Before
THE TOBYHANNA TOWNSHIP PLANNING COMMISSION
---
In Re: Regular Business Meeting
---
Tobyhanna Township Government Center Building
State Avenue
Pocono Pines, Pennsylvania 18350
Thursday, June 10, 2010 beginning at 7:00 p.m.
---
PRESENT: JOSEPH MILLER, Vice-Chairperson
ANNE LAMBERTON, Board Member
PATRICIA M. RINEHIMER, Board Member
ROBERT McHALE, P.E., Township Engineer
PATRICK ARMSTRONG, ESQUIRE, Solicitor
---
_________________________________________________________
PANKO REPORTING
537 Sarah Street, 2nd Floor
Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania 18360
(570) 421-3620
2
1 MR. MILLER: Okay. I'll call to order
2 the Tobyhanna Township Planning Commission regular
3 meeting, June 10, 2010.
4 First item is, any public comment at
5 this point?
6 Next thing, the minutes of May
7 6, 2010. Comments? Revisions? Corrections?
8 MS. LAMBERTON: No.
9 MR. MILLER: No?
10 MS. LAMBERTON: We're good to go.
11 MR. MILLER: Do I hear a motion to
12 approve the minutes of May 6?
13 MS. LAMBERTON: I'll make that motion.
14 MR. MILLER: Do I hear a second?
15 MS. RINEHIMER: I'll second.
16 MR. MILLER: All in favor?
17 THE BOARD: Aye.
18 MR. MILLER: New business, McElroy
19 consolidation.
20 Did you want to go into that now, Bob?
21 MR. McHALE: Yes, please.
22 MR. MILLER: Can you enlighten us,
23 Bob, on that?
24 MR. McHALE: Yes. Mr. Jim Hendricks
25 is here tonight from HRG and he's going to present the
3
1 modification with the original plan that was reviewed by
2 the planning commission and recommended to the board of
3 supervisors. They simply had five existing lots that were
4 being consolidated into one lot for the restaurant and the
5 retail space.
6 What they're considering now is just
7 to draw a line between the two so they could be separated
8 at some point in time with this approved subdivision. If
9 they wanted to sell independently, they could. They'll
10 have cross access easements -- Jim will go into all of
11 that -- sewer easement, the parking and the wells, all
12 those items, utilities, will all be -- they'll stand alone
13 for the most part.
14 So, Jim?
15 MR. MILLER: You have the floor.
16 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: Thank you,
17 commissioners. I very much appreciate the opportunity to
18 be here tonight. I know that some people rearranged
19 schedules and things and I want to express my gratitude
20 and my -- my applicant -- excuse me, my client's
21 gratitude, also.
22 We have the minor subdivision plan
23 that we're proposing before you. The difference in this
24 plan and the one that you recommended for approval last
25 year was that this line is now a property line. Before we
4
1 were combining these five lots into one lot, as Bob
2 said. And we recently had discussions regarding --
3 divided it into two separate parcels, one for the
4 restaurant and one for the retail center, which could
5 actually stand alone. And there was some benefit of
6 future ownership doing that, so HRG coordinated with Bob
7 McHale and we did some research on the zoning requirements
8 and the ordinances and determined that that was a feasible
9 thing to do, to divide this into two lots.
10 The -- the revisions that we needed to
11 make incorporated some changes to the easement language,
12 some of the covenants that were on the cover sheet of the
13 land development plan need to be revised and the easements
14 on this plan as well.
15 We were --
16 MR. ARMSTRONG: When you say easement,
17 what type of easements?
18 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: We needed to
19 provide a cross access easement. We already had easement
20 language on the covenants providing access to -- for the
21 township, in favor of the township, for storm water
22 maintenance and utilities. When we divide this into two
23 parcels, we now need to provide cross access easement
24 for -- to benefit both owners. Also storm water
25 management easements and revise the language so that the
5
1 township has easements on both properties that are now
2 distinct and separate.
3 MR. ARMSTRONG: Okay. So there's
4 going to be one access point?
5 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: Actually there's
6 two access points. There's one on Fern Crest and one on
7 115. And I know that it's been a while since you've seen
8 this plan and what I can do is pull up the site plan
9 and -- that you see what the change is there --
10 MR. McHALE: I think -- I think you
11 can just tag the site plan, it will pull it up and you can
12 leave that up. There you go.
13 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: When we
14 originally proposed this land development plan, we had two
15 wells on the site, one serving each building. And one
16 well was located here for the restaurant, the other well
17 was located there in that island for the retail center,
18 which is on the left. We had access on 115 in and out
19 here, and there's an access on Fern Crest Avenue.
20 The HOP plans involve extending the
21 road widening that was done by Keswick Pointe well beyond
22 Fern Crest Avenue here and upgrading the intersection and
23 widening Fern Crest. So we're widening both. We have
24 dual left turn lanes. Of course, this one's bored out
25 right now because there's not a driveway on the left-hand
6
1 side, but in the future could support such a thing.
2 The sewer line from this building
3 comes out and crosses the corner of this property that the
4 restaurant is proposed to be on and that's to facilitate
5 tying into this -- there's a sewer main that runs down
6 115, there's lateral stub-outs that were done the time the
7 sewer was installed. We had to put a sewer easement in
8 favor of this owner so that this future owner's sewer
9 could cross the corner of that property and still reach
10 the lateral.
11 The setbacks, the zoning, the buffers,
12 the parking requirements are all met with the proposed
13 land development plan. We needed to do all that research
14 before we proposed to the commissioners and supervisors
15 that we do this subdivision.
16 The planning commission, on July 9 of
17 last year, gave a recommendation of approval for the
18 previous land development plan with the reverse
19 subdivision that combined everything into one lot. And
20 that was a conditional approval that includes some
21 conditions on the buffer zone up here, which is a 25 foot
22 buffer between residential and commercial property. We're
23 not changing any of those restrictions or -- or conditions
24 of approval on this plan.
25 There -- there is some language in the
7
1 effort to get everything accomplished in a timely manner
2 and take care of getting things on the land development
3 plan for Monday night's meeting and have the attorneys
4 review the access easement and so on and so forth. We did
5 miss some of the ones that are on the cover sheet that
6 need to be put on this development plan -- or this
7 subdivision plan.
8 MR. McHALE: Just scroll down to
9 the -- where it says Adobe. Tag that once. There you go.
10 Covenants are the top thing.
11 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: I wanted to just
12 point out to you that these are the covenants that have
13 been -- had the language revised. They are on the cover
14 of the land development plan we're proposing to submit to
15 the supervisors on Monday and we have -- this cross access
16 easement language is on the subdivision plan, we do need
17 to add language in this covenant, which is the cross
18 easement -- or, I'm sorry, the easement for access for
19 storm water maintenance for the township and the cross
20 access easement for the individual property owners for
21 access and use of the ingress/egress parking areas.
22 Also --
23 MR. ARMSTRONG: You've submitted that
24 to the township?
25 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: Yes.
