Before
THE TOBYHANNA TOWNSHIP PLANNING COMMISSION
---
In Re: Regular Business Meeting
---
Tobyhanna Township Government Center Building
State Avenue
Pocono Pines, Pennsylvania 18350
Thursday, November 8, 2007, beginning at 7 p.m.
---
PRESENT: MARK SINCAVAGE, Chairperson
JOSEPH MILLER, Vice-Chairperson
TED VANDERVLIET, Board Member
ANNE LAMBERTON, Board Member
ROBERT McHALE, P.E.,
Township Engineer
PATRICK ARMSTRONG, ESQUIRE, Solicitor
ALSO PRESENT: PHYLLIS HAASE, Zoning Officer
---
Panko Reporting
537 Sarah Street, 2nd Floor
Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania 18360
(570) 421-3620
2
1 MR. SINCAVAGE: I'll call the
2 regular scheduled meeting, rescheduled meeting of
3 the Tobyhanna Township Planning Commission for
4 Thursday, November 8, 2007 to order.
5 First of all, is there any
6 public comment related to anything in general
7 first? Hearing none, we'll move on to approval of
8 the October minutes that we all received
9 electronically.
10 MR. MILLER: I have a motion to
11 approve as presented.
12 MR. SINCAVAGE: I have a motion.
13 Do I have a second to the motion?
14 MR. VANDERVLIET: Second.
15 MR. SINCAVAGE: Motion and
16 second. Any discussion? All those in favor,
17 please say aye.
18 MR. MILLER: Aye.
19 MR. VANDERVLIET: Aye.
20 MR. SINCAVAGE: Aye.
21 Moving on, we have a review
22 meeting schedule for 2008 that we all received.
23 I'd like to suggest that for the
24 January meeting, that we make it for January 10th;
25 and for the 4th of July meeting, making it for July
3
1 10th also.
2 Is that okay with everyone?
3 Okay with you guys? I need a motion to accept the
4 proposed meetings with the changes so mentioned.
5 MR. VANDERVLIET: So moved.
6 MR. MILLER: Second.
7 MR. SINCAVAGE: Any discussion?
8 All those in favor please say aye.
9 MR. MILLER: Aye.
10 MR. VANDERVLIET: Aye.
11 MR. SINCAVAGE: Aye.
12 I'll announce then that the
13 cut-off date for the January 2008 meeting will be
14 scheduled for Friday, December the 14th, 2007.
15 Please call the township to verify the date if
16 there is any change.
17 Next order of business is the
18 Blakeslee Minor Subdivision and DEP Planning
19 Module. Did we take care of that planning module?
20 Anyone here representing Blakeslee?
21 MR. RICHARD KRESGE: Good
22 evening. We've come back for several submissions.
23 Our latest review comments that we have from your
24 engineer was narrowed down to three comments.
25 MR. McHALE: Do the planning
4
1 module first.
2 MR. SINCAVAGE: We are going to
3 do the planning module. Get that out of the way
4 first.
5 MR. McHALE: The SEO and the
6 zoning officer have already signed off.
7 MR. SINCAVAGE: On the planning
8 module, Bob informed us that the SEO and zoning
9 officer have signed off on it, so I make a motion
10 to approve the signing of the planning module for
11 the lands of William Blakeslee.
12 MR. MILLER: So moved.
13 MR. VANDERVLIET: Second.
14 MR. SINCAVAGE: All those in
15 favor please say aye.
16 MR. MILLER: Aye.
17 MR. VANDERVLIET: Aye.
18 MR. SINCAVAGE: Aye.
19 We'll have to have Rob Baxter
20 sign that when he's available.
21 Do you have Mr. McHale's letter
22 of November 2nd?
23 MR. RICHARD KRESGE: I believe
24 this is the one. Yes. The first item that
25 Mr. McHale noted was the -- essentially they wanted
5
1 a requirement for a maintenance agreement.
2 MR. WILLIAM BLAKESLEE: Did you
3 get that email?
4 MR. ARMSTRONG: My office just
5 received this yesterday. I looked through it. Did
6 you have an attorney draft this --
7 MR. RICHARD KRESGE: No.
8 MR. ARMSTRONG: -- or did you
9 put it together? What we'll need to do is, there
10 is a number of things that will need to be revised.
11 MR. WILLIAM BLAKESLEE: Right.
12 MR. ARMSTRONG: What I'm
13 thinking about doing, my office may just prepare
14 the form because, I mean -- and you're also -- do
15 you have an engineer on this?
