Before
THE TOBYHANNA TOWNSHIP PLANNING COMMISSION
---
In Re: Regular Business Meeting
---
Tobyhanna Township Government Center Building
State Avenue
Pocono Pines, Pennsylvania 18350
Thursday, December 6, 2007, beginning at 7 p.m.
---
PRESENT: JOSEPH MILLER, Vice-Chairperson
ROBERT BAXTER, Board Member
TED VANDERVLIET, Board Member
ANNE LAMBERTON, Board Member
ROBERT McHALE, P.E.,
Township Engineer
PATRICK ARMSTRONG, ESQUIRE, Solicitor
ALSO PRESENT: PHYLLIS HAASE, Zoning Officer
---
Panko Reporting
537 Sarah Street, 2nd Floor
Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania 18360
(570) 421-3620
2
1 MR. MILLER: I'll call the
2 December meeting of Tobyhanna Township Planning
3 Commission to order. First item would be any
4 public comment at this point?
5 We've had the November minutes.
6 Are there any corrections or additions? Phyllis.
7 MS. HAASE: Mr. Miller, we do
8 have a correction. It would be Page 8, Line 17,
9 it's listed as Darling. It should be Darwin,
10 D-a-r-w-i-n. And that's the only correction that I
11 have found.
12 MR. MILLER: Any other
13 corrections or additions? Do I hear a motion to
14 approve with the correction?
15 MR. BAXTER: So moved.
16 MR. MILLER: Second.
17 MR. VANDERVLIET: I'll second
18 it.
19 MR. MILLER: All in favor say
20 aye.
21 MR. BAXTER: Aye.
22 MR. VANDERVLIET: Aye.
23 MRS. LAMBERTON: Aye.
24 MR. MILLER: Aye.
25 I have an announcement. The
3
1 cut-off date for the January 2008 meeting is
2 scheduled for Friday, December 14th, 2007. The
3 township board of supervisors are accepting resumes
4 or letters of interest from residents interested in
5 serving on the Tobyhanna Township Zoning Hearing
6 Board and the planning commission. Letters and
7 resumes will be accepted through Friday, December
8 28, 2007 until 4 p.m.
9 Items under old business, Pocono
10 Manor PRD. Are we doing anything?
11 MR. ARMSTRONG: Is anyone here
12 for the Pocono Manor PRD application?
13 Well, this PRD application, it
14 needs to be -- a public hearing needs to be set
15 before the board of supervisors. I think we have
16 an extension until the end of January. I have not
17 received any communications from the applicant or
18 the applicant's attorney with respect to an
19 additional time extension. The planning commission
20 should consider tonight possibly making
21 recommendations based upon the information that we
22 have to date, just to protect the township's
23 interest in the event that, you know, the board of
24 supervisors need ample time to set the hearing
25 date, advertise for a hearing date and get all that
4
1 done before January 31st.
2 What we do have, I believe, is a
3 letter from Borton and Lawson with -- setting forth
4 certain deficiencies in the plan. That letter is
5 dated November 7th of 2007. And I believe there is
6 also a communication from the township zoning
7 officer indicating that there are some
8 inconsistencies with the plan in the zoning
9 ordinance. Do you all have a copy of the November
10 7th, 2007 letter from Borton Lawson? I have a
11 copy.
12 MR. MILLER: Would anybody like
13 to read this? I read it. I do have a copy.
14 MR. ARMSTRONG: I believe some
15 of the zoning ordinance sections that are an issue
16 for this particular PRD plan are Sections 155-110
17 of the zoning ordinance; 155-5.B of the zoning
18 ordinance; Sections 155-17.B.1 and 17.F.1; and
19 Section 155-16.J.4.C of the zoning ordinance with
20 respect to PRDs and where PRDs are permitted within
21 the township.
22 I believe this plan is proposing
23 a PRD application plan proposal within the C-1
24 District and there are certain provisions within
25 the zoning ordinance that appear to require PRDs,
5
1 if they are being proposed to be within an entirely
2 residential district. If you look through, like I
3 said, the Borton Lawson letter dated November 7th,
4 you can see Mr. Malkemes's review of the PRD plan.
5 And I guess without the
6 applicant here tonight and without a further time
7 extension, if the planning commission sees fit to
8 make a recommendation tonight based on the
9 information you have, in an effort to make sure the
10 board of supervisors can provide a timely public
11 hearing for that PRD application before the
12 expiration of the extension, which I believe is
13 January 31st of 2008, we can do that tonight or you
14 can wait.
15 MR. MILLER: What is the board's
16 pleasure on a situation like this?
17 MR. BAXTER: By waiting?
18 MR. ARMSTRONG: By waiting, it
19 would cut the board of supervisors somewhat close
20 to their timing, with respect to this public
21 hearing. A public hearing needs to be advertised,
22 needs to be provided with public notice. In the
23 event you make a recommendation -- I mean, if you
24 look through the Borton and Lawson letter, it looks
25 like the applicant's plans are pretty lacking in
6
1 some areas. And if the applicant, after, you
2 know -- if the planning commission does make a
3 recommendation tonight, and after that
4 recommendation the applicant wants to revise plans
5 and come back to the planning commission, the board
6 of supervisors can direct them at that point.
7 MR. MILLER: If we deny it
8 tonight --
9 MR. ARMSTRONG: You would be
10 recommending.
11 MR. MILLER: If we would be
12 recommending to the supervisors denial at this
13 point it doesn't cut them out of the picture. It
14 gives the supervisors a little breathing time to
15 have the revised plans come back in there. And
16 there is nobody here to represent them tonight, so
17 whatever the board's pleasure is at this point.
18 MR. BAXTER: Well, I would make
19 a motion to recommend to the board of supervisors
20 to deny the Pocono Manor Resort PRD plans received
21 on October 11th, based on the incompleteness of the
22 PRD plan and the deficiencies of that plan as set
23 forth in Ken Malkemes's letter dated November 7th,
24 2007, and because of the questions with the
25 compliance of the zoning ordinance, specifically
7
1 Sections 155-110; 155-5.B, regarding the
2 definitions of resort and gaming resort; Section
3 155-16.J.4.C; and Section 155-17.B.1 and 17.F1; and
4 pursuant to the zoning officer's correspondence
5 dated November 19, 2007.
6 MR. VANDERVLIET: Supported.
7 MR. MILLER: You've heard a
8 motion. Are there any questions on the motion?
9 This is only a recommendation to the supervisors.
10 They do what they wish at their end at this point.
11 MR. ARMSTRONG: The board of
12 supervisors will have to hold a public hearing on
13 this because it is a PRD.