8
1 MR. McHALE: So if tonight -- if the
2 planning commission wishes to move forward with the plan
3 to make a recommendation or something, we would make it
4 conditional upon adding these notes to the plan, the
5 formal subdivision plan.
6 MS. LAMBERTON: Is there an issue with
7 just the one entrance off 115 for two separate parcels?
8 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: Let me --
9 MR. McHALE: No.
10 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: -- back up a
11 moment.
12 MR. McHALE: They'll have cross access
13 over each property to serve both, and so it will function
14 the same as if you would have subdivided it --
15 MR. MILLER: Yeah.
16 MR. McHALE: -- or consolidated it.
17 MS. LAMBERTON: I see the flow. It
18 makes sense that that would make enough access.
19 MR. McHALE: And that's the reason
20 that he's putting notes on there is so that it's recorded
21 that way for their guaranteed access.
22 MS. LAMBERTON: That's my point.
23 That's my point. I mean, there is something written there
24 that that property on the left will always have access to
25 that --
9
1 MR. McHALE: That's what's in the
2 covenants.
3 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: That's -- the
4 cross access easement, which is on the language on No. 12,
5 Covenant No. 12 is on the cover plan, it will also be on
6 this subdivision plan, provides that the owner of this
7 restaurant property that's on this side of the subdivision
8 line has access of the parking areas and traffic routes
9 and sidewalks and this driveway onto Fern Crest for his
10 traffic, as well as giving this owner access not only from
11 Fern Crest that's on his property, but also off of 115 and
12 routing through the parking lot and parking on sidewalks.
13 MR. ARMSTRONG: What -- I mean, you're
14 going to have a note on the plan. What I'm thinking is
15 maybe just a very simple easement declaration as well,
16 recordable document, recorded with this plan, rather than
17 just a note on the plan. It's not going to be a -- it'll
18 be a -- like a two page type easement. Just clarifying --
19 note -- like -- like you don't have tax map parcel numbers
20 for those two properties yet.
21 MS. LAMBERTON: They're not subdivided
22 yet.
23 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: Not for those
24 two properties, no.
25 MR. ARMSTRONG: Okay. Well, what we
10
1 can do is, we can just -- we can put together a very
2 brief easement type document to be recorded.
3 MR. McHALE: They'll be designated as
4 Lot 1, Lot 2 of this subdivision, so --
5 MR. ARMSTRONG: Okay. We can do it
6 that way.
7 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: Let me go back
8 to the subdivision we're proposing. You can't read these
9 covenants because the print's so small. I do have a copy
10 of them in my -- in the ones that we have yet to put on
11 that we can make a copy of it and it's on that slide I
12 just showed you. I forgot to take a look at that
13 language.
14 MR. ARMSTRONG: Other than the cross
15 access easement and the sewer easement that's going to cut
16 across that [inaudible], are there any other --
17 MR. McHALE: Storm water management
18 because they're sharing conveyance systems across the
19 lots, so that'll be part of the two, and that's in one of
20 the covenants.
21 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: Going back up to
22 that slide, that may be helpful to you, Mr. Armstrong.
23 MR. ARMSTRONG: Because when someone
24 does a title search, they don't always look at the plan.
25 They look at, you know, what's attached to the deed or
11
1 other written documents that they find on that title
2 search. That's why a lot of times with easements like
3 this we like to have something separate.
4 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: So what -- what
5 I'm here for tonight is to ask for a conditional approval
6 of the minor subdivision plan to combine the two
7 conditional upon us putting this language on that plan and
8 the -- the other --
9 MR. ARMSTRONG: I'm sorry. I just --
10 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: -- the other
11 recommendation that you made. Is that some --
12 MR. McHALE: If we could go back to
13 the minor subdivision plan again, please?
14 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: Certainly.
15 MR. McHALE: On the north side of Fern
16 Crest there's going to be a proposed drainage easement for
17 when they expand or widen and install the improvements for
18 Fern Crest as a part of the project. There's a drainage
19 and construction easement that is going to be granted not
20 only to Mr. McElroy during construction, but also to the
21 township for future maintenance.
22 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: Right. Well,
23 what we're --
24 MR. McHALE: Pat, should that be shown
25 on this plan as well?
12
1 MR. ARMSTRONG: Is this --
2 MR. McHALE: It's about 15 to 20 feet,
3 Jim? Is that correct?
4 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: What we have is,
5 we have a temporary construction easement that's 15 feet
6 wide that the McGinleys have granted to John McElroy. And
7 that's to facilitate the grading and the road widening on
8 Fern Crest and installation of this culvert across --
9 culvert that's being extended. We need the room to
10 accomplish the construction and we're going to need beyond
11 our property to do some of that.
12 MR. McHALE: And the permanent swale
13 that will remain in place that the township would be
14 basically maintaining would be -- as a part of Fern Crest,
15 would be on her property as well.
16 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: Right. And so
17 what we've shown now is, in addition to that temporary
18 construction easement, we are showing a 10 foot wide
19 drainage and utility easement on that plan.
20 MR. ARMSTRONG: The 10 foot, that's
21 shown --
22 MR. McHALE: Well, he's showing it --
23 You're showing it on the land
24 development plan. And my question to you was, he should
25 probably show it as well on the subdivision plan?
13
1 MR. ARMSTRONG: Yes. Yes. I mean,
2 you're showing -- well, you have notes with respect to
3 that cross access and the sewer on this plan, correct?
4 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: Yes.
5 MR. ARMSTRONG: You should have --
6 yeah. It's not something difficult to add.
7 MR. McHALE: It'll fit on there.
8 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: Do you need the
9 temporary construction easement as well or just --
10 MR. ARMSTRONG: No. No. It's just --
11 that's a temporary easement that's --
12 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: Right.
13 MR. ARMSTRONG: Do we have --
14 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: So we'll add the
15 10 foot wide drainage easement on the other side of Fern
16 Crest on this plan.
17 MR. ARMSTRONG: I wasn't -- I
18 wasn't -- I don't think I was here when you guys made this
19 recommendation last year, but I think after reading the
20 transcript it looks like the -- most of the discussion was
21 about the buffer --
22 MR. MILLER: Um-hum.
23 MR. ARMSTRONG: -- towards the back of
24 the property and the recommendation of this board, this
25 commission, I'm assuming, is going to stay the same with
14
1 respect to that issue?
2 MS. LAMBERTON: Yes.
3 MR. ARMSTRONG: And just for
4 clarification purposes that was to -- for the applicant to
5 plant the certain landscaping within that buffer and the
6 opportunity to remove some of the undergrowth to ensure
7 the life span of those plantings?
8 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: That's correct.
9 MR. ARMSTRONG: Does that sound
10 accurate?
11 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: There's existing
12 vegetation in the -- in the buffer. There's mature trees
13 there along with undergrowth and one of the comments that
14 was made during the presentation was that in this 25 foot
15 wide buffer zone, you see here between the residential
16 property and this commercial development, they didn't want
17 these planning -- we're going to supplement the existing
18 vegetation, the existing trees.
