime because God forbid you try to walk down the road at
19 night, you can't see two feet in front of you. He's right.
20 When the kids are walking down the road, they don't get out
21 of your way. They wait until you're on top of them and
22 just about running them over. It doesn't matter if you're
23 even doing 25 miles per hour because, if you don't see them
24 and you hit them, it's too bad for you.
25 MR. GEORGE PLANCHOCK: It's probably
50
1 the wrong time to ask this question. I'm getting
2 conflicting reports. Is this going to be a lumber yard
3 like the one in East Stroudsburg or is it a distribution
4 center, like wholesale.
5 MS. CHRISTINA TORRES: It's like East
6 Stroudsburg.
7 MR. GEORGE PLANCHOCK: That was my
8 first part of my question.
9 Is there any drawings -- you're trying
10 to widen the intersection at 314 and Summit Avenue?
11 MR. KERRICK: That's what the traffic
12 study is recommending, yes.
13 A VOICE: It's not at 314 and Summit
14 Avenue because they are turning in at the horseshoe --
15 MR. KERRICK: Summit Ave and 314 and
16 Industrial Park Drive.
17 A VOICE: There is a third road in
18 that mix.
19 MR. KERRICK: Do you know what page
20 you are on?
21 MS. MARIE PANTALONE: In the gray.
22 That's the widening that's needed. You can see how the
23 truck moves, coming from the site, making that movement.
24 Summit, Woodland Drive. This is 314 and there is Woodland.
25 Are you okay? Okay.
51
1 MR. GEORGE PLANCHOCK: So how much of
2 Mike's Body Shop are they taking out of this parking lot?
3 MS. MARIE PANTALONE: All the widening
4 is within the right of way.
5 MR. GEORGE PLANCHOCK: I don't think
6 that's going to work, but I just thought, you know, if this
7 was a tractor trailer in, tractor trailer out, loaded both
8 ways situation, kind of like a distribution, like a
9 Wal-Mart type, that was my question was -- I didn't know if
10 it was like that or a lumbar yard.
11 MR. KERRICK: From what we understand,
12 it's like East Stroudsburg. Limited retail. I saw
13 somebody's hand in the back.
14 A VOICE: You're talking about street
15 lights. You don't want street lights because that has the
16 kids hanging out more and later hours because it's
17 happening over at the firehouse. That's trouble.
18 MRS. JANET SPOTT: Well, maybe trouble
19 would be -- maybe if we have some more police coverage
20 there to get those kids out of there, they don't belong
21 hanging out there on the street.
22 A VOICE: They just keep moving from
23 spot to spot because they are in our development. They
24 come in at three in the morning --
25 MR. GEORGE PLANCHOCK: I'm a little
52
1 concerned with that intersection. I don't see anyway in
2 God's green earth that you will get a 53 foot trailer not
3 to go into the other lane and still make that corner.
4 Unless the right of way is through Mike's Body Shop's front
5 door --
6 MR. KERRICK: 60 foot right of way on
7 314.
8 MR. GEORGE PLANCHOCK: Off of the
9 center line.
10 MR. KERRICK: No, 30 feet off the
11 center line.
12 Marie, do you have that diagram?
13 MS. MARIE PANTALONE: I just showed it
14 to the gentlemen.
15 MR. GEORGE PANTALONE: You know what
16 that corner is like?
17 MR. KERRICK: I know. It goes back
18 almost to the building, the right of way.
19 MR. GEORGE PLANCHOCK: So that will be
20 almost taken off?
21 MR. KERRICK: Conceivably could be.
22 MR. GEORGE PLANCHOCK: Because that's
23 the only way you're ever going to get a 53 footer around
24 there without --
25 MR. KERRICK: I want to make a
53
1 statement. I understand all you're concerns, unfortunately
2 we are bound by our ordinances. And if there is a way that
3 we can make you happy within reason -- I don't know what
4 else we can say here. We are bound.
5 Go ahead Manny.
6 MR. KAPELSOHN: I'm going to add to
7 what Mr. Kerrick has been saying, which is the township
8 engineer has already provided the opinion that 84 Lumber's
9 traffic study is acceptable. That the intersection
10 widening, the intersection situation, the signalization of
11 the intersection that's in Coolbaugh and so forth, all meet
12 the township's ordinances, both the SALDO ordinances and
13 the zoning ordinances. So -- and I am sympathetic. I am a
14 parent too of young children. I understand the issues
15 about being concerned, about children being hit on the
16 road, about lighting along the road, about people speeding
17 on the road, but I don't believe it's within the
18 supervisors' legal discretion to turn down a project based
19 on whether someone will speed on the road or not. That has
20 to be addressed by the police department, by enforcement.
21 I don't think they can turn it down based on whether or not
22 children at play signs have been put up or not. That's an
23 issue that doesn't allow the supervisors to turn down this
24 project.
25 A VOICE: How about commercial areas,
54
1 residential areas?