16 MR. RICHARD KRESGE: We are the
17 engineer.
18 MR. ARMSTRONG: Identify
19 yourself for the record.
20 MR. WILLIAM BLAKESLEE: William
21 Blakeslee.
22 MR. RICHARD KRESGE: I'm Richard
23 Kresge with Quad 3 Group.
24 MR. WILLIAM BLAKESLEE: I didn't
25 put in --
6
1 MR. ARMSTRONG: The legal
2 descriptions are missing. There is more specified
3 information that's needed.
4 MR. WILLIAM BLAKESLEE: Okay.
5 MR. ARMSTRONG: Parcel
6 identification numbers -- and some of the things
7 within this agreement, we are going to have to
8 change around. But what I would suggest is my
9 office can put something together. I'm assuming
10 you're going to prepare the legal description?
11 MR. RICHARD KRESGE: Yes. We
12 can certainly do that. I thought we did prepare a
13 legal description, but I could be wrong,
14 incorporated with the maintenance agreement.
15 MR. ARMSTRONG: Exactly. It
16 might be more of like an easement agreement. Okay?
17 Which will be recorded with the court upon plan
18 approval and recordation. So what I'm going to do
19 is, I'm going to take this back, I'm going to
20 review it, I'm going to put something together and
21 I'll be forwarding to -- who will I be forwarding
22 to?
23 MR. WILLIAM BLAKESLEE: I guess
24 you can present it to me and I'll send it to my
25 attorney.
7
1 MR. ARMSTRONG: Do I have your
2 information?
3 MR. WILLIAM BLAKESLEE:
4 Willblakeslee@comcast --
5 MR. ARMSTRONG: All lower case,
6 Blakeslee?
7 MR. WILLIAM BLAKESLEE: Yes.
8 @comcast.net.
9 MR. ARMSTRONG: And I'm also
10 going to need some additional information, tax map
11 parcel numbers, the actual -- well we can get it.
12 This is your card?
13 MR. RICHARD KRESGE: Yes.
14 MR. ARMSTRONG: I'll give you a
15 call.
16 MR. RICHARD KRESGE: Is it okay
17 if he copies both of us on that, maybe we can work
18 together. There is probably a lot of stuff you'll
19 need from me.
20 MR. ARMSTRONG: Right, just to
21 put the thing together. So that being said, No. 1
22 on the review letter of November 2nd.
23 MR. RICHARD KRESGE: I didn't
24 have the opportunity to review that.
25 MR. ARMSTRONG: I actually have
8
1 an extra copy.
2 MR. RICHARD KRESGE: Was there
3 anything with respect to the body of the
4 maintenance agreement?
5 MR. ARMSTRONG: There is a lot.
6 I'm not sure where you got the document, but it's
7 lacking, you know --
8 MR. WILLIAM BLAKESLEE: I put it
9 together myself.
10 MR. ARMSTRONG: That's fine.
11 What I'll do is I'll look through it. What I'll
12 probably do is just use one of our forms rather
13 than go -- it would take me longer to go through
14 and review this and revise it in each situation.
15 Okay?
16 MR. RICHARD KRESGE: Okay.
17 Item No. 2, Monroe County
18 Planning Commission provided review comments dated
19 July 9, 2007. The review letter indicates that,
20 quote, all comments are preliminary and will be
21 acted upon by the planning commission at its
22 regular meeting on August 14, 2007. That date
23 should be added to the plan. We did make that
24 revision. I don't know if that's with the drawings
25 you have, but --
9
1 MR. McHALE: Yes, it should be.
2 It's the very last note, Note 27.
3 MR. RICHARD KRESGE: Note 27.
4 MR. SINCAVAGE: Okay.
5 MR. RICHARD KRESGE: Item 3 --
6 MR. SINCAVAGE: Just a copy of
7 the PennDOT highway occupancy permit should be
8 provided.
9 MR. RICHARD KRESGE: Upon
10 receipt. We do not have receipt yet. We have made
11 submission of the design as was submitted here, so
12 that is in process.
13 MR. SINCAVAGE: That's an
14 outside agency.
15 MR. RICHARD KRESGE: Yes, sir.
16 Then the last part of No. 3,
17 the following waiver request, particularly the
18 first one is Chapter 124, stormwater drainage
19 studies for the new lot. Since we are not
20 developing the newly created lots at this time, we
21 are asking for the waiver from the
22 stormwater/drainage study.
