Before
THE TOBYHANNA TOWNSHIP PLANNING COMMISSION
---
In Re: Regular Business Meeting
---
Tobyhanna Township Government Center Building
State Avenue
Pocono Pines, Pennsylvania 18350
Thursday, March 5, 2009 beginning at 7:01 p.m.
---
PRESENT: MARK SINCAVAGE, Chairperson
JOSEPH MILLER, Vice-Chairperson
ROBERT BAXTER, Board Member
ANNE LAMBERTON, Board Member
ROBERT McHALE, P.E., Township Engineer
PATRICK ARMSTRONG, ESQUIRE, Solicitor
ALSO PRESENT: Phyllis Haase, Zoning Officer
---
_________________________________________________________
PANKO REPORTING
537 Sarah Street, 2nd Floor
Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania 18360
(570) 421-3620
2
1 MR. SINCAVAGE: Annie, are you ready?
2 MS. LAMBERTON: Um-hum.
3 MR. SINCAVAGE: All right. I'll call
4 the regular scheduled meeting of the Tobyhanna Township
5 Board of -- Planning Commission to order for Thursday,
6 March 5, 2009.
7 First order of business is approval of
8 the January 2009 minutes. We received them
9 electronically.
10 MS. HAASE: Mr. Chairman, there's one
11 correction on Sheet 4, Page 13, Line 22. The correct
12 spelling of the individual's last name is G-A-L-L-E-R-I-E.
13 MR. SINCAVAGE: Thank you.
14 Any other corrections, comments?
15 MS. LAMBERTON: Nope.
16 MR. BAXTER: Nope.
17 MR. SINCAVAGE: Do I have a motion to
18 approve?
19 MR. BAXTER: So moved.
20 MR. SINCAVAGE: I have a motion.
21 A second to the motion?
22 MR. MILLER: I second.
23 MR. SINCAVAGE: Motion and second.
24 All those in favor, please say aye?
25 THE BOARD: Aye.
3
1 MR. SINCAVAGE: First item on our
2 agenda is John McElroy.
3 Does anyone here represent John?
4 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: Good evening,
5 chairman, board members. My name is Jim Hendricks. I'm
6 with Herbert, Rowland and Grubic. John McElroy is my
7 client. He is not here tonight.
8 Did I -- do I understand that you have
9 the drawings on the computer?
10 MR. SINCAVAGE: Um-hum. Yes.
11 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: Okay. There
12 have been some changes that may have taken place since you
13 saw that drawing.
14 I'm not looking for approvals tonight.
15 I just wanted to come in and let you become familiar with
16 the project. We are working out some final issues with
17 PennDOT that affect our storm water and subsequently our
18 NPDES and E&S submissions, so those submissions haven't
19 been made yet.
20 Mr. McElroy's property is located at
21 the intersection of Fern Crest and 115. McGinley's is
22 right here on this next lot just up from this road here.
23 Keswick Pointe is just to the south of this property.
24 He is proposing a 6100 square foot
25 building for a restaurant and a retail building that's
4
1 12,000 square foot. We're on about 3.3 acres of property
2 here. This is a buffer zone between an R-2 medium density
3 residential area here and we're in a commercial zone.
4 Property over here is zoned commercial also. I believe on
5 115, this side here is also commercial.
6 I'll just go through the drawings and
7 tell you a little bit about the project and if you have
8 any questions, please ask me or speak up.
9 Bob, if you have anything you want to
10 talk about and then we'll do that.
11 The first thing we're needing to do is
12 a lot consolidation plan. Right now the property consists
13 of five lots and we're submitting that at the same time
14 we're submitting the land development plan. This is an
15 existing conditions plan. We have about 28 feet that fall
16 across the site going towards the southeast and there's
17 gonna be improvements both on 115 and the township road.
18 When the project first started out, we
19 were looking at one entrance on 115 and perhaps an
20 emergency entrance on Fern Crest Road. Mr. McElroy said
21 that he wants to do this development in a first-class
22 manner and accommodate anything that could come into this
23 area. He doesn't know for sure what vendors are going to
24 come into these buildings, and this is actually a
25 footprint of the building that HRG is in right now, down
5
1 on Route 611, which was done by Rick Sutliff.
2 This is a restaurant building and
3 it's designed to accommodate most of your restaurants
4 coming, the size of a Red Robin or similar things like
5 that. The area of disturbance here is this entire lot
6 right here and then some grading that's going to be done
7 along 115 for road widening.
8 We are putting in a left turn lane on
9 Ferncrest. Ferncrest is being widened and 115 is being
10 widened all the way down the front of the property. There
11 is a left turn lane for this entrance also.
12 The taper from Keswick Pointe is
13 still -- continues just into this area right here and
14 we're tying into that taper.
15 The --
16 MR. SINCAVAGE: How about to the
17 north? How long -- how far do you take the taper?
18 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: The end of the
19 work is right up here. This orange right here is
20 McGinley's --
21 MR. SINCAVAGE: Okay.
22 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: -- facility, and
23 so we're coming just past just the front of his building.
24 There's actually -- if you look, his building is actually
25 encroaching in the right of way just a little bit there,
6
1 but we're not going to affect that.
2 There's a couple issues we have right
3 now with PennDOT, as I mentioned, that we're working out.
4 One is, we had a meeting with them, with the township
5 engineer sometime back and we talked about fair share
6 contributions. HRG did a traffic impact study and it came
7 up with a fair share cost for improvements up at 940 and
8 115, $8300 and some change.
9 And the last letter that we got from
10 PennDOT said that they want Mr. McElroy to pay for the
11 improvements on 115 and 940, which is a left turn lane on
12 115, both north and southbound. And, so, you know, um --
13 we have a inquiry in to them to back off and let us do the
14 fair share contribution and, you know, we welcome any
15 support we can get from the township on that because he
16 certainly is gonna be doing an awful lot of improvements
17 right here on 115 and Ferncrest.
18 And to saddle one developer with all
19 of the improvements at 940 and 115, I don't understand
20 that, but --
21 MR. SINCAVAGE: Well, what is the
22 percentage of the contribution to the interchange there?
23 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: Um --
24 MR. McHALE: 2.7 percent is what was
25 being proposed. The a.m. peek, I think, was --
7
1 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: 5.3.
2 MR. McHALE: -- 5.4 or 5.8 percent and
3 the p.m. peek was 2.5, and the Saturday was 2.74, and
4 that's the number they were using was the Saturday peek.
5 But also I just wanted to add that --
6 what Mr. Hendricks was saying regarding the left turn into
7 Ferncrest, is that the initial discussions were that they
8 were considering making that rear access to their property
9 off of Ferncrest just an emergency access and they were
10 gonna gate that. If they were to do that, they would not
11 then need the left turn into Ferncrest.
12 So he's -- he's kind of going a little
13 bit above and beyond to actually accommodate the residents
14 and his development with that Ferncrest left turn lane,
15 which will enhance the project, but it also makes it more
16 accessible for the residents. So I think that's a good
17 thing that's going on. So therefore I think what
18 Mr. Hendricks is talking about, taking all of this into
19 consideration, is appropriate.
20 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: We did get
21 permission from PennDOT to make some changes from our
22 original submission. We didn't get to make those changes
23 prior to our submission to PennDOT because we were trying
24 to get it submitted before they came out with a new strike
25 off letter in January and we didn't know what the
8
1 implications were going to be on our client.
2 So we did get permission since then to
3 put the curb in this area right here and also in front of
4 the development down to the driveway. There was some
5 issues with utility relocations, both the main sewer trunk
6 line and also utility poles in this area, and the shoulder
7 swail requirements from PennDOT would have caused the
8 relocation of both of those utilities to do that.
9 We now have a request into them to
10 allow us to continue the curb from the south end of the
11 driveway and blend in down here close to the Keswick
12 Pointe because we do have the same issues with cover on
13 the sewer line, because of what they require for a swail
14 now, and also setting back the utilities.
15 And Bob and I have spoken about
16 relocating. I know he doesn't want to relocate the sewer
17 line. Irregardless, we're going to have some cover issues
18 right here on the driveway that we're working out with
19 Mr. McHale and we'll come to some satisfactory agreements
20 on that.
21 MR. SINCAVAGE: If you put the curbing
22 along 115 there, are you going to put in inlet basins
23 along the road to catch the water off the roadway --
24 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: Yes.
25 MR. SINCAVAGE: -- off of 115?
9
1 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: Yes, we will.
2 There is, um -- there's a cross pipe here, and there's a
3 cross pipe here.
4 MR. SINCAVAGE: Right.
5 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: And they will
6 have curb inlets on them. There's a cross pipe diagonal
7 across the intersection here, which I'll talk about in a
8 little while.
9 So, yes, we'll have some inlets
10 catching that. In our previous design where we do have
11 these as swails, we're catching the swail and the water
12 off the road and from the edge of the parking lot, towards
13 the road, was being picked up in those existing culverts.
14 The additional runoff to them is almost negligible and
15 when you look at the peek and there's hardly any
16 contribution, so --
17 One of the things we're also asking
18 PennDOT to allow us to do is, this pipe right here is an
19 existing -- existing 36 inch pipe here and it's not
20 adequate for the existing conditions right now, and I
21 confirmed that with Mr. McHale that there has been some
22 issues with that. If my client has to replace that pipe,
23 it's likely that he's going to wind up needing a joint
24 permit instead of a GP-11. And we're trying to avoid
25 that; and we can. We've run the hydraulics analysis that
10
1 if we can just put a six foot long taper on that pipe,
2 it'll take the flows and there will be more than adequate
3 room for what's in that pipe.
4 So what we're contributing, in
5 addition to what's already there, is just a little bit
6 from widening of this road and the widening of this road,
7 is the only additional runoff we're putting there. In the
8 time that it hits there, it hits there so soon before the
9 peek, it doesn't affect the peek flows at all, so --
10 But I have been told not to get my
11 hopes up too much because it's not a standard PennDOT
12 design and we've assured them that we provided the
13 hydraulic calculations and structural calculations. We're
14 in a wait-and-see mode.
15 MR. McHALE: When we work through the
16 calcs on that, what storm event was passing? Because all
17 I recall, as far as discussions, were that our folks had
18 indicated that water has, you know, topped the road, I
19 guess, at that point, you know, sometime in the past; but
20 I don't know what storm event that would have been.
21 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: We're analyzing
22 for the 25 year storm, I believe, which is 115 CFS.
23 MR. McHALE: Does that pass for the
24 hundred -- I mean, does it pass for the 25 year?
25 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: Not right now.
11
1 MR. McHALE: It does not. Okay.
2 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: It doesn't.
3 And --
4 MR. McHALE: One other quick question,
5 as far as the left turn lane, it extends to the south,
6 you'd indicated that it was gonna tie into the Keswick
7 Pointe taper.
8 Is that going to be a continuous lane
9 or are you gonna leave there, taper and then begin your
10 left turn from there going north?