2 MR. KAPELSOHN: Similarly, the issue
3 about lighting along the road, they are all good issues and
4 I am sure that the supervisors hear everyone's comments and
5 objections and problems with it and we'll try to resolve
6 it, but, legally, the engineer has found that this proposal
7 meets the township's ordinances and that the traffic study
8 meets what it has to meet. So it doesn't leave the
9 supervisors much leeway to turn down a project on
10 those basis. These other issues are good issues, but I
11 think they are beyond what is being proposed tonight.
12 MR. JERRY SPOTT: When will the
13 traffic be resolved? When will whatever steps that's going
14 to be taken, be taken?
15 MR. KERRICK: What we'd like to do is
16 ask for some volunteers for the task force. Hopefully have
17 a meeting before the end of the week. It has nothing to do
18 with this right now. Then we'd start from that point.
19 Some people mentioned street lights. Someone in the back
20 said no street lights. I mean, you people have to be on
21 that committee to meet you're own needs. We are willing to
22 work with you and try to help.
23 Yes, sir.
24 MR. FRED SCHURR: Fred Schurr, Camelot
25 Forest.
55
1 You say you're bound by the rules of
2 the whatever, but aren't you supposed to take into
3 consideration the people themselves? If there is objection
4 by a large number of people, aren't you -- don't you have
5 to abide by that? Aren't you supposed to rule for the
6 citizens rather than industry. If there is a hardship
7 you're supposed to take care of that. I mean, where is it
8 said that you people can't rule in favor of the regular
9 people, the majority of the people here or in the area?
10 Why do we have supervisors?
11 MR. KAPELSOHN: I'm going to respond
12 as the solicitor.
13 It's not a matter of a majority vote.
14 It's what someone wanted to put on their land. Whether
15 it's you and you want to build you're house on you're own
16 plot of land, it's not legal, it's not permissible for the
17 residence of the township to get together and vote on
18 whether or not they'd like to let you build a house on
19 you're land or not. And if what someone wants to put in on
20 this tract of land is 84 Lumber or if it's a paint store or
21 if it's a supermarket, it is not legal for that land
22 owner's use of their land to be determined by a majority
23 vote. It has to be a matter of law by virtue of what the
24 zoning ordinances are and what the land development
25 ordinances are in the township and that's voted on and
56
1 that's passed in advance by certain notice requirements, by
2 certain legal requirements, by statute. Right now this
3 township has a set of zoning ordinances. It has a set of
4 land development ordinances and the board of supervisors is
5 obliged to follow those. Its obliged to hear your comments
6 and your objections and you're points as well, but it has
7 to act within the laws that have been enacted. The laws of
8 this township are its ordinances. It's not free to just
9 decide that because most people do or don't want 84 Lumber
10 here, it's going to tell the people who own this property
11 you can or can't have it. It has to be in accordance with
12 the ordinances that exist.
13 MR. MICHAEL SOPACK: Can I speak here?
14 I was wondering if you could define a road access regarding
15 commercial traffic going through residential area? Can you
16 define that for me? 155, 106 Item N. "Traffic through an
17 industrial or manufacturing development shall not utilize a
18 local street to a residential district." That's what we
19 are.
20 MR. KERRICK: Can I respond to that?
21 MR. MICHAEL SOPACK: Yes.
22 MR. KERRICK: That was enacted in
23 1998. In 1985 is when the subdivision -- it's
24 grandfathered. It has nothing to do with that ordinance.
25 MR. MICHAEL SOPACK: In 1995 the
57
1 ordinance read that no commercial traffic in a residential
2 road. Then I get a bunch of boloney from your office about
3 it's a general road. And I asked for a definition of a
4 general road and I was told to get out. I never did get
5 the definition of a general road because it's the same
6 thing when I ask to see the blueprints. Suddenly the
7 blueprints disappear every time.
8 MR. KERRICK: When were you ever asked
9 to leave? Mr. Sopack, if you were asked to leave, you
10 would have called me on the phone.
11 MR. MICHAEL SOPACK: This is before
12 you were there. This is before you were there. I told her
13 that was a lot of boloney, in plain English, and she said
14 get out. She's trying to tell me it's a general road.
15 Commercial traffic could use it.
16 I maintain if we had a dead end road
17 there, nothing but residential buildings on it and you went
18 ahead and said, well, we are going to put an entrance onto
19 940. You let them go in and out by the firehouse.
20 MR. KERRICK: Can I correct you're
21 statement.
22 The supervisors in 1985 approved that,
23 not the board that's here right now.
24 MR. MICHAEL SOPACK: I'm talking about
25 before that. I'm talking about if you look at the
58
1 courthouse records, when they got permission for Stillwater
2 Estates to put that entrance over ther by the firehouse,
3 it's in the records that they were going to put an entrance
4 onto 940 so they wouldn't have to come up and down. And
5 the same thing happened with Cramer's. They said they were
6 going to run that Industrial Drive right straight to 940,
7 so they got an okay and never did it. Now you're doing the
8 same thing. You're saying you're going to let them in here
9 and then seeing about getting an entrance onto 940, which
10 is a crock of bull as far as I'm concerned because we had
11 that twice already and we still don't have it.