23 The second one is a waiver from
24 construction of cross sections. We've provided
25 typical cross sections of the roadway. I'm not
10
1 sure what the ordinance prescribed. There is a set
2 parameter of so many cross sections for every so
3 many stations. But we have provided typical cross
4 sections on our roadway design. I guess that would
5 be the waiver request.
6 MR. SINCAVAGE: Are you okay
7 with that? Okay.
8 MR. RICHARD KRESGE: The third
9 is the waiver for the street center line. The
10 entire roadway is within the right of way so we
11 didn't have to destroy a row of pine trees. We
12 actually shifted the roadway within the easement so
13 that that center line of the roadway does not fall
14 directly on the center line of the easement. It's
15 offset. So that's why we had to request a waiver
16 for that requirement.
17 MR. SINCAVAGE: Okay.
18 MR. RICHARD KRESGE: Finally,
19 the roadway composition, we've requested a request
20 to construct the road, all but the bituminous paved
21 portion, until such a time as the lot, the newly
22 created lots become developed for a maximum of 10
23 years, whichever occurs first.
24 MR. ARMSTRONG: I think the
25 maximum of 10 years is a little extensive. I don't
11
1 know what the planning commission would -- I would
2 suggest more like three to five years time frame.
3 MR. SINCAVAGE: From what I have
4 seen in the township, it's usually no more than
5 five years, that I've seen, that I can recall, even
6 down to two years.
7 MR. WILLIAM BLAKESLEE: Would
8 you accept 5 years, the rest of the board?
9 MR. RICHARD KRESGE: Now,
10 understand that no building will occur. If
11 building occurs next week or next year, he'd have
12 to put in the full improvements right out of the
13 gate. But if nothing ever got built there, the
14 road would be vastly improved from what exists
15 there now.
16 MR. SINCAVAGE: The gravel base
17 is already put in. It will be brought up to the
18 proper width for fire access. The only thing they
19 are asking for is the bituminous paving. I'm
20 comfortable with five.
21 MR. MILLER: I am too.
22 MR. VANDERVLIET: Five years.
23 MR. SINCAVAGE: No more than
24 five years. If any building occurs before that,
25 they have to do it when that building occurs.
12
1 MR. ARMSTRONG: And that will be
2 a note on the plan.
3 MR. McHALE: Yes. Note 25 will
4 just need to be marked.
5 MR. ARMSTRONG: Okay. Then we
6 get into the opinion of the probable costs. Bob,
7 you reviewed that?
8 MR. McHALE: Yes, I did. The
9 only thing we'll need to do with the costs, the
10 original assumptions look fine, is just to project
11 it out for inflationary purposes for the 5 years
12 plus 90 days beyond, then you add 10 percent to
13 that. So that will bring you up to about 147,000,
14 somewhere in that range.
15 MR. WILLIAM BLAKESLEE: That's
16 the blacktop.
17 MR. RICHARD KRESGE: This
18 includes everything. Now, if he were to construct
19 everything but the blacktop, in theory, this amount
20 would be reduced to $68,500 bond with inflation.
21 MR. McHALE: We would start with
22 that total amount and then whatever is constructed
23 gets deducted out and released.
24 MR. RICHARD KRESGE: Sure.
25 MR. SINCAVAGE: And that's all
13
1 spelled out in the maintenance agreement or is
2 that --
3 MR. ARMSTRONG: That will be in
4 the financial security agreement that the board of
5 supervisors will --
6 MR. SINCAVAGE: Will work out.
7 MR. McHALE: The maintenance
8 agreement will just be between the property owners
9 that are going to be utilizing the roadway.
10 MR. ARMSTRONG: What the
11 maintenance agreement is going to be, it's very
12 similar to like a shared driveway easement, where
13 property owners share a driveway and there is an
14 easement between them agreeing to do snow plowing
15 in the winter time, maintain the road in a drivable
16 form. That's primarily what this document is going
17 to say.
18 MR. SINCAVAGE: The improved
19 road.
20 MR. ARMSTRONG: Right.
21 MR. SINCAVAGE: That looks like
22 about it. Any questions from the board?
23 MR. McHALE: Timing on the
24 agreement that we need to get wrapped up.
25 MR. ARMSTRONG: This maintenance
14
1 easement agreement that we are going to put
2 together, I'm going to put something together next
3 week. I'll forward it to you and then depending on
4 if there is a recommendation this evening, I'll
5 probably forward it on to the board of supervisors
6 or solicitor as well and -- but that being said, I
7 mean, you're going to have to provide additional
8 information for me to complete the document and you
9 will have to review it and make sure everything is
10 okay. That all being said, we need to have that
11 finalized pretty much in a final form before the
12 board of supervisors has to act on this. So we
13 are -- I think your time frame runs November 27th.