11 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: What we're
12 showing right now, Mr. McHale, is a left turn lane right
13 here on our entrance. And this is a shared lane, I guess,
14 a shared center lane here. It does continue down, but
15 the -- the dedicated left turn lane is right here at
16 Ferncrest and, of course, this is a left turn lane coming
17 into the driveway.
18 MR. McHALE: But the shared lane going
19 southward will tie into Keswick Pointe's --
20 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: Yes.
21 MR. McHALE: -- taper or their left
22 turn lane and that all becomes a shared lane -- it will be
23 a designated left turn, I guess --
24 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: Yes.
25 MR. McHALE: -- to tie it in --
12
1 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: When it comes
2 down on -- it continues on down and does tie into their
3 dedicated left turn lane, is my understanding.
4 This is our utility plan. The site's
5 gonna be served by two on-lot wells, one for each
6 facility, and the restaurant will have an oil/water
7 separator coming out here and we'll tie into this existing
8 trunk line right here, right down in the driveway here and
9 out of the retail building, we're tying in right here.
10 We have talked to the SEO. We've
11 allocated six EDUs for the restaurant, one for this
12 facility based upon the number of employees, knowing that
13 if later on he divides this into, say, space for three
14 tenants, then he'll be required to obtain more EDUs to
15 service that building and the client's aware of that.
16 MR. SINCAVAGE: So how many EDUs are
17 you requesting for that?
18 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: For this one,
19 it's one based on the number --
20 MR. SINCAVAGE: Just one?
21 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: Just one based
22 on the number of employees and recognizing that, you know,
23 that will increase. And the use of that building hasn't
24 been determined yet and it's conceivably that that
25 building could have 15 employees, which is what that was
13
1 based on.
2 Right now the restaurant's proposing
3 that there'll be 162 seats in the restaurant. The parking
4 area is based upon one space for every 2 seats and 81
5 seats for the restaurant. The seating for the retail
6 building is based upon the square footage; and then when
7 we combine that, you're going to hear this same number
8 again, but it's 162 spaces required for the whole facility
9 and that's exactly what we've provided.
10 We are proposing a sign. We're not
11 submitting or applying for a permit for the sign right
12 now, but we propose it'd be located right here, which will
13 be good visibility for traffic, yet it's far enough back
14 not to be an impediment to people either coming into or
15 leaving the development. And we do state that that will
16 be submitted later on as a separate permit application.
17 We have -- I'll talk about the
18 electric power for just a moment. We have power coming
19 down this side of 115. There's also power coming down
20 Ferncrest. In our discussions with PP&L, they're --
21 they're not resolved yet on how they're gonna provide
22 power in this area with Keswick Pointe. They're still
23 working out some issues. So they did say that we could
24 provide power either off of this line here or off of
25 Ferncrest or perhaps both. We just show something
14
1 temporarily, but we're showing a power line coming
2 overhead, hitting the transformer here, and then feeding
3 both buildings.
4 I think in the long run, it's more
5 likely we'll see an overhead line in this area coming to a
6 transformer on this building and either one coming from
7 here to the building or from Ferncrest to the building to
8 a transformer there, and probably separate transformers.
9 And we'll keep the township reprised as we go forward with
10 that. I did have a call in to PP&L today to try to
11 resolve that issue. Couldn't get it taken care of.
12 This is our storm water plan, post
13 construction storm water. It might be different than the
14 one you're seeing there because we made some significant
15 revisions to our storage areas. We had two underground
16 detention areas, one in this area here, which takes the
17 flows basically from this part of the lot; and then we
18 have another area here that takes the remainder of the
19 flows on the lot. Both of those detention areas will
20 handle the difference between the two year pre and post
21 storm for infiltration.
22 We have the -- the rain gutters are
23 going in inlets right here, right here and right here.
24 These inlets are also picking up the runoff on the parking
25 lot, can come into this storage area and also leave from
15
1 this storage area. A very little bit will be kneeded out
2 to this culvert right here. Most of this flow that leaves
3 this one comes down through the pipe to this rain garden
4 where it's treated there. It -- the water then is piped
5 down to this location to contribute to the storage in this
6 basement right here.
7 This is the rain tanks, which is the
8 round, cylindrical tanks that are about 18 inches high and
9 they're flat. They've got about two foot of cover on them
10 over the parking lot. It gives us good volume, very
11 stable as far as supporting traffic goes, one of the newer
12 products that are being used.
13 When it comes out of this one -- the
14 water exits this storage, you know, once an excessive two
15 year storm exits here. Of course anything that came from
16 here already's had treatment from the rain garden.
17 Whatever comes out of here is then going into a swail and
18 it gets treated as it comes around the swail right here
19 and then discharges, what was one of the original natural
20 discharge points on the property. Sort of a natural swail
21 that came down and exited right here, so this was one of
22 our discharge points analysis.
23 And again, there's going to be some
24 improvements for the drainage on 115 and Ferncrest because
25 of the widening and that's contributing very little to the
16
1 flows, but we are dealing with that appropriately.
2 MR. SINCAVAGE: When I was looking at
3 your plans, I was trying to figure out, what happens when
4 the water comes into that secondary area? Is it sheeting
5 across? Not that -- not the underground, but when it
6 comes out of the underground.
7 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: When it comes
8 out of the underground?
9 MR. SINCAVAGE: Right.
10 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: It's -- it's
11 metered in right here, that's a back to back inlet, and
12 there's a head wall here with riffraff and there's a small
13 swail --
14 MR. SINCAVAGE: Right.
15 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: -- right here.
16 MR. SINCAVAGE: Right.
17 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: And it continues
18 on around. So it is a swail.
19 MR. SINCAVAGE: Is that a retention
20 area there to the south?
21 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: No. Originally
22 this was a retention area --
23 MR. SINCAVAGE: Okay.
24 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: -- but we're no
25 longer using that because we're taking care of our volume
17
1 issues right here in this. There is a very small amount
2 of water that comes through a curve cut right here from
3 this area --
4 MR. SINCAVAGE: Right.
5 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: -- right in here
6 and we come in this curve cut. And then this inlet here
7 picks up water from -- surface water, from this area right
8 here, is graded back towards this inlet and the -- the
9 break in the grade is right in here and then it goes to
10 one of these other inlets.
11 MR. SINCAVAGE: So on the outlet from
12 your secondary underground -- or subsurface treatment
13 area, you have a regulator on that?
14 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: Yes.
15 MR. SINCAVAGE: What happens if that
16 system becomes supercharged? If we're like -- say we have
17 a hundred year storm event. Can it become supercharged?
18 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: This -- this
19 inlet is actually designed to accommodate, I believe, the
20 50 year storm.
21 MR. SINCAVAGE: Um-hum.
22 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: So it does have
23 orifice in it, one, to meter the lower flows, but then if
24 it does load up, it's going to go ahead and discharge and
25 it will come right on out through this riffraff here.
18
1 MR. SINCAVAGE: So there's two
2 orifices to allow the discharge from that?
3 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: Yes.
4 MR. SINCAVAGE: Okay. So if you had a
5 50 year storm event, then you're straight -- you're going
6 to have more of a flow going back across that other
7 adjoining property where it comes out, where you said your
8 natural flow was originally --
9 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: Yes.
10 MR. SINCAVAGE: -- right? Keep going
11 up. You have that swail. I can see the swail from here,
12 a little further up?
13 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: Um-hum.
14 MR. SINCAVAGE: It goes back onto the
15 adjoining property. Won't that area become concentrated?
16 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: Um, the design
17 is such that it's not going to exceed the -- you know, the
18 preimprovement conditions.
19 MR. SINCAVAGE: Okay.
20 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: So --
21 MR. SINCAVAGE: But it would get out
22 the swail -- that natural swail area there?
23 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: Yes, and there's
24 a pond -- Keswick Pointe has a storage pond --
25 MR. SINCAVAGE: Right, but I'm just
19
1 I'm worried about your flow going into their basin and
2 then is that basin going to become charged, you know,
3 supercharged.
4 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: Right. As long
5 as we don't release more than what was coming --
6 MR. SINCAVAGE: Right.
7 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: -- out here
8 before --
9 MR. SINCAVAGE: Okay.
10 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: -- then their
11 design will handle whatever we put in there. So we just
12 have to be sure that we don't exceed the predevelopment
13 condition.
14 MR. SINCAVAGE: Bob, have you gotten
15 into those calculations yet or --
16 MR. McHALE: Well --
17 MR. SINCAVAGE: -- is that too far?
18 MR. McHALE: -- we looked at some of
19 the calcs and they're revising some of the storm water
20 on-site, so they'll be resubmitting another set of calcs.
21 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: And I think
22 since Bob looked at it, we've increased the storage volume
23 here, in here, and we've upsized the pipes to the 50 year
24 flows. They're designed for the 25, but they will
25 accommodate the 50 year flows. That was one of his
20
1 comments early on.
2 We did originally have inlet, because
3 this was a swail here, taking water across, discharge in
4 here. We're no longer going to need that because the --
5 as you come off of 115, there's a slight dip here in the
6 grade, the curve is located here and hopefully when you
7 put the curb in here, that this water will flow across to
8 the low part of the driveway there. So it's just a very
9 little bit of surface flow that would be falling right in
10 this area here.
11 MR. SINCAVAGE: But there's an
12 existing pipe that crosses over -- or under 115 right
13 above there, right? Not there. A little bit -- yes,
14 there's one there?
15 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: Yes. There will
16 be a curb inlet on that pipe. There's also --
17 MR. SINCAVAGE: Okay. But what about
18 the water behind the curb -- to the east of the curb cut?
19 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: Right now this
20 is graded from the edge of the parking lot, I believe,
21 down to the back of the curb.
22 MR. SINCAVAGE: Oh, okay.
23 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: I would say we
24 haven't finished grading in this area right here because
25 we're -- we just got approval from PennDOT for the curb
21
1 here.
2 MR. SINCAVAGE: Right.
3 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: So, I guess, I
4 think, we got that a couple -- probably late -- earlier
5 this week or late last week. We haven't -- we haven't
6 resolved all the issues right now. We're still working on
7 that.
8 This is the erosion and sedimentation
9 control plan. This is all being revised because this was
10 actually done -- this plan was done with a previous storm
11 water plan because some of the inlets have changed, the
12 pipes have changed, the sequence is going to be changing
13 with the curb here. It was developed for swails, so this
14 sheet's really null and void. It will be a completely new
15 E&S.
16 This is a landscape and lighting
17 plan -- or landscape plan. We put the lighting on a
18 separate plan to make it easier to read. We have some
19 large trees here on these islands. I believe those are
20 honey locust and we have some red oaks around the
21 perimeter here, and then juniper shrubs and some other
22 shrubs around the buildings in here, and in the islands we
23 have landscaping -- landscaping around the perimeter of
24 the -- of the restaurant. We have some shrubbery showing
25 along the frontages of the roadways to meet an ordinance
22
1 that requires that we don't allow headlights to go up
2 there and blind people driving on those roads.