12 Who is giving all these people
13 permission on all these fleets of trucks? You got trucks
14 running up and down, six three axle dump trucks going up
15 and down all day Saturday about two, three weeks ago. All
16 during the week you will see them running up and down and
17 sometimes they are going down to the no trucking street
18 there. They run that no trucking sign as if it wasn't
19 there. And you got them speeding. I keep complaining
20 about -- especially that beer truck that goes up and down
21 like he goes to a racetrack. And he's still doing it.
22 Talking about all those cars that race up and down there,
23 there is nothing being done about them.
24 MR. KERRICK: What day is the beer
25 truck.
59
1 MRS. COOK: You're going to find out
2 the day and time of the beer truck for us.
3 MR. KERRICK: That's what you said
4 Friday, you told me you'd give me the day and the time that
5 he goes by.
6 MR. MICHAEL SOPACK: I said I'm going
7 to start. As a matter of fact I asked my son to watch also
8 in case I'm not there. Let me know when they come by and
9 if they are speeding or not.
10 Today I got a dead deer laying up
11 there in the front yard and people are racing up and down
12 that road as if they don't know how that deer got dead over
13 there. What's the use of talking? Nobody gives a damn
14 about the speed limit. We are paying for police protection
15 that we're not getting. So now you want to put a whole --
16 another fleet of trucks out. Who gave them permission to
17 have that -- what would you call it, the sand gravel pit
18 that they got over there? All day in and day out they are
19 up and down there with soil, sand and gravel and what have
20 you. Who gave them permission to go in on the Basek
21 property? Do they have permission to go on the Basek
22 property? Who gave them permission?
23 MR. KERRICK: Mr. Sopack, we are on 84
24 Lumber right now.
25 I'll answer you're question. I will
60
1 check Basek's property and I'll give you an answer. I
2 can't give you an answer right now.
3 MR. MICHAEL SOPACK: You've been
4 telling me that for four months now.
5 MR. KERRICK: I gave you an answer
6 Friday when you were here, didn't I?
7 MR. MICHAEL SOPACK: That was because
8 you got that letter that's why.
9 MR. KERRICK: No it wasn't. You asked
10 the question and I got the answer.
11 MR. MICHAEL SOPACK: You keep telling
12 me after every meeting you're going to let me know, you're
13 going to let me know, and I'm still waiting.
14 MR. KERRICK: The question you asked
15 me the last meeting you got an answer to on Friday. And I
16 will give you an answer on that.
17 MR. MICHAEL SOPACK: I got a couple
18 other questions I want to ask.
19 MR. KERRICK: Is this on 84 Lumber?
20 MR. MICHAEL SOPACK: Yes. Would the
21 board please state if there was an environmental impact
22 study completed and filed with the county and state
23 department of environmental resources? Was there a study
24 made?
25 MR. KERRICK: It did not require an
61
1 environmental study, just a traffic study.
2 MR. MICHAEL SOPACK: It don't require
3 environmental study?
4 MR. KERRICK: Not according to our
5 engineer.
6 MR. MICHAEL SOPACK: Are there any
7 known wetlands on that property?
8 MR. KERRICK: 84 Lumber stated that
9 September 15th the Army Corp of Engineers will be there.
10 MR. MICHAEL SOPACK: They still don't
11 know if there are any wetlands on the property?
12 MR. KERRICK: They have an outdated
13 letter where they are defined but the corp wants to come
14 back and take another look. So they will be there on the
15 15th.
16 MR. MICHAEL SOPACK: How about water
17 runoff, stormwater runoff?
18 MR. KERRICK: Designated on the plan
19 here. Maybe, Lou --
20 MR. LOUIS COZZA: You want me to
21 address that?
22 MR. KERRICK: Could you address that,
23 please?
24 MR. LOUIS COZZA: I don't have the
25 report with me.
62
1 MR. KERRICK: Here's the reports.
2 MR. LOUIS COZZA: Above ground
3 detention basin which discharges into the wetland, which
4 flows into the existing culvert that flows under 940.
5 PennDOT has reviewed it and they have no issues with it.
6 We are in a 65 percent release rate, which means, by
7 calculations, I need to release 65 percent of the value of
8 water, the amount of water that runs off the site today
9 after the buildings, the pavement, everything else are in
10 place.
11 MR. MICHAEL SOPACK: Okay. So you
12 will have detention basins? Is there any endangered
13 vegetation on that land? I mean other than shrub oaks, I
14 understand there is --
15 MR. LOUIS COZZA: Shrub oaks, to my
16 knowledge, are not an endangered species. We did not do an
17 environmental impact statement. It was not required.
18 MR. MICHAEL SOPACK: It's not
19 required, but what about wetlands?