14 MR. MILLER: We have a motion.
15 Do I hear a second?
16 MR. VANDERVLIET: Supported.
17 MR. MILLER: Ted made a second
18 on that. Any questions? All in favor of the
19 motion say aye.
20 MR. BAXTER: Aye.
21 MR. VANDERVLIET: Aye.
22 MRS. LAMBERTON: Aye.
23 MR. MILLER: Aye.
24 Okay. Under old business, Item
25 No. 2, Brodhead/McMichaels Creek Stormwater
8
1 Management Ordinance Act 167. We are going to have
2 a special meeting on this after the Holidays.
3 MR. ARMSTRONG: What my office
4 did is, we made some revisions based upon the
5 comments of the planning commission last month and
6 in the special work session that you had prior to
7 that. I think my office -- we forwarded it out
8 yesterday, some of you may have already gotten it,
9 it's basically just for you to review. It's a lot
10 to digest. I believe it's a 50 page ordinance.
11 It's fairly extensive and that's not including the
12 attachments from the county. So I believe there
13 was some discussion about setting another work
14 session to discuss it in more detail. That's
15 completely the prerogative of the planning
16 commission, whether you might want to do that.
17 At this point, since you just
18 received it yesterday, I think you should probably
19 take some time to digest it, look through it and
20 see the revisions that my office has made,
21 particularly with respect to the waivers and the
22 revisions to the buffer areas and some other areas
23 that were discussed.
24 MR. MILLER: I'll make a motion
25 that we have further review of this at our regular
9
1 January meeting and perhaps set a special meeting
2 at that point. Do I hear a second to that?
3 MR. BAXTER: Second.
4 MR. MILLER: Any discussion?
5 All in favor?
6 MR. BAXTER: Aye.
7 MR. VANDERVLIET: Aye.
8 MRS. LAMBERTON: Aye.
9 MR. MILLER: Aye.
10 Now we get into our open
11 projects. We'll try to get through this pretty
12 quickly if we can.
13 Arcadia Lot 100, New Ventures
14 Park and Arcadia Lot 110 of New Ventures Park.
15 MR. ARMSTRONG: Is there anyone
16 here from Arcadia?
17 I believe they have requested to
18 be tabled for this evening. I don't believe there
19 is any action really needed at this point. We do
20 have an extension, so we are fine on time.
21 MR. MILLER: Do we need a
22 motion?
23 MR. ARMSTRONG: No you do not.
24 MR. MILLER: Item C, Wee Wons
25 Day Care expansion. We do have somebody here.
10
1 MR. BRICK LINDER: Good evening.
2 My name is Brick Linder. I'm here tonight with
3 Cathy Guydish, owner of Wee Wons Day Care to
4 represent the project that's presently before you
5 to expand the day-care facility.
6 I believe we were last in before
7 you -- it might have been March or April of this
8 year.
9 MR. ARMSTRONG: It's been a
10 while.
11 MR. BRICK LINDER: It has been a
12 while.
13 If you like I can give you a
14 quick overview of what's happened since then, what
15 the project is about again or I can save you time
16 and move on, whatever you prefer.
17 MR. ARMSTRONG: I think the
18 planning commission would appreciate a quick
19 update. I know you were before the zoning hearing
20 board.
21 MR. BRICK LINDER: Correct.
22 MR. MILLER: Give us a brief run
23 through.
24 MR. BRICK LINDER: There was a
25 bit of confusion and some, I guess some
11
1 inconsistencies I'll call them, with the ordinance
2 and the project and whatnot, the zoning hearing
3 board and the zoning. We were before the zoning
4 hearing board earlier this year for a special
5 exception use application. We appeared before the
6 board, I don't know, three or four times perhaps,
7 and they rendered a decision at the end of May and
8 I think we got the written decision on the matter
9 in early June. They have five conditions of their
10 decision and I'll read them off to you. They are
11 rather brief.
12 "The applicant's request for a
13 special exception and variance from a 5 acre
14 requirement of Section 155-93.A is granted subject
15 to the following conditions:
16 "Number 1, no expansion of the
17 existing improvements for residential use.
18 "Number 2, the removal of the
19 proposed swimming pool from the plans.
20 "Number 3, no further expansion
21 of improvements for the facility unless the size of
22 the land area is increased to 5 acres.
23 "Number 4, the necessary
24 federal, state and local permits are obtained for
25 the proposed improvements, including all applicable
12
1 improvements," correction, "all applicable
2 approvals for encroachment into wetland areas."
3 And, "Number 5, that the
4 planning commission determine that a traffic impact
5 study should be required to evaluate the affects of
6 additional vehicular traffic related to the
7 proposed expansion."
8 MR. ARMSTRONG: That's from the
9 zoning hearing board decision dated May 24, 2007?
10 MR. BRICK LINDER: Correct.
11 As a result of that decision, we
12 have done the following: First off, we added the
13 decision to the notes for the restrictive covenants
14 on the drawing as Restrictive Covenant No. 6, on
15 Drawing Sheet No. 1. We've removed the swimming
16 pool from the plan as required by the zoning
17 hearing board. And we are in the process of
18 obtaining the necessary state, local and federal
19 permits, primarily the wetland encroachment permit.
20 There is wetland on the site. There have been
21 three areas of wetland identified, flagged and
22 survey located. Two of those areas, two of the
23 smallest areas are proposed to be filled in and we
24 have an application pending with the Army Corp of
25 Engineers and Pennsylvania Department of
13
1 Environmental Protection to fill those areas in.
2 And those permit applications are presently pending
3 and being processed by those agencies.
4 With that, I believe we have
5 fulfilled 1 through 4 of the zoning hearing board
6 decision. Number 5 states that the planning
7 commission should determine if a traffic impact
8 study should be required. And I guess that's one
9 matter of discussion we should talk about tonight.
10 And any other items, if the township or Bob has had
11 an opportunity to review at this point.
12 I spoke with Bob earlier this
13 week and I know he's busy and I know he hasn't had
14 an opportunity to review at that point. I don't
15 know if Bob has had the chance to go through
16 anything.
17 MR. McHALE: I just started it,
18 Brick.
19 MR. ARMSTRONG: So you did just
20 resubmit some additional information on the plans?
21 MR. BRICK LINDER: Yes. And we
22 have an application that's pending with the Monroe
23 County Conversation District for the erosion,
24 sediment and pollution control plan. We will be
25 coming back with planning modules for the sewage
14
1 disposal when all of that information and data is
2 received from the sewer company.
3 And, what else? I can tell you
4 we are -- this is for information only. It doesn't
5 have any bearing or impact to the present lay out.