3 In the buffer area --
4 MR. SINCAVAGE: What type of shrubs
5 are those going to be, Jim?
6 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: These --
7 MR. SINCAVAGE: Yeah.
8 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: -- are gold
9 coast junipers. They get about three foot high.
10 MR. MILLER: Sounds like Glen.
11 MR. SINCAVAGE: Yeah, okay.
12 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: I had to look
13 and read the plan. I guess that's pretty apparent, but --
14 MR. SINCAVAGE: No, but that's good.
15 That will stay low and you can keep it cut low.
16 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: And I know that,
17 you know, there's an interest in landscaping here. One of
18 the things we're asking a variance on back here in this
19 buffer, and we're asking for a partial variance because we
20 want to put three light poles just varying into that, show
21 that to you in the lighting plan, but we also want to
22 supplement this buffer.
23 This is a natural existing buffer. I
24 brought some photographs that I'd like to just pass and
25 let you look at it so you can have an idea of what that
23
1 buffer looks like. We feel like it needs to be
2 supplemented. We're showing some Douglas firs in here
3 and -- to be distributed so as not to disturb existing
4 trees and provide the buffer that we're looking for
5 between this residential area and our commercial
6 development.
7 MR. SINCAVAGE: The only comment I'll
8 make on that, the 25 foot buffer has to be maintained
9 between the residential area and the commercial area,
10 right?
11 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: Yes.
12 MR. SINCAVAGE: And you're asking for
13 a waiver on that?
14 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: We're asking for
15 a partial waiver. We have the full 25 foot buffer. The
16 partial waiver we're asking for is because it says that
17 there'll be no objects or constructions in that buffer.
18 We want to put three light poles -- I'll show you the
19 lighting plan in just a moment -- just a couple feet back
20 off of the paving. That puts them in the buffer zone.
21 MR. SINCAVAGE: Where's the 25 foot
22 buffer line there? Maybe I'm not seeing it.
23 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: It is --
24 MR. McHALE: The curb line.
25 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: -- this edge
24
1 right here --
2 MR. McHALE: The curb line --
3 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: -- of the
4 parking lot. That's the edge of the parking lot --
5 MR. SINCAVAGE: The edge of the
6 parking lot.
7 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: And that's the
8 25 foot buffer line from the property line, which is
9 located right here.
10 MR. SINCAVAGE: Okay. So you have
11 that whole area that you could fill in with trees. You're
12 showing the trees almost lined up against your back
13 property line.
14 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: Right.
15 MR. SINCAVAGE: But you could fill in
16 that whole area with some trees.
17 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: Yes. I have --
18 MR. SINCAVAGE: From my experience
19 from a previous board member, I know he always said he
20 liked to have mixed trees. Don't put all of one species
21 in. They usually like to do two or three different --
22 different species so that one host doesn't go on one
23 something, something. Okay?
24 How was that?
25 MS. HAASE: That was pretty good.
25
1 MR. SINCAVAGE: So if you could do
2 a -- a mix.
3 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: A mix.
4 Certainly. We can do that.
5 MR. SINCAVAGE: Well, help me here.
6 MR. BAXTER: I don't remember whether
7 it was the mix actually caused that. Um, I sent an e-mail
8 to Glen, but I thought that the consistency didn't -- it
9 didn't get the co-hosts at that point. But quite
10 honestly, I don't remember.
11 MR. SINCAVAGE: Um-hum.
12 MR. BAXTER: We can do some homework.
13 MR. SINCAVAGE: Maybe you can have
14 your landscape architect look at that to just see if you
15 can do a mix there.
16 And another thing, I see you have a
17 little stagger. We don't want to see rows of trees.
18 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: Right.
19 MR. SINCAVAGE: You know, if you
20 stagger it back there, you have that 25 foot to work in
21 there.
22 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: We'll arrange
23 that so that these trees are distributed and also have
24 more than one species in there. We'll run that by
25 Mr. McHale before we come back before the board.
26
1 This is the lighting plan. We're
2 proposing lights around the perimeter of the parking lot.
3 These are the three lights, one, two, three that we're
4 talking about, are actually going to be in the buffer zone
5 and you can see within a couple of feet of the edge of the
6 buffer. And that -- that is a waiver that we're asking
7 for, to build something within the buffer zone.
8 MR. SINCAVAGE: So it would really
9 only be those three light poles?
10 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: Yes. You're
11 just going to have the concrete pedestal that you see
12 right here and the light pole. That's all that's going to
13 be within the buffer zone.
14 MR. SINCAVAGE: Is that a zoning issue
15 or --
16 MR. McHALE: That --
17 MR. SINCAVAGE: Bob?
18 MR. McHALE: That was in the SALDO.
19 MR. SINCAVAGE: It's in the SALDO.
20 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: Now, on our
21 previous submission we had some inlets and things like
22 that. We're dealing with storm water up here. That's all
23 been taken out. We completely revised the storm water.
24 MR. McHALE: And on the lighting or
25 the photometric plan that he's presented, the light
27
1 fixtures actually have a cutoff to them so that they don't
2 encroach -- you might want to read some of those -- along
3 the back property line.
4 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: This -- this
5 right here is a half of foot-candle, which is an ordinance
6 requirement, that you cannot exceed more than half a
7 foot-candle beyond the property line.
8 MR. SINCAVAGE: Right.
9 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: That's this
10 light gray line right here. And we did bring it out a
11 little bit past the property line here on this driveway,
12 which I think is a good thing, and I believe that we come
13 out a little bit -- well, just slightly past the property
14 line on the driveways; but as you can see, here's the
15 buffer zone, the inside edge of the buffer, here's our
16 half a foot-candle, you know, we're still between 10 and
17 15 feet from the property line back there with our half a
18 foot-candle, well within the property line on the south
19 side.
20 This dark one is the zero food-candles
21 from the lighting that we're providing. There's just a
22 minor amount of light that's coming out into the roadway,
23 but none of it exceeds the half a foot-candle except at
24 the driveways. The average in the parking lot is required
25 to be more than .75 and we actually have the almost two
28
1 food-candles average in the parking lot, but because of
2 the guards on the lights that's -- you know, kept within
3 what we're trying to limit the lighting.
4 Our lighting poles are 25 foot high.
5 I didn't find their limit requirement in the ordinance for
6 the height of the poles. I talked to Mr. McHale about
7 that, limiting them to 25 foot high, the pedestal is two
8 and a half foot high. So we're basically under 28 feet
9 with our lighting.
10 I think that's probably a pretty good
11 presentation of the project. The rest of the sheets that
12 I have are detail sheets. I mean, if you're interested in
13 looking at those, we can, or I'll entertain any questions
14 or suggestions that you have.
15 MS. HAASE: Jim, one comment I have
16 for you, if you're going to be helping the applicant with
17 the signage, I'm assuming it's going be illuminated?
18 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: Yes.
19 MS. HAASE: We've had some issues with
20 some commercial properties on 115 with the glare. So just
21 pay attention to the lighting.
22 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: Okay. Does the
23 ordinance adequately address that? If we -- if we stay
24 within the ordinance or --
25 MS. HAASE: Yes, it does.
29
1 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: Okay. We will
2 be sure we do that.
3 MS. HAASE: Thank you.
4 MR. SINCAVAGE: Was that because it
5 was front lighted as opposed to being from the interior
6 lighting?
7 MS. HAASE: Yeah, and also the angle.
8 Some of the older establishments had the spotlights at the
9 bottom --
10 MR. SINCAVAGE: Right.
11 MS. HAASE: -- and the glare was
12 causing some problems at night with the drivers on --
13 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: Actually the
14 backsplash of the light coming off of the sign? Okay.
15 MR. SINCAVAGE: Any questions from any
16 board member at this time?
17 MR. MILLER: (Mr. Miller shook his
18 head.)
19 MS. LAMBERTON: (Ms. Lamberton shook
20 her head.)
21 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: I'm not looking
22 for a motion for even a conditional tonight, so --
23 MR. SINCAVAGE: Well, you have a lot
24 of issues with PennDOT and --
25 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: Several.
30
1 MR. SINCAVAGE: -- several other
2 agencies.
3 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: I think the
4 other ones will fall right in line once we resolve our
5 highway issues.
6 MR. SINCAVAGE: Any question, Bob?
7 MR. McHALE: No, sir.
8 MR. SINCAVAGE: Any questions from the
9 public?
10 Thank you.
11 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: Thank you.
12 MR. ARMSTRONG: We don't have to be --
13 MR. SINCAVAGE: We'll do a table in
14 just a minute.
15 I'll entertain a motion to table the
16 preliminary final land development plan for John McElroy?
17 MR. MILLER: So moved.
18 MR. BAXTER: Second.
19 MS. LAMBERTON: Second.
20 MR. SINCAVAGE: Motion and second.
21 All those in favor, please say aye?
22 THE BOARD: Aye.
23 MR. SINCAVAGE: Give me a second.
24 Yes, you are next, Kush & Sunny.
25 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: My name is Mark
31
1 Radcliffe. I'm with Riley Associates. We're the engineer
2 for Kush & Sunny.
3 We're proposing a land development
4 plan at the corner of Hemlock Drive and Route 940. Also
5 here is Chris McDermott as well.
6 MR. CHRISTOPHER McDERMOTT: I'm going
7 to try to keep quiet. I was at the dentist earlier so it
8 could slur and spew.
9 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: We'll see how
10 long Chris can stay quiet.
11 MR. SINCAVAGE: Uh-huh.
12 MR. CHRISTOPHER McDERMOTT: It's a
13 test.
14 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: I was here
15 probably in September to discuss this plan. I'll just do
16 a quick review of the plan.
17 We're located adjacent to the Dunkin
18 Donuts along Route 940. The plan merges what were two
19 separate parcels into a single parcel. The proposal is
20 for two uses on-site, one currently is going to be
21 proposed as a prototype bank branch with the set -- with a
22 drive-thru, and the second use would be a rental office
23 space type use.
24 Site access, we're proposing access to
25 the site primarily off 940 with a secondary access on
32
1 Hemlock, Hemlock Drive. We're going to discuss that in
2 some more detail later.
3 Sewage, we'll be serviced by the
4 public sewer system. Currently we're proposing tying into
5 an existing low pressure main along Hemlock Drive. Bob
6 and I were talking about that. We need to just verify the
7 capacity on that -- that line that we have with the tie-in
8 capacity. If that would be unavailable, there's a line on
9 the other side of Route 940 that we could tie into. This
10 would just be a simpler tie in and we wouldn't have to
11 cross Hemlock Road and that would be open on 940. So I
12 will work that out. Either way, we have access to the --
13 to the sewage infrastructure that's there.