20 MR. LOUIS COZZA: No. The impact is
21 less than five acres.
22 MR. MICHAEL SOPACK: Is there any
23 endangered wildlife on that property?
24 MR. LOUIS COZZA: We did not do an
25 environmental impact statement.
63
1 MR. MICHAEL SOPACK: I think it should
2 be done, don't you?
3 MR. LOUIS COZZA: It's not required by
4 state or township law. We have done everything required by
5 township law, state law and federal law. We've done a PNDI
6 search for bog turtles and no hits came up. We've gone
7 through the process through the conversation district.
8 It's being reviewed by the DEP right now. There is no
9 requirement for any of that.
10 MR. SOPACK: We are getting -- all of
11 our wildlife is being killed on that road right now. Like
12 I say, like the deer right in my front yard, if you want to
13 go down.
14 MR. LOUIS COZZA: I believe you.
15 MR. SOPACK: As far as I know, the
16 board of supervisors are required to look after the health,
17 safety and general welfare of the residents. I should
18 think that would take precedence over putting a commercial
19 enterprise in the midst of our area and destroy it. I know
20 you have ordinances, but who's following the ordinances?
21 Take a look at the Foley property over there. Ordinances
22 don't mean a thing. The Basek property, they have all
23 these different activities. Nobody is looking after it.
24 You're telling me Triple A has got a CO for those three
25 office spaces? They aren't allowed to occupy them for over
64
1 three years. They put them up then they wanted a CO.
2 MR. LAMBERTON: Mr. Sopack you're off
3 the subject of 84 Lumber, please.
4 MR. MICHAEL SOPACK: I'm talking about
5 ordinances. You're talking about you have to obey
6 ordinances. You're not obeying them.
7 MR. LAMBERTON: Here's the book. Show
8 us which one we are not obeying.
9 MR. MICHAEL SOPACK: I just told you.
10 MR. LAMBERTON: Show us.
11 MR. MICHAEL SOPACK: Who gave them
12 permission to put those buildings up?
13 MR. KERRICK: Mr. Sopack, that has
14 nothing to do with 84. We are doing our best to obey the
15 ordinances. I'll get you an answer. I promised you I'll
16 get you an answer and I will.
17 MR. MICHAEL SOPACK: Yeah, keep saying
18 that, John.
19 MR. KERRICK: I gave you an answer
20 Friday.
21 MR. JERRY SPOTT: Mr. Kerrick, if this
22 is approved, when will that construction start?
23 MR. KERRICK: I can't answer that.
24 You can ask the people behind you.
25 MR. LOUIS COZZA: Once all our permits
65
1 are in place. We are still waiting for NPDES permit from
2 DEP. It could be within 30 days.
3 MR. JERRY SPOTT: Could be within 30
4 days.
5 MR. LOUIS COZZA: It could be. If
6 everything goes well.
7 A VOICE: What does it stand for?
8 MR. LOUIS COZZA: NPDES? National
9 Pollution Discharge Elimination. It's a federal permit
10 administered by the State of Pennsylvania by the Department
11 of Environmental Protection. It's got to do with
12 stormwater discharges during construction. It's to ensure
13 that the brown muddy river is not brown and muddy during a
14 storm.
15 MR. JERRY SPOTT: Construction
16 vehicles -- I mean, obviously there is nothing that will be
17 done with this traffic. In the meantime and even from the
18 time construction starts, to the time operation actually
19 begins, what kind of time frame are we looking till we see
20 this actual traffic?
21 MS. CHRISTINA TORRES: The
22 construction time period is 120 days from start to finish;
23 from grading to opening our doors.
24 MR. LOUIS COZZA: Depending on
25 weather.
66
1 MR. JERRY SPOTT: So nothing will
2 happen with 314, Summit Avenue or 940 in 120 days, correct?
3 MR. KERRICK: Part of their process,
4 if they were approved, is widening those intersections,
5 yes, but not 940, not the off intersection at 940. Summit
6 Avenue widening and Industrial Park Drive, they have agreed
7 to, as part of their construction project. That would be
8 part of their -- now, if it was approved.
9 Does that answer you're question?
10 MR. JERRY SPOTT: Somewhat. If they
11 put forth this money to widen those intersections, $60,000,
12 is that -- am I on the same page?
13 MR. LOUIS COZZA: No. Those two
14 intersections will be widened as part of this project. The
15 $60,000 is for the task force.
16 MR. KERRICK: That's for the task
17 force to work on --
18 A VOICE: That's seed money for the
19 task force.
20 MR. JERRY SPOTT: If you get approval
21 and construction begins is there anything there going to
22 affect this 940 proposal that we are -- I mean, I don't
23 know if you people are really for it or not, but I know --
24 I think everybody in this room is. And I hope 84 is
25 sincere about this. I think it's really our only way out
67
1 of this. Will there be any negative affects on you
2 starting construction or getting approval?
3 MR. LOUIS COZZA: That 940 access is
4 independent of this project.