19 And the commission didn't want those
20 trees that we're putting in there dying because they're
21 not getting any sunlight or room for growth; so we have
22 addressed that on our land development plan and that was
23 a -- we did ask for a partial waiver of the buffer
24 ordinance to allow us to remove some of the undergrowth.
25 We also put a light pole right there
15
1 on the edge of the buffer in two locations and we're doing
2 some minor grading right there along the edge, just a
3 couple feet when you're coming off the parking lot, and
4 that was my understanding, part of the conditional
5 approval, that waiver was granted.
6 MR. MILLER: Does the board have any
7 questions?
8 MS. RINEHIMER: No.
9 MS. LAMBERTON: My only question was
10 that entrance there off of 115, just as long as it's
11 tended, so that one parcel doesn't have an issue.
12 MR. MILLER: It sounds good.
13 MS. LAMBERTON: Yes, it does.
14 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: We have an HOP
15 submission we have submitted to PennDOT two times
16 previously, and next week we're submitting what we hope is
17 going to be our final HOP submission to PennDOT.
18 MR. MILLER: So we should recommend to
19 the supervisors --
20 MS. LAMBERTON: I'm fine with that
21 condition.
22 MR. ARMSTRONG: I think if you were to
23 make a recommendation, conditioned upon all the conditions
24 that you set forth in there --
25 MS. LAMBERTON: Yes.
16
1 MR. ARMSTRONG: -- your --
2 MS. LAMBERTON: And, Bob, is there
3 anything that you have an issue with?
4 MR. McHALE: The covenants and notes
5 that Jim described and adding an easement on the north
6 side of --
7 MR. ARMSTRONG: You --
8 MR. MILLER: Make a motion here.
9 Do I hear a motion?
10 MS. LAMBERTON: I'll make a motion for
11 a recommendation to the board of supervisors. We're going
12 back to Thursday, July 9, 2009?
13 MR. ARMSTRONG: It would be --
14 MS. LAMBERTON: Is that how you want
15 me to refer to it?
16 MR. ARMSTRONG: It would be
17 condition -- you made your initial recommendation at that
18 meeting with all the conditions of the prior plan. The
19 only thing that's changing with this plan are, it's going
20 to be subdivided in two lots instead of one with the
21 additional easements needed to accommodate the -- the
22 tenants.
23 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: Right.
24 MR. ARMSTRONG: So your recommendation
25 may want to be that you recommend approval of this revised
17
1 plan showing two lots with the required easements and also
2 conditional upon all of the conditions you discussed and
3 set forth in your July 9, 2009 recommendation.
4 MS. LAMBERTON: I'll make that motion.
5 Thanks, Patrick.
6 MR. MILLER: Discussion?
7 Do I hear a second?
8 MS. RINEHIMER: I'll second.
9 MR. MILLER: All in favor?
10 THE BOARD: Aye.
11 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: Thank you very
12 much for your time and consideration.
13 MR. MILLER: Okay. Next item under
14 new business, proposed ordinance, large gathering.
15 MR. ARMSTRONG: Yeah, this is -- this
16 is an ordinance that the board of supervisors authorized
17 and has been advertised for a public hearing on Monday,
18 June 14, 2010. It's not a SALDO, it's not a zoning
19 ordinance; so technically it did not need to be reviewed
20 by the planning commission, but the board felt it
21 appropriate for the commission to review it and provide
22 comments or recommendations that you may have on it.
23 My understanding is that there was a
24 concern with respect to certain large gatherings being
25 organized within the township and not appropriate parking
18
1 and safety type concerns, that those concerns were not
2 being provided for appropriately by the individuals or
3 entities that were having these large gatherings.
4 So what this large -- what this large
5 gathering ordinance does is, it sets forth the definition
6 for a large gathering, and that is, an outdoor assembly of
7 people for the purpose of public amusement anticipated to
8 amount to a number of more than 250 people at one time.
9 It sets forth the requirement that these applications
10 receive permits from the township, that they comply with
11 certain requirements, specifically with respect to the
12 safety and general welfare of the public, parking
13 requirements, security requirements and additionally
14 insurance-type requirements and the possibility of the
15 township requiring bonding for these -- for these large
16 gatherings.
17 MR. MILLER: Do we know of any
18 instances in the township where this has been a problem?
19 MR. ARMSTRONG: I believe it
20 accumulated from the -- the zoning officer. I think
21 there's been a concern with respect to carnivals, certain
22 types of festivals within the township. And my
23 understanding from the zoning officer's standpoint was
24 there was no -- no provisions in the township's ordinance
25 that would require, you know, an appropriate amount of
19
1 space, land for parking, the appropriate amount of
2 security at these events, traffic concerns. It's not a
3 zoning ordinance. It's a stand-alone ordinance.
4 MR. MILLER: Does anybody know how
5 many times a year this happens within the township, of 250
6 or more?
7 MR. ARMSTRONG: Probably not that
8 many.
9 MR. MILLER: One? Two?
10 MR. ARMSTRONG: Yeah.
11 MR. MILLER: Three?
12 I don't know of any carnivals anymore.
13 MS. RINEHIMER: We have a lot of
14 events at the school.
15 MS. LAMBERTON: This is --
16 MR. ARMSTRONG: That would be
17 excluded --
18 MS. LAMBERTON: -- for public. Yeah,
19 that's excluded.
20 MS. RINEHIMER: But they're public,
21 like when they do their fall festivals and their Halloween
22 parade.
23 MR. ARMSTRONG: This is -- the term
24 large gathering does not include funerals, township
25 sponsored events, weddings, day or sleepover camps for
20
1 children up to the age of 18 years of age, academic
2 activities incidental to the daily routine of a private or
3 public school --
4 MS. RINEHIMER: Okay.
5 MR. ARMSTRONG: -- and/or athletic
6 activities held on the property of a private or public
7 school.
8 MR. MILLER: The only problem I can
9 see is -- with this ordinance, is, I know Jeff didn't
10 speak to this, they're gathering for the 4th of July event
11 at the club.
12 MS. LAMBERTON: That's private.
13 MR. MILLER: Yeah? I don't know.
14 MS. LAMBERTON: That's not open to the
15 public. It's my understanding -- correct me if wrong,
16 Patrick -- this is for gatherings that are open to the
17 public. That was one of our discussions, not for a
18 private community.
19 MR. MILLER: You've got to be careful
20 of that.
21 MR. ARMSTRONG: I mean, the definition
22 is -- means all outdoor assemblies of people for the
23 purpose of public amusement anticipated to amount to a
24 number of more than 250 people.
25 MS. LAMBERTON: It would be different
21
1 if --
2 MR. MILLER: Jeff?
3 MS. LAMBERTON: Go ahead.
4 MR. JEFFREY EVANS: Jeff Evans. We
5 reviewed it and we -- we see it as a positive thing.
6 There's rumors that one of the private communities in the
7 township is planning to have a carnival that they're
8 designing after the one that's held in Mount Pocono,
9 heavily advertised, open to the public, and that could
10 create real problems for the -- the township and I think
11 that -- that the township does need some kind of control
12 over those types of events.