14 So what we are going to need tonight is a time
15 extension, an extension of time so that there is
16 time for us to complete this document, time for you
17 to revise any plans. To make these notes that are
18 needed won't take that time, but this document may.
19 So we're going to need a time extension tonight, if
20 there is a recommendation, just so it gives us time
21 to finish this document before it goes before the
22 board of supervisors.
23 MR. SINCAVAGE: It will be
24 December?
25 MR. McHALE: Second Monday in
15
1 December.
2 MR. ARMSTRONG: But this
3 agreement needs to be finalized November.
4 MR. McHALE: By November 27.
5 MR. WILLIAM BLAKESLEE: November
6 27th.
7 MR. ARMSTRONG: So I'll probably
8 be sending you a proposed form sometime early next
9 week. I'll copy you. I have your card. I'll send
10 it to you as well, but I might be giving you a call
11 in the mean time to get additional information so
12 we can plug in what we need to plug in. Okay?
13 I don't know if the planning
14 commission has any other comments or concerns with
15 respect to the plans.
16 MR. SINCAVAGE: Anything from
17 the public?
18 MR. ARMSTRONG: Now, you did
19 request a waiver, so why don't we get the planning
20 commission's position on this waiver request.
21 MR. SINCAVAGE: I believe we are
22 fine with that, so.
23 MR. MILLER: We need a motion
24 just for that?
25 MR. ARMSTRONG: I normally --
16
1 MR. SINCAVAGE: He likes it that
2 way.
3 MR. WILLIAM BLAKESLEE: I have
4 one question, though. The five year limit is on
5 the gravel --
6 MR. SINCAVAGE: Paving.
7 MR. WILLIAM BLAKESLEE: So in 5
8 years we have to pave it?
9 MR. SINCAVAGE: Yes.
10 Okay. You want to take the
11 waivers one at a time or as a group?
12 MR. ARMSTRONG: You can take the
13 waivers all as a group.
14 MR. SINCAVAGE: Okay. Let's get
15 the waivers done.
16 MR. MILLER: I'll make a motion
17 we accept the waivers as submitted except for the
18 roadway composition of a 5 year time frame. I
19 don't know what else I can say.
20 MR. ARMSTRONG: The first motion
21 would be whether or not you're going to recommend
22 granting the waivers. And the second motion would
23 be if you're going to recommend approval or denial
24 of the plan pursuant to the comments and or
25 suggestions of Mr. McHale's November 2nd, 2007
17
1 letter, as well as the finalization of the
2 maintenance easement agreement for the road in a
3 manner satisfactory to the township.
4 MR. SINCAVAGE: Is that your
5 motion, Joe?
6 MR. MILLER: That's my motion.
7 MR. ARMSTRONG: Let's do this.
8 Here's the first motion. The first motion before
9 the planning commission would be whether or not to
10 recommend the granting of the waiver request set
11 forth in the November 2nd, 2007 letter from Mr.
12 McHale. Those waivers being Section 135-18,
13 Subsection B, Subsection 16; and Chapter 124
14 regarding stormwater drainage; as well as SALDO
15 Section 135, Section 18.B, Subsection 18; as well
16 as SALDO Section 135, Section 21.A, Subsection 11;
17 as well as SALDO Section 135.21.B, Subsection 4;
18 and SALDO Section 135.29.C; with the additional
19 condition with respect to the roadway composition,
20 that the applicant agree to and enter into the
21 appropriate financial security performance in a
22 form acceptable to the township, as well as
23 requiring and adding a note to the plan indicating
24 that the completion date for the roadway
25 improvements will be no longer than five years.
18
1 MR. MILLER: So moved.
2 MR. VANDERVLIET: Second.
3 MR. ARMSTRONG: No longer than
4 five years or at the time of land development, if
5 that would be prior to the five year time frame.
6 MR. MILLER: So made.
7 MR. VANDERVLIET: Second.
8 MR. SINCAVAGE: Motion and a
9 second. All those in favor, please say aye.
10 MR. MILLER: Aye.
11 MR. VANDERVLIET: Aye.
12 MR. SINCAVAGE: Aye.
13 MRS. LAMBERTON: Aye.
14 MR. ARMSTRONG: The second
15 motion before the planning commission would be
16 whether to recommend the Blakeslee proposed
17 subdivision, Project 2007-17, for approval before
18 the board of supervisors, pursuant to the November
19 2nd, 2007 comments and suggestions within that
20 letter from Bob McHale, the township engineer, and
21 further conditional upon the completion in a
22 satisfactory form to the township of a maintenance
23 easement agreement set forth in No. 1 of
24 Mr. McHale's November 2nd, 2007 letter to be
25 completed at least one week before the board of
19
1 supervisors meeting that will be reviewing the
2 plan, their work session.