5 MR. MARC WOLFE: The plan was
6 reconfigured from the way the 50 foot right of way --
7 MR. JERRY SPOTT: That's been done.
8 MR. MARC WOLFE: That's been done.
9 A VOICE: There is a 100 foot setback.
10 MR. MARC WOLFE: If the 940 solution
11 is approved, it can be built without interfering with the
12 plan that is before the board tonight.
13 MR. GARY STIDHAM: I had a question on
14 the ordinances. The township must follow all ordinances
15 that are written in their book?
16 MR. KAPELSOHN: The township is
17 supposed to, yes.
18 MR. GARY STIDHAM: Every ordinance
19 that's written in this book. And there is leeway in the
20 ordinance that can be interpreted different ways by
21 different individuals?
22 MR. KAPELSOHN: Some ordinances may
23 have leeway in them. In some cases there isn't leeway in
24 them. In some cases courts have ruled what certain
25 language means or it's defined in an ordinance. It's not
68
1 every provision that has leeway to allow people to have
2 differing opinions about what it means.
3 MR. GARY STIDHAM: Does Tobyhanna
4 Township have an ordinance on those particular pieces of
5 property in commercial industrial that nothing of a
6 nuisance type can be constructed in that area or on those
7 pieces of property? You do have an ordinance that says
8 nothing of a nuisance type. So could it be that maybe a
9 nuisance can be interpreted by me as one thing and
10 somebody else as something else? I mean isn't that going
11 to be a nuisance. Isn't that enough for the township to
12 sort of, you know, settle on it and say let's think this
13 thing through until we realize what the impact will be.
14 Because the ordinance does state that. I don't know which
15 one it is, but I do have both ordinance books. It may not
16 be in the new one now. They may have changed it.
17 MR. JERRY SPOTT: It does have a
18 detrimental effect on the residents.
19 MR. GARY STIDHAM: There is an
20 ordinance that does state that nothing of a nuisance type
21 can be placed on the property.
22 MR. KAPELSOHN: There is a provision
23 in the zoning ordinance that -- it's a provision against
24 nuisance, but here you have a proposed land development
25 plan where the township engineer has said it meets the
69
1 traffic study. The traffic study is acceptable. I don't
2 think that that nuisance provision for instance can be
3 interpreted to mean that the sounds of trucks on a public
4 roadway is a nuisance. I think that's governed by a noise
5 ordinance, it's governed by a state law, you know, motor
6 vehicle law, about the mufflers and the decibel level of
7 the vehicles and so forth. I don't think you can interpret
8 that nuisance provision to ban a proposed development such
9 as this.
10 MR. GARY STIDHAM: Not being able to
11 pull out of you're driveway would be kind of a nuisance, I
12 would think.
13 Thank you very much.
14 MS. LINDA GARGIULO: You have an
15 ordinance under commercial industrial development and it
16 says -- it's under 135-26, "The point of ingress and egress
17 shall be designed in so far as possible not to require
18 commercial and industrial traffic to pass through
19 residential area." It's residential on one side and
20 commercial on the other, right?
21 MR. KERRICK: I believe we researched
22 that. It was enacted in 1998. The subdivision was
23 approved in 1985, preexisting.
24 MRS. JANET SPOTT: Nothing was built
25 there then.
70
1 MR. KERRICK: I didn't write the book.
2 MS. PICKARD: It was approved with
3 this access here on Summit Avenue.
4 MRS. JANET SPOTT: Was it taken into
5 consideration -- you're talking about big rigs coming down
6 this road. Are two trucks going to be able to pass each
7 other on this road? We are talking fire trucks have
8 trouble on this road. What affect is that going to have
9 when a fire truck is leaving and a big truck is coming, are
10 they going to smash into each other because the road is not
11 wide enough? I think you're mixing apples and oranges
12 here. I'm not saying I'm against 84 Lumber, but there is
13 going to be a traffic problem and when you guys see a bad
14 accident happen on that road, you're going to say, oh, I'm
15 sorry. Is that the answer we are going to get then?
16 I understand, Mr. Solicitor, that you
17 have -- you're saying that they're following all the
18 guidelines, but the fact is, all these people here are very
19 concerned about that road and the impact it's going to have
20 on the rest of your lives. And I think it's your
21 responsibility sitting in these chairs, to consider
22 everyone here.
23 (A recess was taken from 9:30 p.m. to
24 9:51 p.m.)
25 MR. KERRICK: Call the meeting back to
71
1 order.
2 Anybody else have any comments?
3 MR. DONNA BETHEL: Donna Bethel,
4 Pocono Summit. Before we recessed, we were discussing the
5 width of this Summit Avenue. Currently there is enough
6 room for two trucks to pass. There is no shoulder on the
7 other side of the road, so when we get a lot of snow in the
8 winter, it builds up. There is not even barely enough room
9 for two cars to pass on Summit Avenue. What's going to
10 happen with the snow?