13 And it's my understanding it's being
14 done strictly for financial reasons, not to create
15 community involvement or those types of things. And
16 without the proper security and those types of things and
17 planning ahead, it could create a real problem for the
18 township, so we certainly don't oppose it.
19 MR. MILLER: So Lake Naomi, you can
20 say, is not opposed to the way this is written?
21 MR. JEFFREY EVANS: Right. Ours are
22 not open to the public and obviously we work with the
23 police department and with our own ranger department to
24 make sure that we have adequate protection, but when you
25 have a private entity like that inviting people, you have
22
1 no control over the numbers of people that -- that you
2 would have.
3 And I know in discussions that people
4 have told me that they've had with this group, they don't
5 have a concept as to how they're going to control how many
6 people they might attract and how they would control that
7 because the -- the police obviously are going to respond,
8 but they're not going to put people there like they do at
9 the Mount Pocono Carnival where Mount Pocono pays for that
10 as part of their police services.
11 MR. MILLER: Okay. Anybody have any
12 comments here? Any thoughts?
13 MS. LAMBERTON: I --
14 MR. McHALE: In the draft it didn't
15 appear that there was a lot of detailed or specific
16 requirements. It's more left to the discretion of the
17 township as they view each individual event.
18 Discretion --
19 MR. MILLER: It --
20 MR. McHALE: -- as far as parking
21 area --
22 MR. MILLER: It would be up to the
23 zoning officer to approve a plan? Is that the way I
24 understand it?
25 MR. ARMSTRONG: It would be up to
23
1 the -- the individual authorized and dedicated to enforce
2 the ordinance and the zoning officer, although it's not a
3 zoning ordinance, is most likely the individual because
4 she's probably also the code officer as well.
5 MR. McHALE: There's also this --
6 regarding parking, for instance, in some events it would
7 be just the public coming in and it's -- everyone's
8 driving their own vehicle. There may be a proposal where
9 they would want to shuttle people in and maybe the parking
10 wouldn't be as high number needed, so I think it's going
11 to be -- have to -- left to each individual event and how
12 they're going to orchestrate it. And that's why they
13 wanted to put together a plan as to how they would
14 approach that, emergency services, the access of the
15 property, the size of the property. Those all come into
16 play.
17 MR. ARMSTRONG: And it's actually the
18 zones officer, building code office -- official, regional
19 police and/or emergency management coordinator shall be
20 granted access to the large gathering at all times for the
21 purpose of inspection and enforcement.
22 MR. MILLER: Yeah. I don't know what
23 to say. I can see where it's beneficial in some cases, I
24 can see where it's a pain in other cases.
25 MS. LAMBERTON: There's two sides of
24
1 it. You have too much government, and you have to protect
2 so it doesn't get out of hand too.
3 MR. MILLER: Right.
4 MR. McHALE: I recall our zoning
5 officer bringing up a couple different events that were
6 being proposed in the last year or so that they didn't go
7 forth with, but had they done so, the one event may have
8 created some issues with traffic on 940 --
9 MR. MILLER: Um-hum.
10 MR. McHALE: -- and they didn't really
11 have a plan in place at the time to discuss how they were
12 going to transport people from one side of the road to the
13 other. You know, these kinds of things would come into
14 play to coordinate with the regional police or, you know,
15 PennDOT or whoever it may be coordinating.
16 MR. JEFFREY EVANS: We talked to
17 Sincavages about what happened to their lawn in the 1972
18 concert at Pocono Raceway where the traffic was backed up
19 out on the interstate. Who would have ever -- they
20 thought they had plenty of parking and plenty of -- but it
21 was ill-conceived to say the -- the least.
22 MR. CARSON HELFRICH: Some of us were
23 at that concert.
24 MR. JEFFREY EVANS: I wasn't going to
25 bring that up.
25
1 MR. ARMSTRONG: What concert was that?
2 MR. JEFFREY EVANS: They had like --
3 this was the first attempt at it and they -- they grossly
4 underestimated the number of people that were going to
5 come and they didn't have the -- you know, the things that
6 they do today for the race and those types of things. And
7 literally the Sincavages lived at the intersection of 115
8 and I-80. They were smart enough to go away for the
9 weekend or the day or whatever. When they came back
10 someone had entrepreneurally parked their entire lawn full
11 of cars --
12 MR. CARSON HELFRICH: I didn't park
13 there.
14 MR. JEFFREY EVANS: -- which they had
15 nothing to do with and then obviously left and they had
16 cars there for days and people walked from there to the
17 raceway, if you can imagine.
18 MS. LAMBERTON: Wow. That's what
19 we're trying to protect.
20 MR. CARSON HELFRICH: Woodstock
21 [inaudible].
22 MR. JOHN HENRY: Can I ask you a
23 question on it? John Henry, Pocono Lake Preserve. Does
24 it apply to religious institutions if they decide to have
25 something outside with the church or -- is there an
26
1 exemption on churches?
2 MS. LAMBERTON: I don't recall that.
3 MR. ARMSTRONG: Does not include
4 funerals, township sponsored events, weddings, day or
5 sleepover camps. It does not specifically exclude -- I
6 mean, any other --
7 MR. JOHN HENRY: Would it be
8 reasonable to say religious services, weddings, funerals?
9 MR. ARMSTRONG: Right. I'm just
10 saying it doesn't say -- it doesn't say religious.
11 MR. JEFFREY EVANS: Well, what's the
12 number, Patrick, that it has to be over?
13 MR. ARMSTRONG: Anticipated 250
14 people.
15 MR. JOHN HENRY: 250 people, that's
16 probably not a problem.
17 MR. JEFFREY EVANS: I think that's why
18 they picked that number because they were trying to look
19 at events that would exceed that.
20 MR. McHALE: And that's at one time,
21 the 250.
22 MR. JOHN HENRY: Right.
23 MS. LAMBERTON: Correct.
24 MR. ARMSTRONG: So if the commission
25 has any recommendations, any comments. If you want to
27
1 make a recommendation on it, you want to suggest changes,
2 you can. It is up for a public hearing on Monday, at
3 Monday night's hearing.
4 MS. LAMBERTON: John, do you have a
5 suggestion for the church functions that you'd like to
6 list something separately that --
7 MR. JOHN HENRY: No, I don't think so.
8 I mean --
9 MS. LAMBERTON: To kind of --
10 MR. JOHN HENRY: -- I think over 250
11 at the church, it's never gonna be that big probably, so
12 it's --
13 MR. JEFFREY EVANS: The churches wish
14 they had that.
15 MR. JOHN HENRY: That probably solves
16 that, but -- I mean, the Methodist church is gonna have
17 this advertised. They're gonna have a music thing. The
18 concert's going to be outside instead of inside because
19 there's not enough space. That -- so that would probably
20 apply if it's going to be over 250, but I don't think it's
21 gonna be that big.
22 MR. MILLER: Well, you know, I don't
23 mind as long as it doesn't cut out charitable events, et
24 cetera, et cetera, et cetera.