3 MR. SINCAVAGE: Okay. That's
4 the motion. Do I have a motion.
5 MR. VANDERVLIET: I'll move.
6 MR. MILLER: Second.
7 MR. SINCAVAGE: All those in
8 favor please say aye.
9 MR. MILLER: Aye.
10 MR. VANDERVLIET: Aye.
11 MRS. LAMBERTON: Aye.
12 MR. SINCAVAGE: Aye. Just a
13 bunch of agreements. That's all it boils down to.
14 MR. RICHARD KRESGE: Do we make
15 the changes on the drawing? There are drawing
16 changes. Note 25 has to reflect the 5 as oppose to
17 the 10 year. Make the changes, submit them to the
18 board of supervisors and then come back and get all
19 the signature blocks filled in?
20 MR. SINCAVAGE: No. After the
21 board of supervisors approve it, then that will
22 come back to us.
23 MR. ARMSTRONG: All that was
24 done tonight was a recommendation from the planning
25 commission. Your actual approval of the plans will
20
1 be coming from the board of supervisors. This
2 board only has the power to recommend certain
3 things.
4 Now, that all being said, this
5 is the time extension that I'll need you to fill
6 out.
7 MS. HAASE: Richard, if you can
8 keep in mind, the 22nd and 23rd the township will
9 be closed, in case you have communications with
10 Mr. McHale and myself.
11 MR. RICHARD KRESGE: It has to
12 be submitted --
13 MS. HAASE: By the 27th. That
14 will be prior to the work session. The work
15 session will be the first Monday in December.
16 MR. RICHARD KRESGE: That's the
17 meeting we would attend?
18 MS. HAASE: You could attend it
19 if you like. It won't be acted upon until the 2nd,
20 until their actual regular meeting, which that
21 would be the second Monday.
22 MR. ARMSTRONG: That's it.
23 MR. RICHARD KRESGE: Thank you.
24 MR. SINCAVAGE: Moving on to our
25 next item, Pyramid Network Services. You're
21
1 Mr. Grab.
2 MR. MIKE GRAB: Good evening,
3 commission members. My name is Mike Grab. I
4 represent T Mobile in connection with the
5 application. I have small copies of the plan to
6 hand out to the board. This is the proposal, board
7 members, you may recall, to replace the existing
8 gasoline, Mobil sign, I think at the intersection
9 of Route 940 and 380. It's a 95 foot tall
10 illuminated gas sign. What T Mobile proposes to do
11 is to take the sign down and place it with actually
12 a sturdier one with 3 legs instead of 2 and then
13 attach antennas to each of those legs. And we've
14 submitted the plan. We did receive zoning approval
15 for the proposed use in October of 2006, submitted
16 the plans to the township. We've been reviewing it
17 with Mr. McHale, Mr. Armstrong and I think that
18 we've addressed all of the issues that have been
19 raised and happy to answer whatever questions you
20 might have about the proposal.
21 There is a small matter with
22 regard to a landscape buffer easement. The
23 easement agreement has been completed, but there is
24 a minor issue that was brought to our attention
25 with regard to the legal description of that
22
1 easement area, and I have assured Mr. Armstrong and
2 Mr. McHale we'll take care of that minor
3 discrepancy right away and we'll get that corrected
4 and we'll submit it to you.
5 MR. SINCAVAGE: Are you
6 gentlemen okay with that?
7 MR. ARMSTRONG: If there is a
8 recommendation tonight, it will be conditional upon
9 them revising the legal descriptions in
10 coordination with the easement agreement to a
11 manner satisfactory to the township.
12 MR. SINCAVAGE: Okay.
13 MR. McHALE: I was going to say
14 it's also this tower -- communications tower/sign
15 is something that needs to be permitted through
16 PennDOT. So it's subject to receipt of PennDOT
17 permit for the sign.
18 MR. MIKE GRAB: We discussed
19 that with the PennDOT representative and what
20 happens is they won't act on anything until we have
21 the municipal approval. It's kind of a catch 22.
22 As soon as we have that we can submit all the
23 information to them and get whatever permit they
24 require.