14 The site itself is about one-third
15 wetland, which are delineated on the plan. The remaining
16 upper portion of this site is the development area. Our
17 storm water is being handled through a number of different
18 things. We're using some porous pave, some underground
19 detention and infiltration, some low infiltration berms
20 around the perimeter and some rain gardens. We really
21 don't have any concentrated discharge points. We have
22 some -- some overflow off a couple of berms and the larger
23 storms into the wetland area where it ultimately sort of
24 coalesces into a stream into the wetland and access the
25 wetland and heads down towards Tobyhanna.
33
1 We're in a conditional no tension
2 area; however, we are managing the pre to the -- to equal
3 the post -- the post equal to the predevelopment flow
4 partially because of the -- sort of the unknown conditions
5 of the culverts downstream. We'll be able to demonstrate
6 (inaudible) conveyance.
7 We've submitted plans to the Monroe
8 County Conservation District. They determined that on the
9 configuration of our site, where we don't have a point
10 source of discharge, we do not need an NPDES permit; so
11 they reviewed our E&S plan, we got an adequacy letter from
12 Erosion and Sedimentation Control.
13 We've spoken to PennDOT about proposed
14 improvements to Route 940, the -- and Bob was part of the
15 discussion. What we're proposing, and it's going to be
16 the preferred alternative, is, at the minimum, a dedicated
17 left-hand turn would be required into the site off of
18 Route 940 with some -- potentially a dedicated left-hand
19 turn added for -- for Hemlock and some tapers continuing
20 on through. The other option was a dual use left-hand
21 turn lane that extended all the way along the frontage and
22 actually continuing past the Dunkin Donuts and tying all
23 the way up to the taper at the -- at the WaWa.
24 That's the option the client has
25 chosen to pursue. He's doing a little bit more length of
34
1 improvement, but he feels that it's just a more palatable
2 and better use for the -- better arrangement for the
3 general community. Obviously, the neighbors have benefit
4 from the left -- the dual use left-hand turn lane and --
5 and avoids any -- any potential conflicts with any of the
6 adjoining property owners as a dedicated left-hand turn.
7 So that, in of itself, should provide some benefit to all
8 surrounding properties.
9 As you recall, back when I was here in
10 September, there was an issue of Hemlock Road and status
11 as a private road. And that really was kind of the key
12 issue of the plan. The residents here -- and remember
13 things, at the time we were proposing an inbound and
14 outbound entrance onto Hemlock Road. There were concerns
15 from the residents and was given direction from the
16 commission to deal with that issue, meet with the parties
17 involved, meet with the owner of the road and the
18 residents, come and get this resolved before we come back.
19 So we've done that, we've met with the
20 owners of the road and the residents. We had a
21 conversation last week with them, the client, to come to
22 an accommodation somewhere that will work for everyone.
23 What we're now proposing, which is a little bit different
24 than the plan you have in front of you, is simply a left
25 out onto Hemlock.
35
1 There will be no means for traffic
2 coming in Hemlock and entering the site. This is
3 reinforced with a little bit of a mountable curb to
4 prevent people from making the shortcut even against the
5 sign. We still have a full use entrance up on the front.
6 That was a compromise we sort of reached at the meeting
7 between our client and the residents, and it seemed to be
8 suitable to all parties involved. And that's the one
9 thing we want to point out to you because it is a major
10 change in the plan over what's -- what's in front of you.
11 That really is the crux of the
12 presentation. I'll turn it over if there's any questions
13 from the commission.
14 MR. CHRISTOPHER McDERMOTT: Just --
15 because I was at the meeting last week with Sincavage
16 Corp. and with some of the neighbors, most of which are
17 here, they had a concern about the traffic making a
18 right-handed turn out of the development and -- or out of
19 our project and going into the residential area. That's
20 primarily, I think, why they felt that they would like to
21 have that channelization to -- to really restrict the
22 right-hand turn, make it -- make them turn left and go to
23 940.
24 And we also agreed that we would put
25 some additional signage out there indicating that it's a
36
1 private road and we will also be working with Sincavage
2 Corp. on possibly installation of another speed hump,
3 again, to discourage through traffic through the
4 residential area. I think that -- that was one of the
5 major concerns of the residents and it was also part of
6 the reason why we went to the center left-hand turn lane
7 instead of dedicated lefts because we, like the previous
8 development, would have had to have done a dedicated
9 left-hand turn lane into Hemlock, which the residents,
10 again, were concerned that that would sort of promote
11 through traffic.
12 This is somewhat softer in its
13 approach, but it also provides them an opportunity or
14 safety of having a left-hand turn for their own sake.
15 And, again, I think it is very beneficial to all involved
16 from this location all the way to the 940 entrance, and I
17 think PennDOT was encouraging us to do that. And I think
18 for that reason, because it's got the most benefit, the
19 most bang for the buck for the most people.
20 MR. SINCAVAGE: Okay. I just want to
21 disclose two things. One, it is not Sincavage
22 Corporation, it's S.I.D.E Corporation --
23 MR. CHRISTOPHER McDERMOTT: S.I.D.E,
24 sorry.
25 MR. SINCAVAGE: -- and just for the
37
1 record, I am the owner of S.I.D.E. Corporation.
2 I want to go back. I was just
3 noticing on your dedicated left and right-hand turn, in
4 front of Palmerton Bank's driveway I see you already have
5 that tapering out there.
6 Is that what's planned or was agreed
7 to by PennDOT?
8 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: That's -- that's
9 what's conceptually agreed to with PennDOT to begin the
10 taper, but currently there's nothing there now --
11 MR. SINCAVAGE: Right.
12 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: -- to protect
13 anyone turning the left. This provides some shielding
14 because you're in sort of the fatter part of the taper --
15 MR. SINCAVAGE: Right.
16 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: -- and, you know,
17 if we could extend it past there then, you know, the taper
18 has to carry on further up and we're really getting out --
19 out of the site -- site area.
20 MR. SINCAVAGE: Because that's a
21 dangerous entrance because of the people coming west on
22 115 -- you know, 940. Thank you. 940.
23 There's been some screeching there and
24 probably some rear ending. I mean, I can understand that
25 it's not your issue, but I think that's something that
38
1 might want to be looked at with the PennDOT meetings.
2 MR. CHRISTOPHER McDERMOTT: I think
3 that's something we could take up with PennDOT to see how
4 far back we can extend --
5 MR. SINCAVAGE: Right.
6 MR. CHRISTOPHER McDERMOTT: -- the
7 center left-hand turn.
8 MR. SINCAVAGE: Right.
9 MR. CHRISTOPHER McDERMOTT: Striping
10 without having to go crazy on the taper.
11 MR. SINCAVAGE: Right.
12 MR. CHRISTOPHER McDERMOTT: And if
13 they can work with us on that --
14 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: Um-hum.
15 MR. CHRISTOPHER McDERMOTT: -- it may
16 be more beneficial for Palmerton also.
17 MR. SINCAVAGE: Yes, it would.
18 MR. McHALE: I just want to make a
19 comment or two about the revised access. The layout that
20 they're proposing here is very similar to what
21 Mr. Hendricks just proposed for McElroy on 115; the left
22 turn in front of the site, the left turn in front of the
23 roadway that's adjacent to the site. I had a couple of
24 concerns that e-mailed back to Mark Radcliffe earlier
25 today -- or I guess it was yesterday, about the left turn
39
1 only out onto Hemlock.
2 And that is, when you have customers
3 or clients that are going to use the facility and they're
4 in the left turn lane in front of Hemlock, and they make
5 the turn, now where are they going to go? And what I kind
6 of threw out was that they only have two choices, and one
7 is to either try to shoot through the wrong direction on
8 the do not enter signs and make it into the facility
9 before somebody else comes out, or they're going to go
10 down into the residential development, turn around at the
11 intersection and come back out again.
12 My thinking is simply that the
13 original layout and the design was fine the way it was
14 originally proposed. If there's additional signage that
15 can be put up right at the edge of the entrance or even
16 square off that lower end of the driveway, you'll
17 discourage people from turning right, and you can have
18 those large signs that say local traff -- or, you know,
19 prohibited, local traffic only, those kind of things. But
20 the other alternative is, if they turn around in the
21 residential area and then come back out, they have to get
22 back on 940 again, fight the traffic, then make another
23 left to get into the facility.
24 So it's kind of awkward and unique,
25 but, again, the -- almost the very similar concept is
40
1 being utilized at McElroy, which they have the same
2 concerns of people utilizing Ferncrest. I'd just like to
3 propose that you all consider that as a board when we're
4 making a recommendation to the board of supervisors that
5 we also get some feedback from PennDOT on this traffic
6 circulation. That's really all I have.
7 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: And we have
8 forwarded this to PennDOT, and, again, the meeting with
9 the residents was last week, so this has kind of developed
10 in the last few days. We got to Bob earlier in the week,
11 just so he was prepared tonight, wasn't seeing something
12 cold feet. We forwarded them to PennDOT. We haven't had
13 any -- any feedback yet from them. We'll wait and see
14 what they say.
15 MR. McHALE: If I'm not mistaken,
16 there are speed bumps further down on Hemlock.
17 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: I believe there's
18 at least one, and I'm not --
19 MR. SINCAVAGE: Two. There's two.
20 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: Is there two?
21 Okay.
22 MR. SINCAVAGE: I'm sorry, there's
23 one.
24 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: I don't know. I
25 haven't driven down this road. It's a private road.
41
1 MR. McHALE: With proper signage
2 coming out of that access onto Hemlock, I believe you can
3 accomplish what you're trying to do, is to keep people
4 from just arbitrarily driving through the development, and
5 that would be to have a one-way sign pointing to the left
6 to go out to 940; the local traffic only signs like you're
7 proposing. I'm just concerned you're going to get a lot
8 of people into an office complex that aren't familiar and
9 are just coming to do business and they're going to turn
10 in on Hemlock and you're going to get that scenario over
11 and over again, and it's just going be a --
12 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: You want to speak
13 to that?
14 MR. CHRISTOPHER McDERMOTT: I was at
15 the meeting and we did discuss that with the neighbors.
16 One sentiment that was expressed was, well, then they'll
17 learn quick. So we want to work with the residents as
18 much as we can. So in a lot of ways, we're really
19 deferring to your desires.