11 MR. KERRICK: You're asking me that as
12 a question? I can't answer that. Point well taken, but I
13 can't answer that question. Depending on how much snow we
14 have, don't have.
15 A VOICE: I'd like to address this to
16 the 84 Lumber people. Is there anyway -- I guess trying to
17 make the best of a bad situation, you've indicated you're
18 certain operating hours early in the morning, 6, 7 or 8
19 o'clock during the summertime. Is there anyway -- and I
20 know from the part of business that I operate in, we do
21 have certain control over our truckers. Is there anyway
22 that you could indicate to you're delivery, outside
23 delivery people or third party delivery people that come in
24 that, you know, you really don't want them running that
25 road from let's say 8 o'clock till 6 o'clock in the morning
72
1 or something like that? What would be considered like
2 evening hours for a residential neighborhood that we don't
3 have trucks, you know 53 foot trailers running up and down
4 that road? I mean, I know my guys try to do it in
5 commercial areas at times, they will try to have a
6 delivery -- a lot of times they show up a midnight, park
7 their truck, get a couple hours sleep, be there first thing
8 in the morning, get offloaded so they can run.
9 All I'm asking 84 is, I mean, you
10 could probably put some type or try to do due diligence to
11 tell drivers, hey, look, we have a situation that we are
12 trying to work with the local community on this. We are
13 trying to keep the heavy trucks off of this road in the
14 evenings because we are impacting the residential
15 neighborhood. Hopefully, we can get some kind of access to
16 940. At least in the evening hours and stuff we can kind
17 of limit the amount of heavy truck traffic on that road.
18 MS. CHRISTINA TORRES: We don't have
19 direct control over these -- some of these trucks are
20 coming in from Montreal, they are coming from all points.
21 We can certainly request of them, but there is no way to
22 enforce it. To be perfectly honest with you, I feel like
23 we are being chipped a way at here. We've done everything
24 you've asked us to do and I don't know what more we can do.
25 In a way, to put that restriction on us is sort of a
73
1 restriction -- it becomes a restriction on our commerce to
2 do business. All I can say to you is, we can request our
3 vendors. There are numerous vendors that come from all
4 points of geographic location. There is no way to enforce
5 it. I'm being honest.
6 A VOICE: All I'm saying is, you have
7 within a certain area a rather large truck stop. So if
8 your truck driver gets into an area, what's to say he just
9 can't park his rig at the truckstop until 6 o'clock in the
10 morning and then drive from Tannersville up, drive the 8
11 miles up the hill and come in at a normal time, instead of
12 driving through the neighborhood at 2 o'clock in the
13 morning.
14 Thank you.
15 MRS. JANET SPOTT: Perhaps that can be
16 made an ordinance.
17 A VOICE: It won't help.
18 MRS. JANET SPOTT: You keep telling us
19 this has been grandfathered in, you can't change something.
20 Well, obviously, at some point some ordinances get changed
21 by whatever means your counsel can do them. Well, I think
22 that you people have the ability to create an ordinance to
23 help these, you know, the residents. And I think it's your
24 responsibility.
25 MR. KERRICK: Care to comment on that,
74
1 Manny?
2 MR. KAPELSOHN: I think that the
3 township could pass an ordinance in the future that relates
4 to things like truck parking or overnight truck parking,
5 which would then be enforceable. I think that's legally
6 possible. Okay?
7 MR. KERRICK: Anybody else.
8 MS. CATHY STIDHAM: Cathy Stidham. If
9 they widen Summit Avenue on the other side, seven feet --
10 you said they were going to widen it?
11 MR. KERRICK: In the subdivision plan
12 there is 8.5 feet that is set aside from widening Summit
13 Avenue, after Mr. Sopack's property, from Mr. Sopack's
14 property all the way to the end to 380 can be widened. You
15 still have from Mr. Sopack's property, to 314, that there
16 is only a 33 foot right of way.
17 MS. CATHY STIDHAM: So from his place
18 all the way up to the bowling alley. So if that's widened
19 on that side, doesn't that take the buffer down for Triple
20 A Storage and the bowling alley and then all these homes
21 would be exposed? This would be exposed to all the
22 residential area. There would be no buffer there. Am I
23 correct.
24 MR. KERRICK: I can't answer that
25 without actually looking at it and measuring. I mean it's
75
1 on the plan that is set aside for that if it's needed.
2 MS. CATHY STIDHAM: Right. And
3 doesn't it state in the ordinance that there is a buffer
4 required?
5 MR. KERRICK: I would imagine, yes.
6 I'm sure there is.
7 The 8.5 feet was put in in 1985 when
8 the subdivision was approved. It says future road
9 widening. Whether it's ever used or not, I don't know.
10 Obviously, the supervisors at the time asked the owner if
11 he would give 8.5 feet for road widening. He said yes and
12 it's on the plan.