6 We have seriously considered controlling the
7 stormwater with subsurface stormwater storage
8 underneath the parking lot. And we went as far
9 as -- we did a relatively detailed design, and we
10 approached some contractors to give us some pricing
11 on that in an effort to reduce the disturbance and
12 to open up the backyard for Cathy a little bit
13 more, however it turned out to be too cost
14 prohibitive. It's a very, very expensive
15 undertaking when compared to a surface storage
16 detention basin. I'm sure you're aware of these
17 new technologies, that include these infiltrators
18 and stone. We tried real hard to make that work
19 and it just -- we just couldn't do it.
20 So we still do meet your
21 ordinance in my view as far as release rates and
22 water quality and that stuff. It's just surface we
23 prefer to try to get, but -- and that kind of gave
24 us a little bit of a lag because I didn't want to
25 proceed with the E and S plans and all that stuff
15
1 if my stormwater layout design is going to
2 substantially change like that. So that's just an
3 informational thing. And other than that, if you
4 have any questions at this point, I'll answer them.
5 We've addressed I believe most of what Bob had in
6 his last report. We've addressed what the county's
7 planning commission has provided.
8 MR. MILLER: How about a traffic
9 study? What do you propose?
10 MR. BRICK LINDER: We propose
11 not to do one. We believe that we are still within
12 the limitations of our low volume highway occupancy
13 permit site. That is to be updated. And we've
14 provided in the revised submissions, some traffic
15 patterns. There is additional signage, although
16 there is a considerable amount of traffic control
17 signs that are already on the site, i.e., do not
18 enter, one way, you know, entrance, exit, things
19 like that. There are some new additions, there are
20 some signs that will label and identify the
21 buildings. Whatever Cathy chooses to name those
22 buildings, whether it's Building A or the Guydish
23 Building or the Miller Building, whatever those
24 names are, they will be named and there'll be
25 directional signs to direct traffic in those
16
1 locations.
2 There are do not enter signs
3 because the previous PennDOT permit was submitted
4 and approved to provide one-way in and one-way out
5 to the loop drive. Traffic comes in here and goes
6 out there. This is just an accessory parking lot
7 to support the new building just off to the right.
8 So that's our belief.
9 MR. BAXTER: How many additional
10 kids would you anticipate the addition is going to
11 end up accommodating?
12 MS. CATHY GUYDISH: I
13 guesstimate 85 to 95.
14 MR. BAXTER: Currently there are
15 about how many?
16 MS. CATHY GUYDISH: Our current
17 license is for 61. Now, it's based on square
18 footage per child.
19 MR. BAXTER: So there is 60 --
20 MS. CATHY GUYDISH: There is 61
21 currently on site at any time.
22 MR. MILLER: You think you will
23 go to 95 or add 95?
24 MS. CATHY GUYDISH: We are going
25 to add 95 in the new building.
17
1 MR. MILLER: That's more than
2 half the amount that's there today. You probably
3 would say the same thing for vehicles or traffic.
4 MR. BRICK LINDER: We have on
5 our drawing 61 existing and up to 100 new. Up to
6 161 total.
7 MR. McHALE: We can discuss this
8 with PennDOT as well, see what they say about the
9 numbers.
10 MR. BRICK LINDER: If it's your
11 desire, we can set up a meeting between the
12 township and PennDOT and us and see what comes out
13 of it or if you have any other thoughts. I know
14 there was a previous concern raised by the Lake
15 Naomi Club in terms of traffic. I'm not sure if
16 that--
17 MR. MILLER: Is that traffic
18 everyday throughout the year or is it mainly during
19 the school time of year?
20 MS. CATHY GUYDISH: I would say
21 it's everyday.
22 MR. MILLER: Everyday.
23 MR. BRICK LINDER: Weekdays.
24 MS. CATHY GUYDISH: Weekdays,
25 Monday through Friday.
18
1 MR. MILLER: Weekdays.
2 MR. BAXTER: So pretty much as
3 steady during the summer as during the school year?
4 MS. CATHY GUYDISH: Just about.
5 MR. MILLER: Well, I think a
6 meeting between the township engineer and PennDOT
7 to discuss this a little more for us, some input on
8 it. I mean, you know, it's a good project for the
9 town and if we can make it work, we really should
10 try to do that.
11 MR. BRICK LINDER: Okay. I'll
12 call Bob or email Bob and see if we can get some
13 times and dates and whatnot.
14 MR. MILLER: Okay.
15 MR. ARMSTRONG: In the meantime,
16 there is revised plans that there will be a review
17 letter in the near future, probably by next
18 meeting, so that the planning commission will be in
19 a better position to go through the plans when they
20 have a revised review letter, based upon your
21 revised plans that were recently submitted.
22 MR. BRICK LINDER: Okay.
23 MR. ARMSTRONG: Because I think
24 the last review letter was back in February of this
25 year.
19
1 MR. BRICK LINDER: It was before
2 the approval of the conditional use -- sorry, the
3 special exception use.
4 MR. ARMSTRONG: Are you still
5 requesting pretty much all the same waivers?
6 MR. BRICK LINDER: Yes.
7 MR. ARMSTRONG: Okay.
8 MR. BRICK LINDER: I think we
9 had provided some waiver letters.
10 MR. ARMSTRONG: Yes. I have
11 three in my file.
12 MR. BRICK LINDER: I don't
13 recall exactly what they were. Bear with me a
14 second. I can pull them out.
15 Do you have them?
16 MR. ARMSTRONG: Yes. I mean,
17 all of this will be in the review letter. Are you
18 planning on attending next month, I imagine?
19 MR. BRICK LINDER: Yes. If we
20 have comments to address, yes.
21 MR. MILLER: Do you think we'd
22 have some traffic information by next meeting?
23 MR. BRICK LINDER: I can't
24 promise you. I know I would prefer to have Brian
25 Boyer from PennDOT attend the meeting, the
20
1 Allentown District representative. Brian is
2 sometime a difficult person to schedule, but we can
3 try it.
4 MR. ARMSTRONG: Okay.
5 MR. MILLER: Okay. So, Pat, you
6 think we are to wait until we get some traffic
7 study information?
8 MR. ARMSTRONG: You don't have a
9 recent review letter. They just resubmitted the
10 plans. You need information on the traffic study.
11 MR. MILLER: Then we are better
12 off looking at it in the February meeting,
13 probably. You think that's doable?
14 MR. ARMSTRONG: Well, that's up
15 to the applicant.
16 MR. MILLER: I know that's up to
17 the applicant.
18 MR. ARMSTRONG: I think right
19 now we have an extension until February 28th of
20 '08. Does that sound right?
21 MR. McHALE: I think we'll have
22 a better handle by the January meeting. We can
23 have a discussion.