20 And I hear what Bob is saying and as a
21 matter of fact we spoke briefly about that and really, at
22 the meeting I was -- I was sort of wishy-washy coming out
23 and saying, well, did they say no -- no two way or did
24 they just say left and -- you know, I spoke with Michelle
25 Farley, who was at the meeting and she said no, Chris,
42
1 they said left only. So that's what we put on the plan
2 here. And maybe you could address, if you'd like, what
3 some of Bob's concerns --
4 MS. HAASE: Well --
5 MR. McHALE: I just want to add to
6 that quickly, real quick, that the -- it's not the concern
7 of the employees or somebody that's going to frequent the
8 facility; but an office complex, you know, you could have
9 a lot of clients coming in to like -- say it's an
10 insurance agency or something, and you might only go there
11 a couple times a year, and so the traffic, it is going to
12 be a concern. It's a very unique design. This is not
13 typical to put a left turn out of a facility and -- Mark,
14 I think you know that --
15 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: Right.
16 MR. McHALE: -- and you could create
17 some issues by proposing this type of thing. So I'm
18 just --
19 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: And in addition,
20 we're trying to balance all concerns obviously --
21 MR. McHALE: Understandably.
22 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: -- and, again,
23 the commission's quite clear that we need to talk to
24 residents and get their feedback and incorporate that.
25 MR. SINCAVAGE: Yeah. Dina, you want
43
1 to speak?
2 MS. DINA LAKE: Dina Lake. I'm a
3 resident on Hemlock. I'm the second house past the
4 development, actually, on -- the first full-time resident
5 who lives on the road, the first house is now a vacation
6 home.
7 We don't want the entrance at all.
8 Let's put it that way. We don't want it at all. It is a
9 private road. I understand that the parcel is commercial,
10 sure, but it is a private road. We pay maintenance for
11 the road and all that kind of stuff and we don't want the
12 traffic. They already cut through as it is and all that.
13 We were -- this was a compromise, whether or not it will
14 work or not; if it can't work, we don't want the entrance,
15 plain and simple.
16 There are too many children that take
17 the bus at that corner. That was our main concern about
18 why we wanted this traffic to be restricted. There --
19 there's too much traffic coming through, increasing
20 through 115 and 940 every day as it is, and they don't
21 want to hit that traffic late so they cut through our
22 street and come out on 115 by the car wash. So, you know,
23 it's already happening without the building being there.
24 As far as Mr. McHale's concerned with
25 regards to people coming into Hemlock, the way I see it,
44
1 it's a private road. You're gonna turn into the parking
2 lot of the business that you're going to. I can't see
3 someone coming down Hemlock to go into the business unless
4 they've been there before and know that Hemlock connects
5 to the business. They may not even know that there's an
6 entrance there or an exit there to get there because it's
7 further down on Hemlock. It's not right next to the edge
8 of the corner.
9 So I understand what he's saying as
10 far as people coming in and trying to get in the left only
11 turn, but I can't see that happening as much as -- as it
12 would be if -- and if there was signage at the very end of
13 the road that said private community, that would also
14 discourage people from coming in, trying to enter through
15 the left only turn. So that's a suggestion there, but the
16 way that we feel, the residents who live there, the people
17 whose children take the bus there, who have to be there
18 three times a day to pick up how many different kids from
19 whatever times they're coming and going, we want to
20 decrease the amount of traffic that comes down that road
21 as much as possible.
22 Kids ride their bikes on that road,
23 they play on that road. It's really the only level road
24 in the community. The other two streets have hills and
25 the kids all come down and play in front of our house,
45
1 actually. So if it can't be a left turn only, we don't
2 want the entrance/exit at all, which I know will interfere
3 with their plans, but that's the only compromise we can
4 come up with.
5 MR. SINCAVAGE: Yes?
6 MR. CHRISTOPHER McDERMOTT: Bob, and
7 just thinking here, perhaps what we could do is, augment
8 this with some signage where -- where in this location, we
9 put up a sign that says exit only, that somebody may be
10 able to see that from the road. I'm not talking about --
11 MR. McHALE: I think you're going to
12 need the signage right out at 940 and Hemlock, very
13 clearly --
14 MR. CHRISTOPHER McDERMOTT: Well, just
15 trying to come up with things that will help. And that if
16 we post this as entrance, those are things that catch
17 people's eyes.
18 MS. DIANE LAKE: Diane Lake, also
19 Hemlock Road.
20 From 940 to where this exit will be,
21 how many feet is that from 940? Where does it parallel
22 with Palmerton Bank or where exactly -- that was one thing
23 I didn't quite get the other night, exactly where will it
24 come out onto Hemlock.
25 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: Oh, sure. Sure.
46
1 The Palmerton Bank building is this right in this area,
2 and unfortunately it doesn't show up from this view --
3 MS. DIANE LAKE: Right.
4 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: -- but it's right
5 about here. We'd be coming out about parallel with the
6 bank. The bank's in a vacant portion of the lot behind
7 this storm basin --
8 MS. DIANE LAKE: Right. Okay.
9 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: -- we're right in
10 front of that break, sort of between the rear of the bank
11 to the open portion of the lot. It is -- I'd have to
12 scale it off, but I believe it's around -- I'll find it.
13 The distance on that is about --
14 MR. CHRISTOPHER McDERMOTT: It's
15 right --
16 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: Approximately 200
17 feet.
18 MS. DIANE LAKE: Oh, so there it is.
19 I can see that from here. It is across.
20 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: Oh, I'm sorry.
21 MS. DIANE LAKE: All right. Because,
22 yeah --
23 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: Palmerton Bank is
24 right here.
25 MS. DIANE LAKE: -- because I'm sure
47
1 what Linda has to say will tie into that, knowing where
2 that is and the people at the bus stop.
3 MS. LINDA WIEBAN: I am not just
4 making a reference to the bus stop and I was at the
5 meeting last week and I've just done a lot of thinking. I
6 have two grandchildren, and who am I concerned about most,
7 is my 11 year old grandson, who has a whole group of
8 little friends and that's why we moved to Old Farm Estates
9 because it's a beautiful development. The kids can ride
10 their bicycles or whatever the case may be.
11 Now, Anna Road intersects Hemlock, and
12 I myself ride a bicycle. The kids go speeding down
13 Hemlock, they go around the curve onto Hemlock -- I mean,
14 from Anna Road, I foresee a dangerous situation --
15 MS. DINA LAKE: Um-hum.
16 MS. LINDA WIEBAN: -- because a bank
17 generates a lot of traffic, there are a lot of parents at
18 the bus stop; and whereas we totally -- I am not against
19 anybody's business. I think Mr. Patel was very
20 professional, the way he stated what he wants to do for
21 the kids, put up parking spaces so the kids could wait at
22 the bus stop, but the bus stop is just not the main
23 concern. Also there's a lot of kids that are in the
24 development that are playing there, riding bicycles, and,
25 granted, we have to be careful when we ride bikes or
48
1 whatever, but kids are not.
2 And I feel that this exit or entrance,
3 whatever is going to be onto Hemlock, even though they can
4 only make a left-hand turn, you're talking about a lot of
5 traffic that will be going in that circle. And, honestly,
6 I am just totally against it. I mean, I just can't -- I
7 can't foresee a commercial business exiting on a private
8 road in our residential development.
9 And that's my opinion and I know that
10 maybe I'm just one voice and we're just, you know, one
11 voice; but that's my main concern. And I hope you take it
12 into consideration that there are a lot of children in the
13 development.
14 MS. DIANE LAKE: The people who wait
15 at that corner for the bus stop, I -- we -- if we would
16 bring our children, and Linda, when she did bring her
17 children to the bus stop, parked in the area that you're
18 supposed to park in; but we have people in our community
19 that park right --
20 MS. LINDA WIEBAN: In the middle.
21 MS. DIANE LAKE: -- in the middle lane
22 and -- which is not what they're supposed to do. So when
23 these people are exiting left, those cars are going to be
24 right there. That's what I was curious about, that we
25 didn't get the other night, was the distance that that
49
1 exit will be from the corner. So if you have two cars
2 parked there with -- waiting to put children on the bus,
3 that -- the person who's exiting is going to exit right
4 into those cars.
5 Is that right?
6 MR. CHRISTOPHER McDERMOTT: Well, it's
7 approximately 200 hundred feet. And when we look at the
8 queueing, how far --
9 MS. DIANE LAKE: Right.
10 MR. CHRISTOPHER McDERMOTT: -- cars
11 stack up, typically what you consider is 25 feet per car.
12 Two hundred feet would be comparable to eight, eight cars.
13 Now, just so the board may recall, we
14 had spoken about this before. One thing that Mr. Patel
15 did want to do for the neighbors, and especially in
16 recognition of the concern about the bus stop, was to
17 create a standing area here with a walking path and if
18 potentially -- if people in the neighborhood wanted to
19 park not on the street, but park in these parking spots in
20 the morning and whatnot, that they would be -- he would be
21 accommodating to that.
22 And that was one thing that we thought
23 would be a benefit to parents in the morning and also a
24 safety item, and we talked about also doing a path from
25 that standing area to the street and that could, perhaps,
50
1 alleviate some of those who may wait on the shoulder of
2 the road --
3 MR. McHALE: Who maintains that in the
4 wintertime after the first couple of snows and they get
5 a --
6 MR. CHRISTOPHER McDERMOTT: Actually,
7 Mr. Patel had offered to maintain.
8 MR. McHALE: So he'd be shovelling or
9 have someone shovel that -- those paths?
10 MR. CHRISTOPHER McDERMOTT: Yes. He
11 did offer to do that.
12 MS. HAASE: Mark, I apologize, but I
13 haven't -- I'm sorry, Mark. I haven't reviewed the
14 parking. And, so, in other words, Mr. Patel's extending
15 an invitation to the residents to pull in and drop the
16 children off in the morning and wait for them?
17 MR. CHRISTOPHER McDERMOTT: Correct.
18 He has said that he --
19 MS. HAASE: Okay.
20 MR. CHRISTOPHER McDERMOTT: -- said
21 that he would not object to them doing that.
22 MS. HAASE: And that probably wouldn't
23 be a problem first thing in the morning when the
24 businesses aren't open, but three o'clock in the
25 afternoon --
51
1 MS. LINDA WIEBAN: Right.
2 MS. HAASE: -- when the businesses are
3 functioning -- I mean, I don't know how many children are
4 dropped at that spot and how many parking spaces you're
5 going to be taking up.
6 MS. DINA LAKE: There's at least six
7 to eight right now --
8 MS. WIEBAN: Yeah, yeah.
9 MS. DINA LAKE: -- kids in the
10 neighborhood that are there from our side of the street of
11 the community. Old Greenwood Acres on the -- right across
12 from us also has children from that side. So not that I
13 can say, per se, they would be using the parking lot, but
14 if they see the parents from our neighborhood using the
15 parking lot, they could then think, oh, we'll just come in
16 and use the parking lot.
17 MR. SINCAVAGE: Do they park on -- on
18 Hemlock Road?
19 MS. DINA LAKE: No.
20 MS. LINDA WIEBAN: No.
21 MS. DINA LAKE: No. They'll park
22 across in their entrance/exit most of the time there and
23 wait there and the kids will get off the bus, cross to our
24 side of the street, go to their side of the street, and
25 whatever, but, you know --
52
1 MR. SINCAVAGE: So where do they park
2 over on Greenwood Acres?