13 MS. CATHY STIDHAM: Thank you.
14 MS. JANET SPOTT: If the road was
15 widened and there is a buffer required and we are talking
16 about the storage place, we are talking about the bowling
17 alley, would they be required then to -- for instance, the
18 storage place has a fence which probably goes up to that
19 eight and a half feet. Would they be required to move that
20 fence in farther and create a new buffer?
21 MR. KERRICK: I can't answer. That's
22 a legal question.
23 MS. JANET SPOTT: I mean, we are
24 talking about ordinances.
25 MR. KERRICK: First of all, I don't
76
1 know if it ever would be widened. We are doing a
2 hypothetical thing here.
3 MS. JANET SPOTT: I mean, that's what
4 I thought we were discussing, whether or not --
5 MR. KERRICK: We are discussing 84
6 Lumber, but they're not required to widen the road. There
7 is a property available and I think that's something the
8 task force should take into consideration, if they would
9 want. I didn't think -- that's only my opinion -- that the
10 residents would want the road any wider and loose buffer.
11 MS. JANET SPOTT: That's fine. If
12 it's something for a later date, that's fine.
13 MR. JERRY SPOTT: Is there any chance
14 we can get some stop signs put in there in the meantime?
15 You know, regardless of what happens here, if there is
16 going to be construction vehicles, as Mike said, with the
17 traffic going in there now and especially this high speed
18 traffic that's going through there, can we get stop signs
19 put in at Colt Lane and Remmington Lane? They did that out
20 on Fairview Avenue in Mount Pocono and both John Lamberton,
21 the chief of police, and the mayor of Mount Pocono told me
22 that that had a tremendous impact on the safety of that
23 road. Now, several people I spoke to have told me that
24 could be done as soon as tomorrow morning.
25 MR. KERRICK: Do you want us to give
77
1 the neighbors you're phone number?
2 MR. JERRY SPOTT: I'll give it here
3 publically for the minutes. I have no problem with that.
4 MR. MICHAEL SOPACK: We are all in
5 favor of that. That will stop the speeding.
6 MR. JERRY SPOTT: I spoke with the
7 neighbors about it. I have asked them. A couple of people
8 have told me to get a petition and go through the -- John
9 Lamberton said he would support it.
10 MR. KERRICK: You'll have stop signs
11 tomorrow morning. If we have them in the back, we'll put
12 them up tomorrow morning.
13 MR. JERRY SPOTT: Thank you.
14 MR. KERRICK: You're welcome.
15 Anybody else? Yes, ma'am.
16 A VOICE: Mr. Kerrick, the stop sign
17 that's on the road going to the bowling alley, is that a
18 private road?
19 MR. KERRICK: Industrial Park Drive?
20 A VOICE: Yes.
21 MR. KERRICK: Yes.
22 A VOICE: Okay. The stop sign is too
23 far in the woods. We have traffic coming out of there
24 terribly with nobody stopping at all, just coming out of
25 Summit Avenue. What can we do about that stop sign? You
78
1 cannot see that stop sign and traffic goes through it
2 without even stopping.
3 MR. KERRICK: We'll send a letter to
4 the landowner tomorrow and ask them to move it.
5 A VOICE: My husband has been going
6 over there and cutting down the grass and also the trees
7 but that still doesn't make any difference.
8 MR. KERRICK: We'll send a letter
9 tomorrow.
10 MS. JANET SPOTT: When they put the
11 stop signs on Fairview they had blinking lights on them for
12 a few weeks to alert motorists who weren't familiar that
13 stop signs were placed there. So they gave them the
14 attention to see that there was a stop sign there. If they
15 are available, I think that would be a good idea so that
16 the neighborhood people who aren't here tonight know that
17 there is a stop sign. Just temporarily.
18 MR. KERRICK: Okay. We don't have
19 those, but we can check tomorrow and see if we can rent
20 them. I know what you're talking about.
21 Anybody else?
22 MR. JERRY SPOTT: You spoke about this
23 task force. Is it in place or is there -- what is --
24 MR. KERRICK: There is some people
25 that volunteered to be on it. Kelly Lewis, Mario Scavello,
79
1 Donna Asure. They have been in touch with you? You said
2 you wanted to be on it and some other residents, hopefully
3 representatives from the fire company, from the
4 development. It's you're community. We want you to be on
5 it. And hopefully before the end of the week, we want to
6 have a kick-off meeting, somewhere like Thursday, Friday.
7 MR. JERRY SPOTT: I'll make myself
8 available.
9 MR. KERRICK: I'll let you know when
10 it is.
11 Thank you for your public comments.
12 It's up to the board. Does the board
13 want to entertain a motion to approve 84 Lumber's land
14 development plan?
15 MR. BERRY: So moved.
16 MR. KERRICK: Motion on the floor. Do
17 we have a second?
18 MR. LAMBERTON: I'll second that.
19 MR. KERRICK: I'm going to have Manny
20 clarify all that.
21 We have a motion and second. Manny?
22 MR. KAPELSOHN: Let me restate the
23 motion with the various provisions.