25 MR. ARMSTRONG: So obviously
23
1 that will be another condition of any
2 recommendation made by the commission tonight, that
3 they receive any required PennDOT and or other
4 state permits and or approvals.
5 MR. MIKE GRAB: But, again, just
6 to be clear, we couldn't obtain that before the
7 board of supervisors actually gave us its approval.
8 We have to wait until we have that and then we can
9 go to PennDOT. So I think it's maybe more of a
10 building permit issue. I know the township doesn't
11 like to approve things conditionally, that's the
12 only reason I make that statement, so it's clear to
13 the board of supervisors, so they are not confused
14 thinking that that's a condition we need to meet
15 before they can approve the plan. See what I mean?
16 MR. SINCAVAGE: This is the 25
17 feet landscaping or does that need to be clarified.
18 MR. ARMSTRONG: In the legal
19 description. I think it's represented correctly on
20 the plan. It's just the actual legal description
21 that's a little -- it's not quite consistent with
22 what's on the survey.
23 MR. MIKE GRAB: At the end of
24 the legal description -- and Bob pointed out to me
25 this evening, there is an error in the last
24
1 distance that's called out in the legal
2 description. So I'll review that with our engineer
3 tomorrow. We'll get it corrected and I assured Bob
4 and Pat that we'd have something to them by Monday
5 with the corrected legal description.
6 And the idea of the buffer
7 easement, board members, is to maintain existing
8 vegetation. There is some heavy vegetation there
9 that surrounds us. So the idea is that we want
10 that to stay there, so we worked out an easement
11 agreement with the owner to ensure that that stays
12 there.
13 MR. SINCAVAGE: Any board member
14 have any questions?
15 MR. ARMSTRONG: Are there any
16 waiver requests?
17 MR. MIKE GRAB: No, we have no
18 waiver requests with this one.
19 MR. ARMSTRONG: Comments from
20 the public?
21 MS. HAASE: Mr. Grab, you are
22 aware that the applicant is going to need to obtain
23 a sign permit from my office?
24 MR. MIKE GRAB: Yes, that's
25 fine. Absolutely.
25
1 MR. ARMSTRONG: Was there an
2 opinion on probable costs associated with the
3 removal of the tower?
4 MR. McHALE: Yes. We received
5 that.
6 MR. MIKE GRAB: Yes.
7 MR. ARMSTRONG: We received an
8 updated certificate of liability insurance?
9 MR. MIKE GRAB: Yes.
10 MR. ARMSTRONG: Anything else
11 from the commission members?
12 The motion before the planning
13 commission would be or is whether or not to
14 recommend approval of the Pyramid Network Services,
15 LLC land development plan, the proposed fuel
16 advertising sign and communications facility,
17 Project No. 2006-028, pursuant to the comments and
18 suggestions set forth in the October 31st, 2007
19 township engineer's review letter; as well as
20 conditional upon the applicant receiving any and
21 all needed permits and or approvals from
22 Pennsylvania Department of Transportation and or
23 other state agency prior to the construction or
24 additions to the site; as well as conditional upon
25 the applicant making the required revisions to the
26
1 legal description for the buffer area set forth in
2 the easement agreement, and that legal description
3 being revised and satisfied at least one week prior
4 to the board of supervisors work session that will
5 be considering the plan for approval.
6 MR. SINCAVAGE: That's the
7 motion.
8 MR. MILLER: So moved.
9 MR. VANDERVLIET: Second.
10 MR. SINCAVAGE: Motion and
11 second. Any further discussion? All those in
12 favor please say.
13 MR. MILLER: Aye.
14 MR. VANDERVLIET: Aye.
15 MR. SINCAVAGE: Aye.
16 Have a letter from Omnipoint
17 Communications that they are withdrawing their
18 application.
19 MR. ARMSTRONG: Yes, I did
20 receive that.
21 MR. SINCAVAGE: So we have no
22 action.
23 MR. ARMSTRONG: No. They
24 withdraw.
25 MR. SINCAVAGE: By letter dated
27
1 October 22nd, 2007 to the Tobyhanna Township
2 Planning Commission, they would request the
3 withdrawal of their application. Correct?
4 MR. MIKE GRAB: That's correct.
5 I represent -- T Mobile/Omnipoint is the same
6 company. That application has been withdrawn.
7 MR. ARMSTRONG: I see that you
8 did it without prejudice. Do you anticipate --
9 MR. MIKE GRAB: There is that
10 possibility that we may reapply. If so, it would
11 be a brand new application unrelated to this one.
12 MR. SINCAVAGE: Which is so
13 noted in your letter.