3 MS. DINA LAKE: In the entrance/exit
4 of their own -- yeah.
5 MS. LINDA WIEBAN: I have a big
6 question.
7 Is this exit or whatever, is it
8 absolutely necessary, looking at the footage on 940 and
9 the rest of the businesses that have an entrance and an
10 exhibit, is there any way to make that entrance on 940
11 an -- large enough that we don't -- you don't need an exit
12 onto Hemlock, being that several of those businesses don't
13 have any other way to get in or out other than 940?
14 MR. McHALE: There is one other thing
15 that we need to take into account. We haven't gotten the
16 review back from Guardian Inspection Services. The
17 International Fire Code, as I recall, for these commercial
18 projects, they would like to see two access points, you
19 know, in and out of the facility. So we need to keep that
20 in mind too as another item.
21 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: Right. And
22 actually adjusting that, we verified this with the -- in
23 an emergency, a fire truck could proceed either way
24 through this. I mean, they could run the wrong way if it
25 came to that main entrance was blocked. So, yeah, it can
53
1 explain -- there does need be two entrances. The way
2 entrances are now permitted by PennDOT, you need
3 controlling -- you can't have open frontage on the
4 roadway.
5 So that narrows our entrance down to a
6 single point and then what happens is, we don't have the
7 frontage to have a single entrance with that -- you know,
8 with Hemlock here, to have a second -- second point onto
9 940. There's just -- it just begins to stack up too
10 closely and PennDOT wouldn't allow that for -- for safety
11 reasons and just driver expectation and --
12 MS. DIANE LAKE: So if Hemlock wasn't
13 there, you would not be able to put this where it is?
14 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: If Hemlock were
15 not there, then it may be possible to put an entrance on
16 this side of the property. But what happens is, Hemlock
17 exists as an access -- as an opening onto 940 and it's --
18 it comes to be the distance between the openings on 940.
19 MS. DIANE LAKE: Okay.
20 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: So that's where
21 that -- the -- complicates it.
22 MR. BAXTER: Can you do something with
23 that second entrance where it's gated and then only used
24 in event of an emergency?
25 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: I mean, I suppose
54
1 it's something we can look at. I mean, obviously, we also
2 like the entrance for purposes of circulation and queuing,
3 or circulation through the site, and just makes the site a
4 little nicer to use. You know, there's some other sites
5 where that happens. We can block off an emergency exit
6 and those can be -- those can be troublesome too. And,
7 you know, it does complicate the internal circulation a
8 little bit as, you know, people are backing out or
9 whatever --
10 MR. SINCAVAGE: What is the
11 complication from the internal circulation? If you have
12 the people coming out of the drive-thru there, they have
13 to make a left and would have to go around the building,
14 right?
15 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: Right. If you
16 came out of -- the drive-thru's set up so there's sort of
17 an opening in the middle of the building --
18 MR. SINCAVAGE: Right.
19 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: -- a mezzanine
20 space over top. So you would end up with cars that would
21 come out of here and would have to make this -- this hard
22 left and loop around to get out. And, you know, I mean,
23 traffic moves this way. This provides a second relief
24 point or whatever, you could say, to let straight through
25 movement to come out, especially as these lanes sort of
55
1 come together. The car that has to come out of here has
2 to begin to really double back and kind of exceed a 90
3 degree turn and start to make a turn out. So --
4 MR. CHRISTOPHER McDERMOTT: So --
5 MR. SINCAVAGE: So is there any way to
6 soften that turn?
7 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: This particular
8 one?
9 MR. SINCAVAGE: Yeah.
10 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: I would have to
11 look at the design to see if that would even be possible.
12 Certainly get into a lot of --
13 MR. CHRISTOPHER McDERMOTT: And there
14 probably --
15 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: -- plan changes.
16 MR. CHRISTOPHER McDERMOTT: I mean, to
17 be direct, I mean, could we do this development with just
18 this entrance? And the answer is yes, and we talked about
19 that last week. Could you do it? Yes. This provides a
20 better circulation path. If this isn't here, all cars
21 have to go to one point. It would be more of an
22 inconvenience and also put more turns directly at this
23 entrance with -- with -- with the ability to use turns
24 here, there'll be -- two cars could exit out in the gap
25 versus just one.
56
1 You know, PennDOT talks about grid
2 systems and efficiency of grid systems. This -- this,
3 essentially, is a grid system. So it's a more efficient
4 way of handling traffic. Could you do it the other way.
5 Yes. Is this more beneficial for the owner, I think yes.
6 Obviously we wouldn't be proposing if it wasn't beneficial
7 for him.
8 And, really, that's why we went to the
9 neighbors and said we'd like to do it; but we want to be
10 sensitive to what -- to your concerns. And it was really
11 very nice meeting -- I really felt good about it, that we
12 could come out with some compromise, and I thought it was
13 a good compromise. And I really appreciated the input and
14 the -- the ability to do that.
15 We do have a letter, Bob, to talk --
16 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: Yeah.
17 MR. CHRISTOPHER McDERMOTT: -- about
18 also?
19 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: Yeah, we'll --
20 Bob came back with some comments. We've addressed the
21 bulk of these and returned plans to Bob. He just got
22 those today, and I know he was probably tied up all
23 afternoon, so I'm not sure if he got a chance to look at
24 them or not. I'm going to guess in the 20 minutes between
25 the time you told me in the hallway -- yeah, you didn't
57
1 get a chance to look at them -- and the time the meeting
2 started you probably didn't, and that's fine.
3 I just want to roll through some of --
4 largely they have to do with simply graphical items and
5 plans, typographic things. We had an issue with some
6 lighting spillover, we talked about in the earlier plan.
7 In the area of this entranceway we had some light -- some
8 light spilled over in excess of the half foot-candle.
9 That lighting plan's been revised to eliminate that.
10 We have also -- also given some
11 additional details on the plantings that buffer the
12 property, some planting details and some cross sections as
13 well.
14 MR. McHALE: Could you give us an
15 update as to where you're at with PennDOT?
16 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: PennDOT, we are
17 preparing our TIS. One of the issues in actually
18 submitting the TIS is gonna be the final configuration
19 of -- of this and how the trips break out. So the TIS is
20 well underway and waiting for these kind of details to
21 finish it out so that we can complete the TIS and do our
22 full HOP. We've met with them and gotten the
23 conceptual by -- on the overall plan. Again, we just
24 talked -- we just gave them information so they can digest
25 this reconfiguration here. Again, that will affect our
58
1 HOP.
2 Currently with this connection here,
3 we'd actually be doing an HOP -- two HOPs, one where
4 S.I.D.E. would be a party too because we have to make some
5 improvements to the radiuses on the drive -- on the
6 roadway flares here, and then there'll be one for the site
7 entrance. So again, we'll be completing that once we have
8 some resolution --
9 MR. CHRISTOPHER McDERMOTT: So with
10 the resolution of that item, we were getting ready to
11 submit. We've spoken with them several times, and not
12 only at the meeting that you were with -- or at, Bob, but
13 we have had contact with Melissa concerning lane --
14 turning lane widths, travel lane widths; so we've been
15 working with PennDOT through this process.
16 The Hemlock Road issue was -- was
17 really, do we prepare one or do we prepare two?
18 MR. ARMSTRONG: Just while we're still
19 on Hemlock, you do know, since you've been in contact with
20 the owner of the road, that you'll need some kind of like
21 an access easement agreement with the owner of the road --
22 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: Right.
23 MR. ARMSTRONG: -- if and when that
24 point comes, that you are --
25 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: Right. And
59
1 then -- we've been working that out and, you know, Mr.
2 Patel's agreement --
3 MR. CHRISTOPHER McDERMOTT:
4 Mr. Patel's attorney has been in contact with S.I.D.E.
5 Corp.
6 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: So I'm just
7 moving forward on the comments.
8 MR. SINCAVAGE: Mark, instead of going
9 through all the comments, because you guys still have some
10 issues to get to, is there anything that you have a
11 concern about --
12 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: The only --
13 MR. SINCAVAGE: -- that you want
14 feedback on?
15 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: The only issue
16 that I have, as far as feedback was -- I'm sorry, I'm
17 flipping through it here. Under storm water management
18 comments, Bob, you had asked about the -- the
19 jurisdictional determination from the Army Corps of
20 Engineers?
21 MR. McHALE: Yes. Your plan indicates
22 the wetland line and I think your wetland line indicates a
23 jurisdictional determination?
24 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: Yeah. And it
25 was --
60
1 MR. McHALE: And you --
2 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: It was called out
3 as a jurisdictional line because that was the --
4 MR. McHALE: But --
5 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: -- delineator's
6 interpretation of where the jurisdiction --
7 MR. McHALE: Right. So it's actually
8 a delineation line, not a jurisdiction line.
9 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: Correct.
10 MR. McHALE: That's one thing we
11 should clarify. The other thing is --
12 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: And that
13 revision, right?
14 MR. McHALE: -- because -- because
15 your contour lines are going right up to the fringe of the
16 wetlands, you probably should have some kind of
17 construction fencing or something to keep that contractor
18 from going over into the wetlands and creating a
19 violation. And the other thing is, because you are
20 building so close to it, we'd like to see something from
21 the Army Corps of Engineers.
22 Now, to go through a full blown
23 jurisdictional determination, you know, is probably gonna
24 be some lengthy time and effort paperwork, but it's our
25 understanding that what they've been doing is something
61
1 closer to like a a non JD letter, but it's more now, I
2 think, Phyllis, it's a preliminary JD --
3 MR. SINCAVAGE: Yes.
4 MR. McHALE: -- where if you will
5 actually flag out the edge of your improvements, they will
6 come out to the site, look at it and say, we concur that
7 you're not going to build into the wetlands. So you're
8 not getting a JD, you're not going through that lengthy
9 process, but you're getting a concurrence from them on a
10 preliminary basis that that is the line that they're
11 satisfied with.
12 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: Okay. And we
13 could investigate that.
14 MR. CHRISTOPHER McDERMOTT: I'm not
15 familiar with that process, Bob. How long does that take?
16 MR. McHALE: It's our understanding
17 it's a few weeks, is that correct, Phyllis?
18 MS. HAASE: The non JD was. I'm not
19 certain about the preliminary.
20 MR. CHRISTOPHER McDERMOTT: Okay.
21 And --
22 MR. McHALE: But it does save some
23 time?