24 Move that the land develop plan of 84
25 Lumber be approved with two conditions as follows:
80
1 Condition one, that 84 Lumber will
2 require its drivers, including both employees and contract
3 truck drivers and will request third party carriers making
4 deliveries to the location to use the following Route, SR
5 314/Woodland to Summit Avenue, to Development Park Drive
6 and the reverse when leaving.
7 And condition number two, 84 Lumber
8 agrees that in the event the Pennsylvania Department of
9 Transportation approves access to the site from SR 940, 84
10 Lumber will provide and dedicate a future 50 foot right of
11 way, if need for such access. This obligation on the part
12 of 84 Lumber will terminate if PennDOT or the federal
13 authorities make a final determination that such access
14 will not be permitted.
15 As an additional condition, 84 Lumber
16 is required to modify their performance bond that has been
17 provided to the township, tomorrow, by adding to it the
18 drawings and specifications, details of which will be
19 provided to them by the township. And, finally, that 84
20 Lumber would be required by the end of business this coming
21 Wednesday, two days from now, to enter into a suitable
22 stormwater management agreement, a draft of which has been
23 provided to the township tonight, but which needs to be
24 reviewed by the township solicitor and township engineer.
25 Those are the conditions that should
81
1 be added to the motion.
2 MS. PICKARD: Does that include the
3 widening of those two intersections? And the seed money
4 for the committee are not part of the motion?
5 MR. KAPELSOHN: Seed money is not part
6 of it.
7 MS. PICKARD: The two intersections.
8 MR. KAPELSOHN: Isn't the widening of
9 the two intersections part of what's already been covered
10 in Bob McHale's letter?
11 MS. PICKARD: Okay.
12 MRS. COOK: If I can add to that, a
13 waiver of SALDO 135-17L.
14 MR. KERRICK: You want to amend your
15 motion and second?
16 MR. BERRY: Yes.
17 MR. LAMBERTON: I'll second it.
18 MR. KERRICK: Motion and second on
19 the floor.
20 Any discussion from the board?
21 Any discussion from the public?
22 Call the vote. Jon?
23 MR. BERRY: I vote in favor.
24 MR. KERRICK: Ray?
25 MR. WEISHUHN: Yes.
82
1 MR. KERRICK: Hugh?
2 MR. LAMBERTON: I vote in favor.
3 MR. KERRICK: Heidi?
4 MS. PICKARD: I vote in favor.
5 MR. KERRICK: And I vote in favor.
6 Motion carried. Thank you and we hope
7 you become a very active partner in this task force and try
8 to keep our neighbors happy.
9 Next, road bids, 2004 road projects.
10 Today we had sealed bids that arrived
11 at 12 noon, opened at 12:15. We only had one bidder from
12 Slusher Brothers, Penske Supply doing business as Slusher
13 Brothers.
14 I want to make sure that all this is
15 in order with Manny, the bid bond. We had Acahela Road,
16 Kerrick Road, Thomas Road, Mackes Road, Ferncrest Road,
17 Woodland Avenue, Gross Drive East and Altemose Road.
18 The totals, Acahela Road, $55,060.35;
19 Kerrick Road is $40,489.40; Thomas Road, $64,541.38; Mackes
20 Road, $24,700.74; Ferncrest Road $39,435.74; Woodland
21 Avenue $221,169.90. Woodland Road or Avenue.
22 MRS. COOK: Avenue.
23 MR. KERRICK: Gross Drive East,
24 $83,581.67; Altemose Road, $18,890.11, for a total of
25 $547,869.29.
83
1 MS. PICKARD: I make a motion we
2 accept the Slusher Brother's bid for $547,869.29.
3 MR. KERRICK: Motion on the floor, do
4 we have a second?
5 MR. LAMBERTON: Second it.
6 MR. KERRICK: Any discussion from the
7 board?
8 It's 90 pound scratch with an inch and
9 a half overlay. That includes shoulders and line painting.
10 Any questions or comments from the
11 public?
12 Call the vote, Jon?
13 MR. BERRY: I vote in favor.
14 MR. KERRICK: Ray?
15 MR. WEISHUHN: Yes.
16 MR. KERRICK: Hugh.
17 MR. LAMBERTON: I vote in favor.
18 MR. KERRICK: Heidi?
19 MS. PICKARD: I vote in favor.
20 MR. KERRICK: And I vote in favor.
21 Motion carried.
22 Public comments on anything?
23 Motion for adjournment?
24 MR. LAMBERTON: So moved.
25 MS. PICKARD: Second.
84
1 MR. KERRICK: Meeting adjourned.
2 (Meeting concluded at 10:11 p.m.)
3 ---
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
85
1
2
3
4
5
6
7 I hereby certify that the proceedings
8 and evidence are contained fully and accurately in the
9 notes taken by me, to the best of my ability, at the
10 meeting in the above matter; and that the foregoing is a
11 true and correct transcript of the same.
12
13
14
15 JOSEPHINE HOLLMAN, C.R.
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25