24 MR. BRICK LINDER: Is it
25 February that we have the extension until?
21
1 MR. ARMSTRONG: Yes.
2 MR. MILLER: So we don't need to
3 get anything tonight?
4 MR. ARMSTRONG: No.
5 MR. BRICK LINDER: I wasn't
6 sure.
7 MR. MILLER: Do we make a motion
8 to table this then, Pat?
9 MR. VANDERVLIET: So moved.
10 MR. MILLER: Ted made a motion.
11 Do I hear a second?
12 MR. BAXTER: I'll second it.
13 MR. MILLER: Discussion? All in
14 favor?
15 MR. VANDERVLIET: Aye.
16 MR. BAXTER: Aye.
17 MRS. LAMBERTON: Aye.
18 MR. MILLER: Aye.
19 Next one is Locust Ridge Quarry
20 Contractors Shop.
21 MR. ARMSTRONG: I believe
22 someone was here last month from Locust Ridge. I
23 think they are still considering weighing their
24 options with respect to the contractors shop plan.
25 We did just receive a revised time extension.
22
1 MR. MILLER: Okay. Do we need a
2 motion of any kind on this?
3 MR. ARMSTRONG: Table this.
4 MR. MILLER: Do I hear a motion
5 to table Locust Ridge Quarry Contractors Shop?
6 MR. BAXTER: So moved.
7 MRS. LAMBERTON: Second.
8 MR. MILLER: Any discussion?
9 All in favor?
10 MR. BAXTER: Aye.
11 MRS. LAMBERTON: Aye.
12 MR. VANDERVLIET: Aye.
13 MR. MILLER: Aye. Next item
14 would be Glorious Church Land Development Plan.
15 MR. ARMSTRONG: It's my
16 understanding that the board of supervisors'
17 solicitor is in communication with the applicant.
18 MR. MILLER: Okay. Do we table?
19 MR. ARMSTRONG: Yes, you can
20 table.
21 MR. MILLER: Do I hear a motion
22 to table?
23 MR. BAXTER: So moved.
24 MR. VANDERVLIET: Second.
25 MR. MILLER: Discussion? In
23
1 favor?
2 MR. BAXTER: Aye.
3 MR. VANDERVLIET: Aye.
4 MRS. LAMBERTON: Aye.
5 MR. MILLER: Aye.
6 Next item, Glorious Church
7 Conditional Use Application.
8 MR. ARMSTRONG: Same. They are
9 entwined.
10 MR. MILLER: Motion to table.
11 MR. VANDERVLIET: So moved.
12 MR. BAXTER: Second.
13 MR. MILLER: Discussion? All in
14 favor?
15 MR. VANDERVLIET: Aye.
16 MR. BAXTER: Aye.
17 MRS. LAMBERTON: Aye.
18 MR. MILLER: Aye.
19 Next item, Lands of Elaine
20 Brockett, Final Land Development.
21 MR. ARMSTRONG: Anyone here for
22 Elaine Brockett?
23 We are okay. I don't think we
24 had any revised plans submitted since the last
25 review letter.
24
1 MR. MILLER: Do we table?
2 Do I hear a motion to table
3 Lands of Elaine Brockett?
4 MR. VANDERVLIET: So moved.
5 MR. BAXTER: Second.
6 MR. MILLER: Discussion? All in
7 favor?
8 MR. VANDERVLIET: Aye.
9 MR. BAXTER: Aye.
10 MRS. LAMBERTON: Aye.
11 MR. MILLER: New business. Item
12 1, we have received time waivers for Locust Ridge
13 Contractors Shop, Wee Wons, Arcadia, New Ventures
14 Lot 100 and Arcadia New Ventures Lot 110.
15 Next item under new business is
16 Kevin Callahan Site Specific revised land
17 development plan.
18 MS. DEANNA SCHMOYER: This is
19 actually -- we had received engineering comments
20 but we are not going to address the comments. We
21 just kind of wanted to give you an update about the
22 project.
23 This is a previously approved
24 plan. It was in front of the board before and it's
25 approved plans of Kevin Callahan. What had
25
1 happened is there was a discrepancy in the survey,
2 so the property line has actually changed. The
3 original property line that was on the other land
4 development plan is in the red. The new property
5 line is in green. So it actually reduced the
6 property significantly. So due to the changes in
7 property line, we've altered the layout of the
8 parking and proposed building.
9 Basically, we are doing the same
10 thing. It's still a proposal of a storage
11 building. The existing building that was up in the
12 front will now need to be demolished because
13 parking will have to go in the front now. So what
14 was proposed is just add an office in the front of
15 the proposed storage building. The original office
16 space that was proposed in the existing building
17 was -- I think it was almost double or around ten
18 hundred square feet or something. Now we are
19 proposing about 768 square feet. It's the same
20 storage building area of 2400 square feet. We just
21 shifted it back a little bit. Then we put the
22 parking in the front and I think originally the
23 parking was on the side of the proposed building.
24 MR. McHALE: Deanna, originally,
25 as I recall, the existing residence was going to
26
1 remain and you were going to use that as part of
2 the office space. And I think an employee was
3 going to be able to reside there. Is that what
4 you're thinking with this or just strictly office?
5 MS. DEANNA SCHMOYER: Yes. Now
6 my understanding is it's just going to be for
7 office only and for storage.
8 MR. ARMSTRONG: Did it affect
9 the impervious surface calculations at all?
10 MR. McHALE: They did the
11 stormwater calculations over again and they took
12 that into account.
13 MS. DEANNA SCHMOYER: I think
14 the detention basin was originally on the side. We
15 pulled it on this side in the back. But, yeah,
16 everything has been recalculated that way.
17 The parking spaces I think are
18 the same. If anything, I think one less is
19 actually required because the size of the office
20 space has gone down.
21 MR. McHALE: On the south side I
22 believe you all added some additional landscaping
23 to kind of screen the property adjacent to --
24 MS. DEANNE SCHMOYER: Right
25 here?
27
1 MR. McHALE: Yes. I don't
2 believe that was required. I think that was a
3 suggestion the planning commission had made. And
4 you all were kind enough to put that on the plan
5 and it helps the buffer because that property
6 adjacent to is being used as a residence right now,
7 even though it's zoned commercial.
8 You might want to touch base on
9 the back portion of the property because originally
10 you all had a 25 foot buffer and that buffer was
11 not to be touched, use the existing landscaping
12 that's there, existing vegetation, and then you
13 were going to supplement that I believe with some
14 vegetation. What's happening now, with the
15 configuration of the basin, the lot has reduced
16 significantly, I guess by about two tenths or 15
17 hundredths of an acre.
18 MS. DEANNE SCHMOYER: Yes. I
19 think we are around a little less than half an acre
20 now.