24 MS. HAASE: Yes, it does.
25 MR. CHRISTOPHER McDERMOTT: -- a
62
1 wetland report was prepared for this. It deliniated --
2 MR. McHALE: In 2004, that's correct.
3 MR. CHRISTOPHER McDERMOTT: Right.
4 And the delineation was done in accordance with the Army
5 Corps standards and DEP standards. The conservation
6 district has reviewed the plan. They -- this plan will
7 not be going to DEP. The closest they will get to it is
8 through the conservation district, which is really a
9 delegated authority from DEP. So the conservation
10 district has indicated that this delineation has been
11 acceptable to them. I --
12 MR. McHALE: But they don't have
13 jurisdiction over wetlands. The Army Corps of Engineers
14 is the only entity that has jurisdiction, other than DEP,
15 over the wetlands. So you need to get something from the
16 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers saying that they concur with
17 your delineation one way or the other. We're not asking
18 that you necessarily do a full blown JD, but you need to
19 get something from them so that we don't get down the road
20 and you're under construction and they shut you down.
21 MR. CHRISTOPHER McDERMOTT: Yeah. All
22 right. I'll certainly contact the Army Corps and find out
23 about this -- this new process. I think we have filed --
24 followed the guidelines in the ordinance regarding
25 delineating wetlands. So -- and we can continue to talk
63
1 about that.
2 MR. SINCAVAGE: You don't have the --
3 you don't have a JD from the Army Corps?
4 MR. CHRISTOPHER McDERMOTT: And your
5 ordinance does not require a JD.
6 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: Yeah. And JDs
7 are pretty lengthy. In fact, they just started doing JDs
8 again. There was a period where they were not doing
9 jurisdictional determinations because they were having
10 some internal --
11 MR. CHRISTOPHER McDERMOTT: They
12 couldn't decide --
13 MS. HAASE: Yeah, it was --
14 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: Where the line
15 was going to be.
16 MR. CHRISTOPHER McDERMOTT: -- not
17 that they couldn't decide what a wetland was, they
18 couldn't decide if a wetland was jurisdictional or not.
19 MR. SINCAVAGE: Right.
20 MR. CHRISTOPHER McDERMOTT: They knew
21 what wetlands are, they just were having an internal
22 policy --
23 MR. SINCAVAGE: Right.
24 MR. CHRISTOPHER McDERMOTT: --
25 decision --
64
1 MR. SINCAVAGE: I think that's what
2 this preliminary JD is now trying to address as part of
3 it. That's why they're doing these preliminary.
4 MR. JAMES HENDRICKS: I have some
5 input. I just went through a process of what Bob is
6 talking about on a land development plan here in Tobyhanna
7 Township on 940. It was on Dr. Giacalone's chiropractic
8 center. We did contact the Army Corps of Engineers, the
9 Gouldsboro office. Melissa was very accommodating. We
10 had flagged the wetlands with orange fencing. She came
11 out, concurred. We would have had that letter within two
12 weeks except that Melissa went on vacation and then to
13 school and it fell through the cracks; but when she came
14 back within a week we had that letter. It was relatively
15 painless, nonexpensive.
16 And for our client, no one can come
17 out there and dispute that wetland line and we had
18 probably a similar situation. We were building within two
19 feet of the wetlands. We were making improvements and
20 grading. When we found out that was an option, we pursued
21 that. That's how it worked for us.
22 MR. SINCAVAGE: It's something you
23 should look into.
24 MR. CHRISTOPHER McDERMOTT: And that
25 would be great. I would be -- if things can happen on
65
1 that time frame, I'm in favor of it, you know.
2 MR. McHALE: Well, when it states in
3 the ordinance that you need to show the wetland line,
4 there's only one entity that can define that line for us
5 and that's the Corps. So, anything other than that, you
6 can get twelve consultants out there and they can flag it
7 twelve different ways, but the Corps's the only ones that
8 can say here it is.
9 MR. SINCAVAGE: Yeah. I would check
10 into that process. I would check with them on this
11 preliminary JD. The person, Melissa is no longer there.
12 It's now Elaine Moyer, so you can check with her.
13 What else, Mark?
14 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: I think that hits
15 our big discussion items at this time. So --
16 MR. SINCAVAGE: Do we need a -- I'm
17 sorry. Is there any other comments from the public?
18 Any comments from the board?
19 MR. BAXTER: Not at this point.
20 MR. CHRISTOPHER McDERMOTT: And really
21 tonight, we have come in hoping to really review the
22 waiver request and ask for a conditional approval.
23 Obviously, I think we've heard some other concerns and
24 we'll look into that and take our time, but we do think
25 that we're nearing the -- the goal line with this project
66
1 and certainly would hope to be in a position to have a
2 favorable recommendation. We wanted to do it tonight. I
3 get the feeling the board may not be comfortable with that
4 at this moment, but we definitely would like to be in that
5 position at next month's meeting. We're working directly
6 with Bob to resolve those issues and, of course, any
7 recommendation would be contingent upon the outside
8 agencies.
9 The conservation district has been
10 contacted. That has been resolved. PennDOT will be the
11 outstanding outside agency, which we'll have to get our
12 approvals through. There were, I think approximately,
13 four or five modification requests. Most of the other
14 items on the letter are -- really, we'll just comply with
15 it and work with your engineer.
16 So this -- I don't foresee this plan
17 changing greatly. Obviously we want to resolve the
18 roadway issues and we'll continue to work with the
19 neighbors and S.I.D.E. Corp.
20 MR. SINCAVAGE: Is your client under
21 any time frame --
22 MR. CHRISTOPHER McDERMOTT: Uh --
23 MR. SINCAVAGE: -- constraints?
24 MR. CHRISTOPHER McDERMOTT: He would
25 like to move forward with this as quickly as possible.
67
1 He -- he can turn his full attention to this project now.
2 He used to be the owner of multiple Dunkin Donuts. He is
3 now divested out of that and can really focus in on this,
4 so he'd like to move forward. We're in a good position,
5 really, to -- I think if we get our PennDOT permit, we
6 talked about being able to start construction this summer.
7 We're very lucky with this project in
8 that we don't have to go through the NPDS process, which
9 is -- which is onerous and very long. So this is a
10 project that really could be happening this year. I think
11 it would not only be good for our owner, but also projects
12 are gonna be good for our economy. We all have to work
13 together to -- to get things moving in these tough times.
14 MR. SINCAVAGE: I'll agree with that
15 comment.
16 If your client needs to have a special
17 meeting, we will be glad to do that --
18 MR. CHRISTOPHER McDERMOTT: Okay.
19 MR. SINCAVAGE: -- if he feels he's
20 under a time constraint; otherwise we'll see you at the
21 April meeting. I think if you'll be able to get these
22 items cleaned up, i don't think the board has any
23 objections to the concept of the plan, we just have to
24 work out those details.
25 MR. CHRISTOPHER McDERMOTT: Okay.
68
1 Thank you very much.
2 MR. MARK RADCLIFFE: And we have
3 submitted paperwork for the time waiver as well, which is
4 available --
5 MR. ARMSTRONG: I think it takes us to
6 May 12.
7 MR. CHRISTOPHER McDERMOTT: May 12,
8 yes.
9 MR. SINCAVAGE: Okay. I'll entertain
10 a motion to table Kush & Sunny's land development plan?
11 MR. MILLER: So moved.
12 MR. SINCAVAGE: Motion. Second to the
13 motion?
14 MS. LAMBERTON: Second.
15 MR. SINCAVAGE: Motion and second.
16 All those in favor please say aye?
17 THE BOARD: Aye.
18 MR. SINCAVAGE: And the next item on
19 our agenda is Wee-Wons Day Care expansion. Is there
20 anything on that?
21 Do we have any definite on time
22 waiver, right?
23 MR. ARMSTRONG: Not a definite -- not
24 indefinite, but I know we have --
25 MR. SINCAVAGE: Thank you.
69
1 MR. ARMSTRONG: -- we should be good
2 on time for these. Yeah. It looks like we're good until
3 April 14, all right. That takes us past our next meeting.
4 MR. SINCAVAGE: Okay. Glorious Church
5 land development plan -- I'm sorry, let's do -- do I hear
6 a motion to table Wee-Wons Day Care expansion?
7 MR. MILLER: So moved.
8 I have a motion.
9 Second to the motion?
10 MS. LAMBERTON: Second.
11 MR. SINCAVAGE: Motion and second.
12 All those in favor please say aye?
13 THE BOARD: Aye.
14 MR. SINCAVAGE: Glorious Church land
15 development plan? We have heard nothing further from the
16 applicant? I'll entertain a motion to table --
17 MR. BAXTER: So moved.
18 MR. SINCAVAGE: Second to the motion?
19 MS. LAMBERTON: Second.
20 MR. SINCAVAGE: Motion and second.
21 All those in favor please say aye?
22 THE BOARD: Aye.
23 MR. SINCAVAGE: Glorious Church
24 conditional use application? We have heard nothing on
25 that.
70
1 Motion to table?
2 MR. BAXTER: So moved.
3 MR. SINCAVAGE: Motion, and second to
4 the motion?
5 MR. MILLER: Second.
6 MR. SINCAVAGE: Motion and second.
7 All in favor please say aye?
8 THE BOARD: Aye.
9 MR. SINCAVAGE: Locust Ridge Quarry
10 940 Contractor Shop preliminary land development?
11 Anything on that?
12 MR. ARMSTRONG: (Mr. Armstrong shook
13 his head.)
14 MR. SINCAVAGE: Time, we're still okay
15 with time?
16 Entertain a motion to table?
17 MR. BAXTER: So moved.
18 MR. SINCAVAGE: Motion.
19 Second to the motion?
20 MS. LAMBERTON: Second.
21 MR. SINCAVAGE: Motion and second.
22 All those in favor please say aye?
23 THE BOARD: Aye.
24 MR. SINCAVAGE: Pinecrest Phase 2,
25 Section 4 lot consolidation. Have we heard anything on
71
1 that? Still okay with time?
2 I'll entertain a motion to table?
3 MR. MILLER: So moved.
4 MR. SINCAVAGE: Motion, and second to
5 the motion?
6 MS. LAMBERTON: Second.
7 MR. SINCAVAGE: Motion and second.
8 All those in favor please say aye?
9 THE BOARD: Aye.
10 MR. SINCAVAGE: Lands of Route 940,
11 Pocono Motor Sports final land development plan. They did
12 submit a letter asking it to be tabled tonight; so I'll
13 entertain a motion to do so?
14 MR. BAXTER: So moved.
15 MR. MILLER: Second.
16 MR. SINCAVAGE: Motion and second?
17 Motion and seconded.
18 All those in favor please say aye?
19 THE BOARD: Aye.
20 MR. SINCAVAGE: Petition to rezone
21 Pocono Manor?
22 MR. ARMSTRONG: Yeah. This is -- and
23 it's actually an ordinance that has been advertised for a
24 public hearing for next week at the supervisors' meeting.