25 MS. LAMBERTON: I didn't think it did.
28
1 MR. MILLER: No, I don't think it
2 does, but prohibit in some way, not having enough parking,
3 this and that, sick of it, one day fund-raising. You got
4 to cover that.
5 MR. ARMSTRONG: And just to keep in
6 mind, some of the monetary requirements, i.e., the bonding
7 and the insurance, it does give the township the ability
8 to have some discretion depending on the type of event.
9 MR. MILLER: Yeah.
10 MR. ARMSTRONG: And with respect to
11 parking, I believe it was the township's position -- yeah,
12 this is how it's -- this is how it's worded. Each large
13 gathering shall be located on a property of sufficient
14 size to ensure the safety, health and welfare of the
15 public. The township shall have the sole discretion to
16 determine whether the property where in the large
17 gathering is proposed be held is of a sufficient size to
18 ensure the safety, health and general welfare.
19 So it doesn't -- it doesn't list
20 specifically the size requirement.
21 MR. MILLER: Now, I understand all
22 that discretion stuff as long as that's always used,
23 but -- you don't have to be -- five years from now --
24 MS. LAMBERTON: You don't know.
25 MR. MILLER: There's -- I can see
29
1 probably after hearing the discussion here that it's
2 probably needed more so than not.
3 MS. LAMBERTON: Looking on the Mount
4 Pocono Carnival level is where the thoughts were coming
5 from and to prevent anyone being in harm's way with
6 something -- a function of that size being in an area
7 where it really doesn't belong --
8 MR. MILLER: Right.
9 MS. LAMBERTON: -- I think was what
10 produced --
11 MR. MILLER: Yeah.
12 MS. LAMBERTON: -- the wordage in
13 this.
14 MR. MILLER: Well, it's --
15 MS. LAMBERTON: And I respect that,
16 because I've been there.
17 MR. MILLER: I mean, I don't see
18 anything in there I would change. I don't know if you
19 ladies do either, anything that you would change, writing,
20 wording.
21 MS. LAMBERTON: Maybe we could put in
22 charitable events or anything to do with religious
23 activity. I mean, that would cover any church function,
24 which obviously they are -- they've been going on for
25 years. You don't want to see the Lutheran church not be
30
1 able to have their craft bazaar because 251 people showed
2 up.
3 MR. MILLER: You need a charitable
4 zoning officer.
5 MR. CARSON HELFRICH: I thought that
6 was an oxymoron.
7 MR. ARMSTRONG: Bob brought up a good
8 point. This isn't prohibiting it, it's just requiring a
9 proper plan.
10 MR. MILLER: Right.
11 MS. LAMBERTON: Correct, yes.
12 MR. MILLER: Yeah, it won't prohibit
13 it --
14 MS. LAMBERTON: Yeah. But it is
15 something --
16 MR. MILLER: -- but there might be
17 some times when an exact proper plan might be just on the
18 very edge of not being able to meet that proper plan.
19 MS. LAMBERTON: But if it is something
20 large there are items that would be put into effect to
21 protect the public.
22 MR. MILLER: So, I mean, if somebody
23 wants to make a motion to --
24 MS. RINEHIMER: I think it's a good
25 thing.
31
1 MR. MILLER: -- recommend to the
2 supervisors, I support it.
3 MS. LAMBERTON: I make a motion to
4 recommend it to the board of supervisors.
5 MR. MILLER: You second?
6 MS. RINEHIMER: I'll second.
7 MR. MILLER: Any other discussion?
8 All in favor?
9 THE BOARD: Aye.
10 MR. MILLER: Good.
11 MR. ARMSTRONG: The next -- I'm sorry.
12 MR. MILLER: Next item, proposed
13 ordinance, official map.
14 MR. ARMSTRONG: I believe Carson's
15 here this evening. I looked over the proposed ordinance
16 provided by Carson. I made some changes and revisions,
17 sent it on to the planning commission, as well as Carson
18 to take a look at. I took a lot out, primarily because a
19 lot of it is -- it was just restating what's in the code
20 and I just clarified some points. Carson and I spoke a
21 couple weeks ago with respect to some of the provisions
22 that I took out.
23 He also -- there was also two
24 additional proposed amendments, one for zoning, one for
25 SALDO. You're not required to adopt the SALDO and zoning
32
1 ordinance if you don't want to. The official map
2 ordinance is all that's required for the adoption of the
3 official map.
4 MR. CARSON HELFRICH: Correct. The
5 other two are just to --
6 MR. ARMSTRONG: Clarify the zoning and
7 the SALDO.
8 MR. CARSON HELFRICH: That's right, so
9 that if somebody's making application under the zoning or
10 the subdivision, you know, to kind of put them on notice
11 and also for them to include that information on their
12 application and plans. So that was the intent of the two
13 other amendments.
14 MS. LAMBERTON: Are we still going to
15 move forward just until the feasibility study is complete?
16 I know that was brought up at our last --
17 MR. CARSON HELFRICH: You mean the
18 trail feasibility? Yeah --
19 MS. LAMBERTON: There were items that
20 they did bring an issue to.
21 MR. CARSON HELFRICH: Yeah. The part
22 of the discussion was, you know, should -- I guess the
23 thing to think about is, is that even if you wouldn't
24 include the trail on the official map at this point, there
25 may be some other -- you know, some other things that
33
1 you'd want to move forward on and you could always amend
2 the official map at a later point once that feasibility
3 study was completed, because knowing how those things go,
4 that could be -- I mean, it's just kind of an idea at this
5 point and I think people are putting together grant
6 applications. I don't know that it's been funded yet at
7 this point, but I kind of hate to see a holdup in the
8 whole process, you know, waiting for a feasibility study
9 when nobody's sure what the time frame is on that.
10 I mean, the other thing is, did George
11 Basila from the county drop off addit -- any updated maps?
12 MS. LAMBERTON: I did not see
13 anything.
14 MR. ARMSTRONG: I'm not aware.
15 MR. CARSON HELFRICH: Yeah, okay. I
16 mean, I'm thinking if it might make sense just to have
17 like another work session with the map and maybe go over
18 the ordinances kind of item by item at some point.
19 You know, while I do agree with
20 Patrick, most of his suggests -- there were a couple items
21 I just wanted to discuss in a little bit more detail with
22 the board in terms of the time frames, you know, for
23 acting on permit applications and a couple of other items;
24 so I'd be happy to do that now if you want to or if you
25 wanted to do it with -- you know, at a special meeting and
34
1 look at the map, you know, like we did the last time?
2 MS. LAMBERTON: We should probably
3 have those guys here.
4 MR. MILLER: Yeah. You know, it might
5 be getter if we can get a full house here --
6 MR. CARSON HELFRICH: Okay.
7 MR. MILLER: -- and have a discussion.
8 MS. LAMBERTON: Rather than do it
9 twice.
10 MR. MILLER: Yeah. So let's not act
11 on this.
12 MS. LAMBERTON: I would wait.
13 MR. MILLER: We'd rather get all the
14 members together at some point in time when we can --
15 MR. CARSON HELFRICH: Okay.
16 MR. MILLER: -- continue that
17 discussion.