14 MR. MIKE GRAB: Okay. Thank
15 you.
16 MR. SINCAVAGE: Next item is E
17 and T Realty also known as Brick City minor
18 subdivision. Anyone here representing them?
19 MR. JOHN HENNEMUTH: Yes, sir.
20 Good evening planning commission. My name is John
21 Hennemuth, I'm a professional land surveyor,
22 Scranton, Pennsylvania. I'm here on behalf of E
23 and T Real Estate. We are proposing -- I don't
24 know if you have seen this plan.
25 This is a lot combination plan
28
1 for a property. My client, E and T Real Estate
2 purchased this property sometime in 2006 from --
3 four lots from two individuals and proposed to do a
4 commercial development on the property. This is
5 over along Route 940. This property sits in the
6 split. Approximately two thirds of the property is
7 in Coolbaugh Township and the other third lies in
8 Tobyhanna. Our proposal tonight is to consolidate
9 all of these four properties into one tax parcel.
10 So it's really procedural. As Mr. Sincavage read
11 or -- this is intended to be a Brick City retail
12 outlet that's planned to be developed by another
13 firm. I'm here strictly on the lot combination
14 plan.
15 We are requesting, due to the
16 fact that it's simply a lot combination plan,
17 waivers from several articles of the Tobyhanna
18 Township SALDO, specifically SALDO 135.12.D.5.B,
19 deed restrictions, protective covenants and pending
20 agreements; SALDO 135.12.D.5.F, drainage plan
21 reported calculations; SALDO 135.15.A.25, existing
22 state and township driveway permits; and SALDO
23 135.17.L and 135.17.M, the existing structures,
24 sewer system, road rights of way, petroleum
25 facility within a 500 foot radius of this site; and
29
1 SALDO 135.18.B, final drainage plan for site
2 improvement. As obviously with the lot combination
3 plan, we are planning no improvements and that's
4 part of the other submission by, again, another
5 firm.
6 So our request tonight is that
7 we'd obviously like to make it, if possible, on the
8 application request, we are requesting
9 recommendation of approval on the lot combination
10 plan.
11 MR. SINCAVAGE: Bob McHale's
12 letter of October 31st, 2007 does make
13 recommendations that it be approved. Is that
14 correct, Bob?
15 MR. McHALE: Yes, sir.
16 MR. SINCAVAGE: With the
17 requested waivers. The waivers were submitted and
18 in written format and received by the township by
19 letter dated October 3rd, 2007. This is just a lot
20 joinder, not doing any development.
21 MR. JOHN HENNEMUTH: Correct.
22 MR. SINCAVAGE: Anyone have any
23 questions from the board?
24 Any questions from the public?
25 MS. HAASE: Pat, I have a
30
1 question for you. The four parcels have Coolbaugh
2 Township tax numbers. So is this something that we
3 still act upon?
4 MR. ARMSTRONG: The four parcels
5 involved in this.
6 MS. HAASE: Lot joiners are all
7 within Coolbaugh township tax numbers, not ours.
8 MR. McHALE: The property is a
9 portion, as Mr. Hennemuth indicated, a third of it
10 approximately is in Tobyhanna Township. The lot
11 combination plan does have Coolbaugh Township's
12 signature blocks.
13 MR. JOHN HENNEMUTH: Yes.
14 MR. McHALE: As well as
15 Tobyhanna.
16 MR. ARMSTRONG: So you have a
17 subdivision plan in front of Coolbaugh?
18 MR. JOHN HENNEMUTH: Yes,
19 coincidentally -- simultaneously, I should say.
20 MR. ARMSTRONG: The only -- it
21 looks like a very small portion of it is in
22 Tobyhanna Township.
23 MR. JOHN HENNEMUTH: Just this
24 portion here, correct.
25 I didn't know that the tax
31
1 numbers would have to spell out which township.
2 It's obviously just been taxed by Coolbaugh.
3 MR. ARMSTRONG: I mean, he's
4 going to have to get approval from Coolbaugh
5 Township as well.
6 MR. SINCAVAGE: Do we make a
7 motion conditioned upon approval from Coolbaugh?
8 Can we do that?
9 MR. JOHN HENNEMUTH: I
10 understand the point, but I think it puts me in a
11 catch 22. If they say it's dependent upon you,
12 you're first. That's the only thing I'm asking
13 for.
14 MR. McHALE: It's subject to the
15 fact that they would get Coolbaugh Township's
16 approval and that then makes it --
17 MR. ARMSTRONG: Right. Just
18 saying that your recommendation is to approve it as
19 long as he does get the approval from Coolbaugh
20 Township as well.
21 MR. JOHN HENNEMUTH: That's
22 correct. That's fine.