25 I think you reviewed it previously, pursuant to a petition
72
1 to rezone, from the property owner of Pocono Manor, and
2 subsequent to that, the township board of supervisors
3 reviewed it, you know, took all the planning into
4 consideration and came up with a -- an ordinance that was,
5 you know, acceptable to the board of supervisors at that
6 time and they moved forward and advertised for the public
7 hearing on Monday.
8 So it would be appropriate for us to
9 take a look at it again, have it --if you have any
10 comments or recommendations on it, tonight would be the
11 night to make it so the supervisors have them by their
12 Monday night public hearing. And if you don't -- go
13 ahead.
14 MR. SINCAVAGE: I was just going to
15 say, I think that the supervisors basically took our
16 recommendation -- our previous recommendation to zone the
17 west side of 3 -- rezone the west side of 380 from R-2 to
18 commercial, but they decided not to rezone the west side
19 of 380.
20 MR. ARMSTRONG: It looks like the
21 large RR parcel to the west -- or to the east --
22 MR. SINCAVAGE: The east. I'm sorry.
23 MR. ARMSTRONG: East of 380, so it's
24 north of Sullivan -- Sullivan Trail?
25 MR. SINCAVAGE: Yes.
73
1 MR. ARMSTRONG: And that's the only
2 parcel proposed to be rezoned by the board of supervisors.
3 MR. SINCAVAGE: Anybody have a comment
4 or a question or --
5 MR. ARMSTRONG: Again, that's from RR
6 to C commercial.
7 MR. BAXTER: So they're not changing
8 this?
9 MR. SINCAVAGE: They are changing
10 this.
11 MR. BAXTER: They are changing this?
12 MR. SINCAVAGE: That's there and that
13 would be changed from R-2 to commercial. But they're not
14 changing --
15 MS. HAASE: It's -- actually,
16 Mr. Chairman, it's RR.
17 MR. SINCAVAGE: I'm sorry, RR.
18 MR. BAXTER: That's what's in the
19 gravel -- the sand pit now?
20 MS. HAASE: Yes. The quarry and ATV,
21 Lost Trails, is located in that parcel.
22 MR. SINCAVAGE: So that --
23 MS. HAASE: I received a tremendous
24 amount of calls from residents regarding this.
25 MR. BAXTER: Complaints?
74
1 MS. HAASE: Yes. And what's happened
2 is, the few people that we did notify did a mass mailing
3 and hand delivered quite a few flyers to people in the
4 area.
5 MR. SINCAVAGE: Well, I can see our
6 room is overflowing with people making comment on it,
7 so --
8 MR. ARMSTRONG: They'll probably be
9 here for the public hearing.
10 MS. HAASE: They'll be here on Monday,
11 I'm sure.
12 MS. LAMBERTON: Where is the
13 residential area remaining?
14 MR. SINCAVAGE: Yes. I think to the
15 south of --
16 MS. LAMBERTON: To the south of it.
17 MR. SINCAVAGE: -- Sullivan.
18 MS. LAMBERTON: Are those the ones
19 that have --
20 MS. HAASE: Yes.
21 MR. SINCAVAGE: Right.
22 MS. LAMBERTON: And their issue being?
23 MS. HAASE: Issues being the noise at
24 this point. They're concerned with what is being
25 proposed. That's the main concern, people want me to
75
1 answer, what's being proposed. I explained to them that
2 anything that's permitted in a C district would be allowed
3 there.
4 A lot of people are concerning --
5 there was a petition that was put together for Pocono
6 Township and submitted to Pocono Township regarding the
7 ATV trails and their concern is, if they rezone this to
8 commercial, that there may be an additional use of the
9 land that's going to create more problems.
10 MR. SINCAVAGE: Well, if that's
11 commercial and they propose to do anything with it, what's
12 the buffer between the residential area and the
13 commercial? It's a hundred feet or 25 feet?
14 MR. MILLER: Twenty-five.
15 MR. SINCAVAGE: Twenty-five. Okay.
16 MR. BAXTER: Is the ATV use allowed
17 now under the RR zone.
18 MS. HAASE: No. The township has been
19 working with the gentleman that owns a concession and the
20 option that I gave him would be either to move the
21 business into Pocono Township -- I spoke to a chairperson
22 from Pocono and also the zoning officer contacted me last
23 week. It was presented to me that they received all the
24 approvals and they have told me that they did not even
25 submit anything, so Pocono Township is under enforcement
76
1 of this business.
2 Ten percent of the business is in
3 Tobyhanna Township, so they're going to have to -- need to
4 submit for a conditional use if it's rezoned to commercial
5 for recreation -- outdoor recreational use; or if it does
6 not get rezoned, then they can go underneath the private
7 club.
8 The residents are very unhappy of the
9 dust, the noise, and also in the summertime, if you're
10 going down 380, the dust will cross over 380; so I
11 received quite a few phone calls of that.
12 MS. LAMBERTON: Currently they're
13 running here in this commercial district?
14 MR. BAXTER: I thought that it was a
15 golf course?
16 MR. SINCAVAGE: No. They're in the
17 R --
18 MS. HAASE: They're in the RR
19 district.
20 MR. SINCAVAGE: -- R district.
21 They're operating in the RR district.
22 It's there.
23 MS. LAMBERTON: So it's already
24 existing, but the people are now complaining?
25 MS. HAASE: It's not allowable use of
77
1 the land. And, yes, they are complaining. The township
2 has not taken enforcement because they've been working
3 with us, but unfortunately some of the information wasn't
4 presented to us properly. And I don't know if this is the
5 sole reason, I know that they are talking about developing
6 the site also, so that's not the sole reason why they're
7 proposing the rezoning.
8 MS. LAMBERTON: Not for ATV.
9 MR. SINCAVAGE: They want to make --
10 you know, they want to do something else there. I mean,
11 you don't rezone just to --
12 MS. HAASE: Right.
13 MS. LAMBERTON: Which is
14 understandable.
15 MS. HAASE: Right.
16 MR. SINCAVAGE: -- ATVs. And the
17 township, Tobyhanna Township, was looking for more
18 commercial land.
19 MR. ARMSTRONG: Right. I think the
20 supervisors looked at not only the planning within the
21 township itself, but actually the neighboring townships to
22 see if it would mesh well with those neighboring --
23 MR. SINCAVAGE: Right.
24 MR. ARMSTRONG: And it's my
25 understanding that it did.
78
1 MS. HAASE: Pocono is not part of the
2 regional comp.
3 MR. SINCAVAGE: Right.
4 MS. HAASE: So --
5 MR. SINCAVAGE: But that land to the
6 east of the rezoned area is commercial, right?
7 MS. HAASE: To the east in Pocono?
8 MR. SINCAVAGE: Yes.
9 MS. HAASE: I believe it was
10 recreational.
11 MR. SINCAVAGE: Recreational. That's
12 what -- what it is.
13 MR. BAXTER: It's recreational.
14 MR. SINCAVAGE: Oh, it does say that?
15 MS. LAMBERTON: Yeah. That's what
16 they're saying this is.
17 MR. BAXTER: So we would be putting
18 commercial next to their recreational?
19 MS. HAASE: And there's a certain
20 portion of that property that's protected by moss or
21 something. There's an area that has been deemed that we
22 couldn't -- they couldn't touch it because of some type of
23 moth --
24 MR. MILLER: Moths.
25 MS. HAASE: -- to protect it.
79
1 MR. MILLER: To protect that moth.
2 MR. ARMSTRONG: As you can see, the
3 parcels to the north and northwest look like they're
4 commercial already.
5 MR. SINCAVAGE: Right.
6 What's your pleasure?
7 The supervisors have been through
8 this. You know, we had recommended both areas being
9 commercial.
10 MS. LAMBERTON: Um-hum.
11 MR. ARMSTRONG: Any comments or
12 recommendations for the board for their Monday public
13 hearing?
14 MS. LAMBERTON: How long have they
15 been using it for ATV activity?
16 MS. HAASE: The township was notified
17 by the conservation district probably about 18 months
18 ago --
19 MR. MILLER: Yeah.
20 MS. HAASE: -- over some violations,
21 but, again, I don't really think -- I mean, this may have
22 small reason of why they wanted to rezone, but I don't
23 think it's the main reason.
24 MS. LAMBERTON: I understand that.
25 MR. BAXTER: If it's rezoned, it
80
1 probably would put an end to the ATV --
2 MS. LAMBERTON: Exactly. They develop
3 it. I mean, it makes sense.
4 MR. SINCAVAGE: That's a good point,
5 yep.
6 Pat, what type of motion do we --
7 MR. ARMSTRONG: It just would be, if
8 you want to recommend the township adopt the proposed
9 ordinance as is on Monday night, that would be the
10 recommendation; or if you want to hang tight, do what you
11 were talking about last time you looked at it and
12 recommend that they, again, consider that additional
13 parcel to rezone it C commercial. I mean, it's to the
14 pleasure of the commission.
15 MR. SINCAVAGE: Let's just
16 recommend --
17 MR. MILLER: I'll make a motion that
18 we recommend to the supervisors to go forward with the
19 proposed ordinance as written.
20 MR. SINCAVAGE: I have a motion.
21 Do I have a second to the motion?
22 MS. LAMBERTON: I'll second it.
23 MR. SINCAVAGE: Motion and seconded.
24 All those in favor please say aye?
25 THE BOARD: Aye.
81
1 MR. SINCAVAGE: All right. We need a
2 time waiver for John McElroy and Kush & Sunny. We have
3 received both of those.
4 MR. ARMSTRONG: We have received both
5 of those.
6 MR. SINCAVAGE: What do you want to
7 tell us about Brick City, Bob?
8 MR. McHALE: No update.
9 MR. SINCAVAGE: Why do we keep having
10 that on our agenda then? There's been no update for the
11 past 30 months.
12 MR. McHALE: It's still at PennDOT's
13 office for review. They submitted --
14 MR. SINCAVAGE: Really?
15 MR. McHALE: I'm sorry. I take that
16 back. We did get a review letter back from PennDOT on
17 Brick City, I believe it was last week. I'm sorry about
18 that. We did. And it was a lengthy review letter, so
19 it's gonna be a while before they get things revised and
20 back into --
21 MR. SINCAVAGE: Any comment or
22 question from the public?
23 Wendy, our public.
24 MS. WENDY FREEMAN: Damn right.
25 No, I have none, thank you.
82
1 MR. ARMSTRONG: I hope you haven't
2 been here since four, since the beginning.
3 MS. HAASE: No, she's a second shift.
4 MR. SINCAVAGE: Okay. Any comment or
5 questions, concerns from the board?
6 I'll entertain a motion to adjourn.
7 MR. BAXTER: So moved.
8 MR. SINCAVAGE: Motion, and second to
9 the motion?
10 MS. LAMBERTON: Second.
11 MR. SINCAVAGE: All those in favor
12 please say aye?
13 THE BOARD: Aye.
14 (Meeting concluded at 8:36 p.m.)
15 ---
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
83
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