18 MR. CARSON HELFRICH: Okay.
19 MR. ARMSTRONG: Are there any
20 questions you have for me, Carson?
21 MR. CARSON HELFRICH: I guess the
22 only -- on the -- in the ordinance, on the official map,
23 the part where it has a one year time frame? Under the
24 code, under the state planning code, it provides that --
25 that -- you know, the inclusion on the official map would
35
1 expire one year following the time when somebody makes an
2 official application and provides notice that they're
3 gonna develop.
4 And a number of the other
5 municipalities actually reduced that and that was largely
6 in response to -- I don't want to say public outcry,
7 but, you know, public comment at some of the meetings
8 were -- you know, if somebody's making application, let's
9 say, for a permit to build a house, you know, the public
10 kind of felt that giving the township a full year to make
11 a decision on that was -- was a bit excessive. So that
12 was the reason for some of those changes. I don't know.
13 Patrick, do you think we're precluded
14 from shortening those times?
15 MR. ARMSTRONG: There's nothing in
16 that section of the code that says you can do it, but
17 there's also nothing in there that says you can't.
18 MR. CARSON HELFRICH: That you can't
19 do it.
20 MR. ARMSTRONG: At the end of the day
21 you wouldn't be making it more strict, you'd be making it
22 less strict. So chances are you would be okay in doing
23 that.
24 MR. CARSON HELFRICH: Right.
25 MR. ARMSTRONG: My take on it is, if
36
1 someone comes in with a permit, the township should know
2 within the first week whether or not they're going to do
3 something on it.
4 MR. CARSON HELFRICH: Well, and I
5 understand that, but that's not how it was perceived by --
6 you know, perceived by the property owners that were
7 affected by -- that are going to be affected by the --
8 MR. ARMSTRONG: Right.
9 MR. CARSON HELFRICH: -- official map.
10 Now, in the other municipalities there
11 were quite a few more properties on the map too, so maybe
12 part of the discussion would be to take a look at the
13 properties and see -- see, you know, what properties are
14 affected and how you think that would work for those
15 individual properties, because that was one of the key
16 things that kind of was brought up at the public meetings,
17 so I think it's worth discussing.
18 MR. ARMSTRONG: Yeah. At the end of
19 the day if you would shorten that one year time period,
20 you'd be -- you wouldn't be impairing the residents.
21 You'd be tying the township's hands, if anything.
22 MR. CARSON HELFRICH: Correct.
23 MR. ARMSTRONG: One other -- since you
24 have that section up, one other change I made was, the
25 official map, that section of the code allows for the
37
1 township to set a reservation time period for the official
2 map to be valid, meaning if you set that as 25 years,
3 which is what I set it at, that official map will be good
4 for 25 years. And at the end of 25 years, if the township
5 hasn't taken the properties shown on that official map,
6 it's no longer valid, which means you can either amend it
7 before the 25 years is up, you can let it run and not
8 worry about it and then maybe five years after the 25
9 years is up you want to come up with another official map
10 or you can go forward and take all that property within
11 the 25 years.
12 Now, I put 25 years in there because
13 the's a time period that one of our other clients has
14 used. Tobyhanna Township made one 10 years, Tobyhanna
15 Township made one a hundred years, Tobyhanna Township
16 might want no -- like an infinite amount of time.
17 MR. CARSON HELFRICH: And I think you
18 could probably set a different time for different elements
19 of the map or is it just one -- one time period?
20 MR. ARMSTRONG: I don't think -- I
21 don't think it allows for that.
22 MR. CARSON HELFRICH: Okay.
23 MR. ARMSTRONG: You can just -- I can
24 look, but --
25 MR. CARSON HELFRICH: I don't think
38
1 it's -- I mean, I think if you're going to set one up, it
2 would probably make sense to be consistent. And that's
3 another thing we need to speak about, you know, with the
4 group; so those were the two --
5 MR. McHALE: This is a future
6 visioning of something that the township wanted to see
7 happen and it didn't occur in 25 years, then it's probably
8 not going to happen. So, I mean -- it should be a
9 little --
10 MR. CARSON HELFRICH: I'm not going to
11 worry about it, that's for sure.
12 MS. LAMBERTON: He was at that
13 concert, that's why.
14 MR. CARSON HELFRICH: Yeah, that's
15 right. And it rained, too, by the way.
16 MR. McHALE: And the official map
17 could be readopted. I mean, so I don't know if you want
18 to go with a 10 year time period or something like that?
19 Maybe people won't feel as though they're --
20 MS. LAMBERTON: I don't want to visit
21 it every 10 years, to be honest.
22 MR. CARSON HELFRICH: Twenty-five
23 years, I think, makes sense. And I really think it's
24 going to be the time frames for action on the different
25 types of permits that are going to raise the most concern.
39
1 MR. McHALE: But the items that are on
2 the map --
3 MS. LAMBERTON: Yeah.
4 MR. McHALE: -- are they going to be
5 accomplished within 10 years? And if they are, maybe
6 that's the number to use is 15.
7 MR. CARSON HELFRICH: Right.
8 MR. McHALE: Why stretch it out to 25
9 if it's -- if those items are not going to be accomplished
10 or if they are going to be accomplished?
11 MR. ARMSTRONG: That's a policy
12 that's -- I'm not going to make the decision. It's up to
13 the board or the planning commission to --
14 MR. CARSON HELFRICH: Well, the same
15 for me. We're just trying to give you what the options
16 are.
17 MR. ARMSTRONG: I just put that in
18 there because that's --
19 MR. CARSON HELFRICH: You needed to
20 put something in, so --
21 MR. MILLER: Okay. We'll go by this
22 and we won't act on this particular ordinance tonight.
23 We'll need some further discussion.
24 Yes?
25 MR. JOHN HENRY: John Henry, Pocono
40
1 Lake Preserve. Just a couple questions on the trail. I'm
2 coming late to the party as it were.
3 Is the map -- is this the map or is
4 there -- was there a map that I could look at? And I'll
5 do that later, but my point for coming tonight was, Mark
6 suggested I might want to come to point out that in --
7 regarding the trail, in 2002 the Top of the Mountain Open
8 Space Committee adopted a proposed trail location, and
9 it's in Section 4 dash 5, and it outlines the --
10 Margie was looking for the section,
11 she got the wrong one, but it describes the route that the
12 proposed trail through the township should take and that
13 was approved by the Open Space Recreation Plan of 2002.
14 And it doesn't utilize all of the railroad grade.
15 I just wanted to point out that the
16 railroad grade that goes through Doc Kitchen's property,
17 and the Pocono Lake Preserve and the Upper Tunk Fishing
18 Club, those right of ways were purchased in the '40s by
19 those entities; so they're not right of ways anymore and
20 they're private land.
21 MR. CARSON HELFRICH: Well, the one
22 thing -- not to interrupt, but the one thing we did
23 discuss with the Kitchen property, I believe, was not even
24 using the right of way, but, you know, going to the --
25 along the northern edge of the property, staying in the
41
1 state lands.