21 MR. McHALE: And what's
22 happening is that that stormwater basin and berm,
23 which it's not a big basin, we are talking maybe a
24 couple of feet on the back side, but it does
25 encroach into what would be a 25-foot buffer. In
28
1 order to compensate for that, perhaps additional
2 landscaping could be provided because I don't know
3 how you're going to fit all that stormwater in
4 there, with the configuration of the site, what
5 you're left with and still accomplish kind of a
6 buffer that stays in the existing natural state.
7 MS. DEANNE SCHMOYER: Is that
8 what you're looking at when you made the comment
9 regarding the buffer in the back?
10 MR. McHALE: Yes.
11 MS. DEANNE SCHMOYER: Okay. So
12 if you're saying if we go with additional
13 landscaping --
14 MR. McHALE: That's up to the
15 planning commission. You might want to explain
16 what you're doing. Do you have a landscaping plan
17 with you?
18 MS. DEANNE SCHMOYER:
19 Actually --
20 MR. MILLER: That's permitted in
21 the buffer, the basin?
22 MR. McHALE: Well, it basically
23 speaks to not having any use other than just what's
24 there. I think a sign is allowed to go in there.
25 But we have allowed this in the past. There is a
29
1 project on 940 where they were tight on the
2 position of the building and such and the setbacks,
3 and there was a modification I believe that was
4 given to that, very similar to what we are looking
5 at here.
6 MR. ARMSTRONG: The SALDO does
7 not permit someone to use the buffer areas as a
8 detention basin, so it would be part of the
9 required waiver request.
10 MR. MILLER: Waiver request, but
11 we'd have to require the heavier screening between
12 the basin and the property line.
13 MR. McHALE: To help compensate
14 for that.
15 MS. DEANNA SCHMOYER: Yes. I
16 think originally what we were proposing is rows in
17 the back here. And I know you had made the comment
18 about that. I think we are proposing six to seven
19 feet high Douglas firs and I think we had about six
20 across the back. It is going to be a pretty tight
21 squeeze for the detention pond. We were looking at
22 maybe trying to shift it, but I don't know -- it's
23 something we have to really look at. If we didn't
24 have to, we'd rather not try to do that. Like I
25 said, I don't know if it's going to work anyway, so
30
1 if there is a recommendation for us to add some
2 more landscaping, I don't know if the client would
3 be okay with that. Kevin --
4 MR. KEVIN CALLAHAN: One comment
5 that came up earlier, we looked at doing
6 underground stormwater detention. Soil analysis
7 unfortunately came back negative on that and
8 wouldn't allow us to do it. We are looking -- now
9 that area in the back, backs up to the street that
10 comes in Greenwood Acres I guess. It's pretty
11 thick stuff back there. I challenge anybody to try
12 to walk from my property back to Greenwood Acres.
13 MR. McHALE: The concern that we
14 enter into, I guess, Kevin, is that if you don't
15 show the buffer and have it addressed on your
16 portion of the property, yours is the commercial
17 property that is adjoining the residential, and so
18 you need to protect that residential. They could
19 come in some day and cut all their vegetation down
20 right to your property line, then there would be no
21 buffer if you didn't address it. But that's all we
22 were asking, to supplement what you are already
23 showing and still show the buffer. But, remember,
24 the vegetation would compensate for that 25 foot
25 wide strip that would normally remain in its
31
1 existing condition. That's all I'm saying is
2 that -- help compensate for that, so that in the
3 event Greenwood Acres, they cut down their
4 vegetation next to the road, you still have
5 adequate buffer.
6 MS. DEANNA SCHMOYER: Okay.
7 MR. KEVIN CALLAHAN: Is that
8 what's up there now?
9 MS. DEANNA SCHMOYER: Yes. The
10 Douglas firs.
11 MR. KEVIN CALLAHAN: Originally,
12 yeah. I'm all right with doing that.
13 MR. McHALE: It may be something
14 where you add a couple more if you can do it and
15 then in between the spacing of those trees and
16 maybe some other evergreen type shrubs that would
17 help, you know, buffer that.
18 MR. MILLER: What we request is
19 block it as much as possible.
20 MS. DEANNE SCHMOYER: Okay. We
21 can do that. No problem.
22 MR. MILLER: Any questions from
23 the board on that?
24 MR. ARMSTRONG: I guess the one
25 other thing -- I'm just looking at his letter. I
32
1 note the township engineer's letter and I know you
2 said you were going to address it, but the one with
3 respect to the note on the plan, having warehousing
4 and distribution, you are aware it's not permitted
5 in the zoning district that it's in?
6 MS. DEANNA SCHMOYER: That was
7 actually a typo. Because originally -- it's
8 storage is what it is. It's only office and
9 storage. I think we stated it on the site part,
10 but it was in the notes that it was termed as
11 warehouse.
12 MR. McHALE: Is your HOP -- is
13 the permit for the driveway you're showing the same
14 as what you applied for previously or you have to
15 resubmit for that?
16 MS. DEANNA SCHMOYER: It's
17 actually shifted about 10 feet and we had
18 discussion with PennDOT about it. Originally we
19 thought it only shifted about 3 to 5 feet or
20 something. They said you were okay with it. We
21 just want to clarify, so we'll have to talk to them
22 again about it. But originally they were okay with
23 it, to keep the same permit. So I have to get back
24 to you on that one, I guess.
25 MR. MILLER: Anything else from
33
1 the board here?
2 Do I hear a motion then to
3 table? How are we on time?
4 MR. ARMSTRONG: It was just
5 submitted, so the time starts from tonight, 90 days
6 from tonight.
7 MR. MILLER: It's a complete
8 plan?
9 MR. McHALE: Yes.
10 MR. MILLER: Do we have to
11 accept it as a complete plan?
12 MR. McHALE: I believe we
13 already did that previously.
14 MR. ARMSTRONG: Just make a
15 motion to table.
16 MR. MILLER: Do I hear a motion
17 to table?
18 MR. VANDERVLIET: So moved to
19 table.
20 MR. MILLER: Do I hear a second?
21 MRS. LAMBERTON: Second.
22 MR. MILLER: Discussion? All in
23 favor?
24 MR. VANDERVLIET: Aye.
25 MRS. LAMBERTON: Aye.
34
1 MR. BAXTER: Aye.
2 MR. MILLER: Aye.
3 MR. ARMSTRONG: The revised
4 stormwater maintenance agreement?
5 MS. DEANNA SCHMOYER: Yes. We
6 have to do that.
7 MR. MILLER: Last but not least,
8 Blakeslee Pharmacy.
9 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: Hello.
10 Sarah Bue-Morris.
11 We have a comment letter. We
12 will be addressing the comments, but I wanted to
13 explain the new project to you tonight anyway.
14 MR. ARMSTRONG: You mean you're
15 going to be addressing them in the future?
16 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: Yes.
17 Basically the plan was approved in April of 2005,
18 and during construction, some revisions have been
19 made to the plan. So we are actually kind of
20 creating an as-built with a few additional
21 revisions that the client wanted to make. I have
22 brought the plan that was approved down here. And
23 this is the plan as it is right now. Now, having
24 said that, what we did is we took this plan and we
25 modified it, but we are getting an as built
35
1 hopefully this week, and so that the surveyor is
2 actually going to pick up everything as it is right
3 now. So you will be seeing a little bit different
4 plan because this is based on the original Pasonick
5 survey that was done about 10 years ago, before the
6 building was started.
7 All right. The modifications,
8 Bob did list all nine of them in his letter on the
9 top of page 2. The first one is, if you can see
10 right here, this was the actual woods line before
11 and that woods has been taken down. As a matter of
12 fact, those trees are no longer here. So what we
13 are proposing is evergreens all along here, a
14 couple here and then deciduous trees in here to
15 make it look nice. Okay.
16 Also, rather than put evergreens
17 along here, because this is also commercial up
18 here, we are planning on putting deciduous
19 flowering trees up front for the aesthetics.
20 Still, back here is going to be the same
21 evergreens, because this back here is residential.
22 The zoning boundary is right here, which is why
23 this tree right there is an evergreen.
24 Additional pavement has been
25 added to the plans. You can see right here, the
36
1 pavement originally was going to go around like
2 this and it didn't. They just brought it down.
3 They also extended it a little bit further and put
4 in a sidewalk back here. There is an emergency
5 door here. And David Murphy just told me tonight
6 this is also an emergency door here. And they are
7 probably also going to extend the sidewalk to it.
8 The other change was that in
9 the parking lot, the islands would be grass with a
10 few plants in them and they paved the whole thing.
11 They want the islands for snow removal.
12 MR. ARMSTRONG: Where were the
13 islands supposed to be?
14 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: The
15 islands are still there. They are here, here, here
16 and one here. It's mainly where the lampposts are.
17 It's just that they were originally going to be
18 grass with plants. They didn't move in location.
19 They just got paved.
20 MR. MILLER: The islands are
21 paved?
22 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: Yes, so
23 they can pile the snow there around the light
24 poles.
25 MR. BAXTER: So they are not
37
1 really islands?
2 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: Well,
3 they are striped out so you can't park there.
4 MR. BAXTER: But there is no
5 curbing around there.
6 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: There is
7 no curbs anywhere on this site. Even the entrance,
8 the existing entrance building doesn't have any
9 curbing. This green area here is actually walkway.
10 It's paved right up to the planter. This is the
11 existing building.
12 So basically what we are doing
13 here is doing the same thing. We are having
14 planters here and then the walkway is only in the
15 front of the building.
16 Also the parking lot striping
17 and access ramp to the building have been modified.
18 I don't have it with me, but originally we were
19 planning on ramping down right here, but what the
20 contractor did was adjust the building elevation so
21 that the ramp was eliminated. It just means there
22 is not as much area -- if the water starts backing
23 up during a heavy rain event, there is not the
24 ramp.
25 Okay. The split railing.
38
1 Originally we had proposed split rail fencing
2 around this existing basin. What they have done is
3 actually placed stone and in between the large
4 stones they are going to have landscaping. The
5 landscaping will have to be inverted rather than
6 piled up because the water gets into this basin by
7 sheet flow across the parking lot.
8 The access rights to Maple Road
9 are to be memorialized, and I have a copy of what
10 was recorded today as well as the recorder's
11 receipt. And I'll get you a copy of that tomorrow
12 because this is the only copy -- it's actually the
13 original. He didn't have another copy.
14 MR. McHALE: Okay.
15 MR. ARMSTRONG: What was
16 recorded?
17 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: An
18 easement that gives him the right to use this
19 private road.
20 MR. ARMSTRONG: Right. There
21 may be needed supplemental information to that. If
22 it's the same thing that I received this past week,
23 there may be some changes needed to it, but if it's
24 already been recorded --
25 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: It's
39
1 already been recorded.
2 MR. ARMSTRONG: Chances are the
3 applicant may have to execute another similar
4 agreement, but another agreement may need to be
5 recorded in the future in compliance with this
6 plan.
7 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: Okay.
8 MR. ARMSTRONG: Could you send
9 me a copy of that? Are you sending a copy of that
10 to the township?
11 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: Yes.
12 MS. HAASE: There is the
13 agreement -- actually, Mr. Murphy, was that the
14 agreement that Mr. Blakeslee signed last month?
15 MR. DAVID MURPHY: That's a new
16 one.
17 MS. HAASE: That was the copy
18 that we received blank, without signatures. It's
19 not this one either.
20 MR. DAVID MURPHY: Sarah has it.
21 I can show it to you.
22 MR. ARMSTRONG: Just be sure to
23 send an executed copy to the township and the
24 township will forward it to my office and the board
25 of supervisors' solicitor's office. We'll review
40
1 it and if we think there needs to be additional
2 information or a revision, it'll need to be made
3 with this plan prior to any kind of an approval.
4 Okay.
5 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: The
6 entrance and exit signage has been added here and
7 it's illuminated. Originally we were just going to
8 paint arrows.
9 And the last thing is that the
10 additional storage volume was provided. Originally
11 we were just doing a little basin like this, but
12 what's happened is we are now berming up here and
13 berming up here, so that the basin will actually
14 flood this entire area. It actually makes it
15 better, makes it larger, so that it will hold water
16 longer.
17 MR. ARMSTRONG: I don't want to
18 trip you up, but back to the split rail fencing, I
19 guess show on the plan -- where was it supposed to
20 be, just around that corner?
21 MR. McHALE: It's the same
22 location that the boulders are is where the
23 splits --
24 MR. ARMSTRONG: So the boulders
25 are basically taking its place?
41
1 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: Yes. Can
2 you see it right here?
3 MR. McHALE: On the north and
4 west side.
5 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: The main
6 reason we did it is because the basin is right up
7 against the pavement. We don't want anybody to
8 back up and end up in the basin. The boulders will
9 serve the same purpose.
10 MR. BAXTER: So is most of the
11 drainage going to go into that basin or is it
12 coming over?