2 MR. JOHN HENRY: If you go by this
3 plan, that's true. It stays in the state lands.
4 MR. CARSON HELFRICH: Yeah, that's
5 what we actually talked about --
6 MR. JOHN HENRY: Right.
7 MR. CARSON HELFRICH: -- on the
8 official map as well.
9 MR. JOHN HENRY: I haven't seen the --
10 MR. CARSON HELFRICH: Right.
11 MR. JOHN HENRY: That's my point.
12 MR. CARSON HELFRICH: Right.
13 MR. JOHN HENRY: The feasibility study
14 that was being done up in Lackawanna County, there's a
15 group up there that -- for the Rails to Trails plan, was
16 going to use the railroad right of way, and I just wanted
17 to mention to the board that there's a hunk of the
18 railroad right of way that is no longer a right of way.
19 That was recognized in 2002 and an alternative route was
20 proposed in 2002 and it's in the township's plan.
21 MR. CARSON HELFRICH: And we had that
22 discussion. Well, we had the discussion that -- I think
23 there was a little bit of confusion that some people
24 thought that it still was a right of way, but it really
25 isn't anymore.
42
1 MR. JOHN HENRY: And
2 that's [inaudible] right now.
3 MR. CARSON HELFRICH: We had that
4 discussion.
5 MR. JOHN HENRY: The railroad grade
6 that crosses that crosses Pocono Lake where the power line
7 is, is not a right of way anymore. And there's also --
8 there is a nice bridge on -- up by 423, are you familiar
9 with the location of that [inaudible] bridge?
10 MR. CARSON HELFRICH: 423?
11 MR. JOHN HENRY: Yeah, where --
12 Tunkhannock Creek up by where the gas pipeline crosses --
13 MR. CARSON HELFRICH: Oh, right,
14 right.
15 MR. JOHN HENRY: There's a bridge
16 there existing that crosses -- I just wanted to point that
17 out.
18 MR. McHALE: Tobyhanna.
19 MR. JOHN HENRY: And that proposed
20 trail does follow that route. So --
21 MR. CARSON HELFRICH: We'll take a
22 look at that.
23 MR. JOHN HENRY: If you want to take a
24 look at the plan -- you have one, or --
25 MR. CARSON HELFRICH: I don't.
43
1 MR. JOHN HENRY: The township's is a
2 little light, if you want mine?
3 MS. RINEHIMER: What kind -- two
4 places, you said the railroad was owned privately in two
5 places? The Kitchens --
6 MR. JOHN HENRY: Three places. Doc
7 Kitchen, which is actually the Deaners [phonetic] now.
8 MS. RINEHIMER: Okay, that one -- that
9 one we talked about that. What's the other one?
10 MR. JOHN HENRY: They purchased that.
11 And then Pocono Lake Preserve purchased it --
12 MS. RINEHIMER: Okay.
13 MR. JOHN HENRY: -- and then the Upper
14 Tunkhannock Fishing Association purchased it. So if
15 you basically go from -- if you come out of Brady's Lake,
16 the railroad grade goes on the other side of the dam where
17 the lake is and then it comes down and hits the Kitchen
18 property. At that point the trail was proposed to go over
19 onto the Brady's Lake Road, go down and go up the gas
20 pipeline and cross and go back through.
21 That's what's in the plan. But if you
22 stay on the railroad right of way, you come down through
23 Kitchens and then you cross Pocono Lake where the -- you
24 know, the bridge is out, for a hundred years it's been
25 out, and then you cross that and you go down by Pocono
44
1 Lake Supply, then it goes across 940 and down through the
2 Tunkhannock Fishing Association property.
3 MS. RINEHIMER: Right.
4 MR. JOHN HENRY: And those three
5 entities purchased those right of ways back in the '40s
6 when the railroad was closed down. So that's not -- it's
7 no longer a right of way. I mean, the grade is still
8 there, but it's now a private property, has been for a
9 long time.
10 MS. LAMBERTON: I think that's what
11 the whole feasibility study's about.
12 MR. JOHN HENRY: Right, and they want
13 to do a feasibility study to follow that and I just
14 wanted --
15 MS. LAMBERTON: Right.
16 MR. JOHN HENRY: -- to save a lot of
17 trouble --
18 MR. CARSON HELFRICH: I'll come up.
19 We'll be aware of that.
20 MS. LAMBERTON: Actually I think they
21 changed that Tunkhannock Fishing -- we didn't -- we went
22 down to -- what were we looking at going by the lumber
23 place and that being one of the spots and then --
24 MR. CARSON HELFRICH: Right.
25 MS. LAMBERTON: -- coming up 940?
45
1 MR. MILLER: Frisbie?
2 MS. LAMBERTON: Yes.
3 MR. CARSON HELFRICH: Right.
4 MS. LAMBERTON: We did change this.
5 We didn't have to cross over 940, go into the fishing,
6 leave them be, keep it as it is, because it's a beautiful
7 setting --
8 MR. CARSON HELFRICH: Well --
9 MS. LAMBERTON: -- and not disturb
10 that.
11 MR. CARSON HELFRICH: Again, I think
12 it -- one of the -- I sent an e-mail to everybody. I
13 don't know if you got that or not, and that was one of the
14 points that I tried to make in there is, it may be
15 premature to show the trail on there because, let's say if
16 somebody does propose something on one little segment of
17 it, are you prepared to acquire that piecemeal when you're
18 not sure where the trail is gonna be? So it may make
19 sense to show something on there as a possibility, but not
20 necessarily reserve it for -- you know, as part of the
21 official map.
22 Something similar to what we talked
23 about doing for the rights of way at Blakeslee Corners
24 there. Remember that? We said we were gonna show those
25 but put a note on that, that this is being considered for
46
1 the future or something to that effect. So we have quite
2 a bit to sort out at this point.
3 MS. LAMBERTON: Money.
4 MR. CARSON HELFRICH: Okay?
5 MR. JOHN HENRY: I just would ask
6 one -- as I say, I'm late for the show here. What stage
7 is the process in for creating the official map? Are we
8 just writing the ordinance or we haven't drawn a map yet?
9 MR. CARSON HELFRICH: Well, there's a
10 map. It's just a proposed map.
11 MR. ARMSTRONG: It was prepared by the
12 county?
13 MR. CARSON HELFRICH: Yeah, the county
14 planning department has been working on it and -- but
15 nothing has even been proposed past the work group at this
16 point.
17 MR. ARMSTRONG: It hasn't been passed
18 on to the board of supervisors.
19 MR. CARSON HELFRICH: It hasn't even
20 come before the planning commission.
21 MR. JOHN HENRY: The work group is --
22 MR. CARSON HELFRICH: I guess just the
23 planning commission and --
24 MR. JOHN HENRY: So there's plenty of
25 time for public comment on the map?
47
1 MR. CARSON HELFRICH: Oh, absolutely.
2 MS. LAMBERTON: Yes.
3 MR. ARMSTRONG: There'll be a public
4 hearing. Yeah.