13 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: When I
14 get the survey, the new as-built survey, I'll know
15 exactly where everything is going. Originally it
16 was planned that this half of the building and this
17 area here will all drain this way, as well as the
18 front of this building, but this building actually
19 drains all back this way and there is a swale now
20 in here that drains this back to here. And this
21 half of this building -- actually, this building
22 tends to go back here and it will come around. But
23 when I get the survey, I'll know a little bit
24 better for sure. One of the things Bob's asked for
25 is revised stormwater details.
42
1 MR. VANDERVLIET: If you don't
2 know the direction, how do you know the size?
3 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: It was
4 based on the original design and the original
5 survey by Pasonick.
6 MR. ARMSTRONG: You said you're
7 going to address all of the comments from
8 Mr. McHale's recent letter and provide revisions
9 after tonight sometime.
10 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: Yes. Is
11 there any other questions?
12 MR. BAXTER: So you think the
13 survey and everything, the as built will be done
14 and be here at the next meeting?
15 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: I hope
16 so. But then I was supposed to get it the third
17 and today's the fifth and I haven't gotten it yet.
18 The information that I have to add onto it
19 hopefully will be minor, but a week turn around is
20 not much.
21 MR. ARMSTRONG: Who is the
22 attorney for the applicant?
23 MR. DAVID MURPHY: Geff Blake.
24 MR. ARMSTRONG: Do you have his
25 contact information?
43
1 MR. DAVID MURPHY: You want a
2 phone number?
3 MR. ARMSTRONG: That will be
4 fine.
5 If you know his firm, I could
6 probably find it that way too.
7 MR. DAVID MURPHY: I have it. I
8 just had to turn my phone on. Work number,
9 961-1166, same area code.
10 MR. ARMSTRONG: 570?
11 MR. DAVID MURPHY: Correct.
12 MR. ARMSTRONG: What I'm going
13 to do is I'm probably going to give him a call
14 about that.
15 MR. DAVID MURPHY: G-e-f-f.
16 MR. ARMSTRONG: Oh, it's
17 G-e-f-f. I'm going to give him a call about that
18 right away, that it'll be submitted to the
19 township, the executed copy.
20 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: The
21 right-of-way agreement was written by the surveyor,
22 wasn't it?
23 MR. DAVID MURPHY: I don't know.
24 I think Geff tweaked it.
25 MR. ARMSTRONG: The actual
44
1 right-of-way agreement should have been written by
2 the attorney, but the actual legal description,
3 which is probably an attachment of that, was
4 probably done by the surveyor.
5 MR. DAVID MURPHY: I don't know
6 if he did it by border or not. I didn't read it,
7 which one it is, but if he did it by property
8 border, I know that's a legal road description. I
9 don't know if that's how it was done or not.
10 MR. ARMSTRONG: I'll have to
11 call your attorney and look at the agreement once I
12 receive it and see if it's adequate. I think there
13 is also the possibility of a needed maintenance
14 agreement for that road.
15 MR. McHALE: Can that be
16 combined?
17 MR. ARMSTRONG: Yes. That's the
18 reason there may need to be a revision or changes
19 to that because there is a possibility that can
20 just be combined into one document.
21 MR. DAVID MURPHY: I don't
22 understand that.
23 MR. ARMSTRONG: From my
24 understanding, this is just a right-of-way
25 agreement that was recorded, but there also needs
45
1 to be some kind of an agreement, like a maintenance
2 agreement for the road so someone's maintaining it
3 in a condition.
4 MR. DAVID MURPHY: The owner has
5 not. It's shared by the people in the back.
6 MR. ARMSTRONG: Okay, well,
7 that's something we have to look at and consider
8 and make sure that there is --
9 MR. DAVID MURPHY: You may want
10 to talk to the residents back there. I maintain it
11 just out of good faith.
12 MR. ARMSTRONG: That's very
13 good, but there needs to be something in there to
14 ensure someone is maintaining that.
15 MR. DAVID MURPHY: It doesn't
16 exist. It's three neighbors. They just chip in
17 for snow plowing. That's the maintenance.
18 MR. ARMSTRONG: It would just
19 need to be illustrated in a document. I'm going to
20 call your attorney, Geff Blake, we'll see what we
21 can come up with. Okay?
22 MR. MILLER: Any other questions
23 from the board? We are okay timewise to table?
24 MR. ARMSTRONG: Yes. You just
25 submitted the plan, right?
46
1 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: Yes.
2 MR. ARMSTRONG: So the time
3 starts from tonight.
4 MR. MILLER: Do I hear a motion
5 to table?
6 MR. VANDERVLIET: So moved.
7 MR. BAXTER: Second.
8 MR. MILLER: Further discussion?
9 All in favor say aye.
10 MR. VANDERVLIET: Aye.
11 MR. BAXTER: Aye.
12 MRS. LAMBERTON: Aye.
13 MR. MILLER: Aye.
14 MS. SARAH BUE-MORRIS: Bob, I
15 have one question. On the Shikhman's request from
16 PennDOT to obtain comments on the HOP, are you
17 handling that or is that going to come to the
18 planning commission?
19 MR. McHALE: I put a call into
20 PennDOT. I'm waiting to hear back from them, so we
21 can talk. But we'll bring that before the planning
22 commission.
23 MR. DAVID MURPHY: I have a
24 question also. We are dealing with this as an as
25 built. When we were here last time we were talking
47
1 about the final topcoat has not been put on. I had
2 agreed to bond that. That will alter -- and that
3 is going to be what in the end will shift the water
4 runoff. So I don't know -- you tell me if the as
5 built is appropriate for today or not, because
6 there will be an inch and a half of fine top put on
7 and that will be the final piece that will direct
8 that water.
9 MR. McHALE: Generally, whatever
10 is there now in a binder surface condition will
11 direct the water. I mean that extra inch and a
12 half will be uniformly graded throughout the site.
13 MR. DAVID MURPHY: That's not
14 what my black topper told me. He's a professional.
15 I don't know that. I'm just telling you what he
16 said.
17 MR. McHALE: So he's not going
18 to pave it uniformly an inch and a half?
19 MR. DAVID MURPHY: He may go up
20 to two and a half.
21 MR. McHALE: So he's going to
22 try to force the water in a different direction?
23 MR. DAVID MURPHY: The direction
24 it needs to go. He's not trying to push it --
25 MR. McHALE: That's good
48
1 information to know because otherwise Sarah might
2 have been working towards doing some calculations
3 on the as built not the final.
4 MR. DAVID MURPHY: We can
5 continue with that as built by doing exactly what
6 you said.
7 MR. McHALE: Let's look at it
8 and see what the patterns are on the site and if
9 they model close, very close to what was the
10 original design, then there isn't going to be a lot
11 to deal with. But if it's significantly different,
12 then the basin may not be sized properly.
13 MR. DAVID MURPHY: I don't want
14 to hear this summer I need another as built.
15 That's where I'm thinking.
16 MR. McHALE: I understand.
17 MR. MILLER: Any other public
18 comment? I'd like to thank Wendi for your
19 beautiful calenders.
20 MS. WENDI FREEMAN: You're
21 welcome.
22 Actually, I would like to make a
23 comment, if that's okay?
24 MR. MILLER: Yes, please.
25 MS. WENDI FREEMAN: Wendi
49
1 Freeman, Lake Naomi Club.
2 I just want to again go on
3 record with the planning commission. We spoke to
4 you when the Wee Wons Day Care expansion came in
5 back in January. We also attended the zoning
6 hearing for the special exception. And I just
7 wanted to say that while we are in full support of
8 the Wee Wons expansion, it's a wonderful facility,
9 it's a positive contribution to the community, the
10 Lake Naomi Club is concerned about the
11 configuration of the parking lot and the back of
12 the traffic that the increased occupancy may
13 produce. Adding 95 more possible parent drop offs
14 between 7 and 9 a.m. could seriously affect the
15 traffic there. If you check the plan, there is not
16 that many more parking spaces being added and of
17 all the parking spaces being added, I anticipate
18 that there will be an increase in staffing. We
19 watch it every morning, and as it stands now, the
20 staff double parks six in three spots and then the
21 parents pull up and they double park and they drop
22 off.
23 We just really want to state
24 that we hope that the traffic study does continue
25 to be required. I'd hate to see a child get hurt
50
1 over there. But, again, we are in support of the
2 project.
3 MR. McHALE: It would be
4 beneficial to have Lake Naomi attend the meeting
5 with PennDOT.
6 MS. WENDI FREEMAN: We would
7 absolutely be happy to.
8 MR. MILLER: The traffic study
9 would determine those kinds of things that Wendi is
10 talking about, correct?
11 MR. McHALE: It should show some
12 of those things, but something like the -- that's
13 kind of unique -- is the drop off and the way they
14 go about dropping off the children. That has an
15 affect on what gets backed up or queued into the
16 state right of way. But PennDOT is going to need
17 to take a hard look at that as well. The number of
18 trips should be proportionate to whatever they are
19 expanding by, but how they drop them off -- because
20 the entrance and exit stays the same on the
21 drawing. And people will have to go back into kind
22 of a dead end area to drop off children near the
23 new building and then circulate out somehow.
24 They're going to have to back and turn around and
25 get back out again. So it's kind of an awkward
51
1 maneuver that's going to have to occur there,
2 that's why I wanted to get with PennDOT, talk to
3 them, not only, you know, what are the trips being
4 generated and how is it going to impact locally the
5 access driveways, but rather how are they really
6 going to queue this thing out as far as when they
7 are dropping off students, children.
8 MR. MILLER: Don't you have the
9 same pick-up situation at the end of the day?
10 MR. McHALE: Yes.
11 MS. WENDI FREEMAN: And then it
12 starts around 4:30 and it goes until about 6:30.
13 And it's worse at night, especially right now,
14 because you can't see, the cars are running, the
15 exhaust is coming out. It can be, you know, a
16 safety situation.
17 MR. McHALE: I think PennDOT
18 would be receptive to having their input because
19 these are observations that you make at these peak
20 hours that are very important, and just mere
21 traffic count numbers may not provide that kind
22 of --
23 MS. WENDI FREEMAN: I agree.
24 And like you said about the way they come in and
25 out now, and now the new parking lot is way over
52
1 here, the queue to drop them off is up in front of
2 the building. So unless they move the exit down
3 there, down further where I doubt PennDOT would
4 allow it because it's a blind curve, I think it's a
5 sticky situation. I think there is a solution. I
6 think they have to find, you know, a better drop
7 off and pick up situation.
8 MR. ARMSTRONG: I would also
9 keep in contact with the township to know when they
10 are going to be on the agenda before the planning
11 commission, before the board of supervisors, so you
12 can express your concerns. I know you're
13 expressing them tonight, but this is not a
14 recommendation tonight. By next month or the month
15 after, when there is a recommendation, we may
16 recall that you were here, you made some comments,
17 but we may not recall the specific concerns that
18 you had.
19 MS. WENDI FREEMAN: I would be
20 happy to.
21 MS. HAASE: I think it's also a
22 unique situation that these students are two,
23 three, four and five year olds. So, therefore, the
24 parent is going to have to park the car, walking
25 the child in, versus and eight or nine or 10 year
53
1 old saying I'll see you after school, mom. I think
2 it's a little different situation.
3 MR. BAXTER: You actually have
4 to go in and sign your child in and sign them out.
5 MS. HAASE: It's not a matter of
6 shooing them out of the car and --
7 MR. BAXTER: The parent has to
8 get out of the car, walk into the building, both at
9 drop off and pick up, so that leaves the car
10 outside running. As you were saying, the parent is
11 just going to stop the car where it is, run in the
12 building and come back out.
13 MR. MILLER: It's a hard thing
14 if you're going to do 150 cars like that.
15 MS. WENDI FREEMAN: It is a
16 significant increase in the number of children that
17 are going in and out.
18 MS. HAASE: Wendi, once we
19 confirm the meeting, I'll email you and also call
20 you.
21 MS. WENDI FREEMAN: I appreciate
22 that. Thank you.
23 MR. ARMSTRONG: The only other
24 thing that's not on the agenda, I submitted -- we
25 discussed briefly revision to the zoning ordinance
54
1 with respect to churches and places of worship last
2 month. I made those revisions. You have copies of
3 it. We don't need to discuss it tonight. Just
4 take it home, review it, and then next month, if
5 you're ready to either make a recommendation on it
6 or tell my office to make some more changes, we can
7 address that next month.
8 MR. MILLER: Okay.
9 That could be on the agenda, so
10 we don't forget.
11 MS. HAASE: If you wish.
12 MR. MILLER: Anything else
13 before the board? Hear a motion for adjournment.
14 MR. BAXTER: So moved.
15 MR. MILLER: Hear a second?
16 MR. VANDERVLIET: Second.
17 MR. MILLER: All favor?
18 MR. BAXTER: Aye.
19 MR. VANDERVLIET: Aye.
20 MRS. LAMBERTON: Aye.
21 MR. MILLER: Aye.
22 (Meeting concluded at 8:05 p.m.)
23 ---
24
25
55
1
2
3
4
5
6
7 I hereby certify that the
8 proceedings and evidence are contained fully and
9 accurately in the notes taken by me at the hearing
10 in the above matter, to the best of my ability; and
11 that the foregoing is a true and correct transcript
12 of the same.
13
14
15
16 JOSEPHINE HOLLMAN, C.R.
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25