5 MR. JOHN HENRY: -- go out there and
6 look at the map. It's premature to even look at the map
7 because it's not --
8 MR. CARSON HELFRICH: Right.
9 MR. JOHN HENRY: I just wasn't sure
10 where we were in the process, so there's lots of time.
11 MS. LAMBERTON: We're really just
12 looking at a couple of intersections, John, just so we had
13 opportunity for growth there.
14 MR. JOHN HENRY: Okay.
15 MR. CARSON HELFRICH: And one of the
16 things that we'll probably try do is, anybody that is --
17 at least the larger property owners that are included,
18 whose properties were included, will make contact before
19 even any kind of public hearings.
20 MR. JOHN HENRY: I -- you know, I
21 represent a 6,000 acre landowner, so that's why I'm asking
22 questions.
23 MR. JEFFREY EVANS: They're going to
24 condemn the whole thing.
25 MR. ARMSTRONG: Whose that?
48
1 MR JOHN HENRY: Pocono Lake Preserve.
2 So I want to just do my job and make sure I'm on -- so I'm
3 not too late to get on top of this?
4 MS. LAMBERTON: No. Trust us.
5 MR. CARSON HELFRICH: Okay. Thanks,
6 and then I'll wait to hear from the --- somebody.
7 MS. LAMBERTON: I'm sure Mark will --
8 MR. CARSON HELFRICH: Okay.
9 MS. LAMBERTON: -- be in touch with
10 you.
11 MR. ARMSTRONG: Thanks, Carson.
12 MS. LAMBERTON: Thank you, Carson.
13 MR. JOHN HENRY: Note this, I'm all
14 for the trail. I just want to --
15 MS. LAMBERTON: No, yes, absolutely,
16 there's a lot to think about there. You're affecting a
17 lot of people, so everybody has to be for it.
18 MR. JOHN HENRY: Yeah.
19 MR. MILLER: Okay. The next next item
20 would be Item D, proposed amendment to zoning official
21 map.
22 MR. ARMSTRONG: Yeah. The next two,
23 the proposed amendment to the zoning and the proposed
24 SALDO amendment all have to do with the official map.
25 Carson had suggested adopting those as well, not as a
49
1 necessity under the official map, but as a clarification
2 point for the SALDO and zoning. So we can -- you know,
3 that goes hand in hand with the official map ordinance.
4 MS. LAMBERTON: We can just let those
5 go, right?
6 MR. MILLER: What?
7 MS. LAMBERTON: We can just let those
8 go, right?
9 MR. MILLER: What do you want to do
10 with this Item D?
11 MS. LAMBERTON: I say we table it.
12 MR. MILLER: Table it?
13 MS. LAMBERTON: Yes, because those
14 three go together.
15 MR. ARMSTRONG: Yeah, you can just
16 table all three of those.
17 MS. LAMBERTON: I make a motion to
18 table all three.
19 MR. MILLER: Go ahead. Do that.
20 MS. LAMBERTON: I make a motion to
21 table all three; proposed ordinance for the official map,
22 proposed amendment to the zoning of the official map and
23 proposed amendment to SALDO of the official map.
24 MR. MILLER: Any discussion?
25 MS. RINEHIMER: No.
50
1 MR. MILLER: Do I hear a second?
2 MS. RINEHIMER: I'll second.
3 MR. MILLER: All in favor?
4 THE BOARD: Aye.
5 MR. MILLER: Okay. Old business, the
6 Wee Wons project, whatever's happening there.
7 MS. LAMBERTON: What is happening?
8 MR. ARMSTRONG: No new developments
9 that I'm aware of. I don't see -- I don't have -- I'm not
10 aware of any new developments for the Wee Wons project or
11 the Locust Ridge Quarry project.
12 MR. MILLER: What do we do? Table
13 this now?
14 MR. ARMSTRONG: You can table it.
15 MR. MILLER: You want to table all
16 three of those?
17 MS. LAMBERTON: I make a motion to
18 table Wee Wons, Locust Ridge Quarry and the official map
19 at this time.
20 MS. RINEHIMER: Second.
21 MR. MILLER: Do I hear a second?
22 MS. RINEHIMER: I'll second.
23 MR. MILLER: All in favor?
24 THE BOARD: Aye.
25 MR. MILLER: Item No. 6, open
51
1 discussion, Brick City, which is located in Pocono Summit.
2 I notice that there's a for sale sign on the land there --
3 MS. LAMBERTON: Yeah, did they pull
4 their plans?
5 MR. MILLER: Pardon me?
6 MS. LAMBERTON: Did they pull their
7 plan?
8 MR. MILLER: I don't think they pulled
9 the plan --
10 MR. McHALE: There's been --
11 MS. LAMBERTON: No activity.
12 MR. McHALE: -- no activity. We had
13 seen a PennDOT review letter several months ago and that's
14 about it.
15 MR. MILLER: I think they tried to
16 sell the property off the way it looks, not necessarily do
17 a Brick City.
18 MR. ARMSTRONG: Okay.
19 MR. MILLER: So I guess we -- do we
20 need to table that?
21 MR. ARMSTRONG: No, that's actually --
22 that plan would -- I think the supervisors waived land
23 development on that. That's the condition, so there's no
24 need to table it.
25 MS. LAMBERTON: We're good?
52
1 MR. ARMSTRONG: The one thing I
2 noticed, you did skip over the Mount Pocono proposed
3 ordinance amendment.
4 MR. MILLER: Okay.
5 MR. ARMSTRONG: Under the
6 comprehensive plan you have the ability to comment on the
7 ordinances of Mount Pocono that may impact Tobyhanna
8 Township. So I don't know if the commission has any
9 comments on that proposed ordinance for Mount Pocono?
10 MS. LAMBERTON: I do not.
11 MR. MILLER: Anything here?
12 MS. LAMBERTON: I do not. I have no
13 comment.
14 [Inaudible comment.]
15 MS. LAMBERTON: No, I certainly would
16 not, which is okay.
17 MR. ARMSTRONG: Well, since there's no
18 comment there's no need for any action.
19 MR. MILLER: No comment.
20 Item F, we're back now to any -- any
21 public comment from you gentlemen?
22 MR. JEFFREY EVANS: No. We think
23 you're doing a fine job.
24 MR. JOHN HENRY: Great.
25 MR. MILLER: Well, that's fine. We're
53
1 glad to hear that.
2 MR. JEFFREY EVANS: We wish you were
3 busier.
4 MS. LAMBERTON: So do we.
5 MR. MILLER: Yeah, big difference from
6 10 or 15 years ago. We used to meet sometimes twice a
7 month and four hours a night.
8 Any -- anything else to come before
9 the board?
10 MS. LAMBERTON: We're good.
11 MR. MILLER: We're adjourned.
12 MS. LAMBERTON: Thank you, Joe.
13 (Meeting concluded at 8:03 p.m.)
14 ---
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7 I hereby certify that the proceedings
8 and evidence are contained fully and accurately, to the
9 best of my ability, in the notes taken by me 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 Jessica L. Holt, C.R.
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25