23 MR. McHALE: Okay.
24 MR. SINCAVAGE: Got it.
25 So I'll entertain a motion that
32
1 we recommend for approval to the board of
2 supervisors the E and T Real Estate, LLC minor
3 subdivision, lot line combination plan, Project No.
4 2007-021, with the recommendation that the
5 modifications for waivers to SALDO Section
6 135.12.D.5.B and F; SALDO Section 135.15.A.25;
7 SALDO Section 135.17.L and M; SALDO Section
8 135.18.B.15; and that Coolbaugh Township also
9 approve the plan.
10 MR. MILLER: So moved.
11 MR. VANDERVLIET: Second.
12 MR. SINCAVAGE: Motion and
13 second. Any further discussion? I'm going to call
14 the vote now. All those in favor, please say aye.
15 MR. MILLER: Aye.
16 MR. VANDERVLIET: Aye.
17 MRS. LAMBERTON: Aye.
18 MR. SINCAVAGE: Aye.
19 The next item on our agenda is
20 Arcadia Lot 110 New Ventures Park. I understand
21 that we received a request to table this for
22 tonight.
23 MS. ALEXIS WILKINSON: Yes.
24 Alexis Wilkinson, Reilly Associates.
25 We did fax a copy of a request
33
1 to table these. I do have a formal hard copy if I
2 can submit it to the township.
3 MR. SINCAVAGE: We are okay with
4 time on this?
5 MR. ARMSTRONG: Yes. The first
6 time was -- actually it was just a sketch plan last
7 month?
8 MR. McHALE: They signed an
9 acknowledgement that both Lot 100 and Lot 110 are
10 incomplete applications, but they asked for a
11 technical review.
12 MR. SINCAVAGE: So we are okay
13 with time. But we need a motion to table this.
14 MR. ARMSTRONG: Not necessarily,
15 not if it's not complete.
16 MR. MILLER: That doesn't have a
17 starting date, does it?
18 MR. ARMSTRONG: There is no need
19 to take action. But we did receive your letter and
20 your letter is requesting not to be acted upon
21 tonight and further extending any time extension,
22 at least until I have seen the letter.
23 That's fine. That was for both
24 lots 100 and 110?
25 MS. ALEXIS WILKINSON: Yes.
34
1 MR. ARMSTRONG: Okay.
2 MR. SINCAVAGE: No action
3 needed. Okay. As noted, that is for Arcadia Lot
4 number 100 in New Ventures and Arcadia Lot 110, New
5 Ventures.
6 Second item on our agenda is the
7 redesignation. I'm going to move that to the end.
8 We'll get through the land development. Let's
9 start with our list as usual.
10 Wee-Wons Day Care expansion.
11 Anyone here representing Wee-Wons? Have you heard
12 anything further on this?
13 MR. ARMSTRONG: I don't think I
14 have.
15 MR. SINCAVAGE: Bob?
16 MR. McHALE: No, sir.
17 MR. MILLER: I make a motion to
18 table.
19 MR. SINCAVAGE: I have a motion.
20 Do I have a second to the motion?
21 MR. VANDERVLIET: Second.
22 MR. SINCAVAGE: Any discussion?
23 All those in favor please say
24 aye.
25 MR. MILLER: Aye.
35
1 MR. VANDERVLIET: Aye.
2 MRS. LAMBERTON: Aye.
3 MR. SINCAVAGE: Aye.
4 Locust Ridge Quarry. Is there
5 anyone here representing Locust Ridge? You're
6 here, right?
7 MR. ARMSTRONG: Are you here for
8 the land development or the special exception?
9 MR. McHALE: It's for the land
10 development bog site. Scott, you can speak to
11 that.
12 MR. SCOTT DRUMBORE: Pretty much
13 status quo. Scott Drumbore. We are pretty much
14 status quo with the plan. As you know, earlier
15 this year we discovered a site on 940 that looks
16 like it may be a more viable option than the bog
17 site. We've been exploring that. We've had some
18 zoning issues that we need to work out and actually
19 later on tonight, that application will be
20 discussed. Mr. McHale prepared a letter.
21 Obviously, if that goes through, the previous plan,
22 what we call the bog site, would no longer be. So
23 that it's kind of status quo mainly for the reasons
24 that the focus has shifted to this new site. I
25 understand your patience with that plan and keeping
36
1 it going. At this point, you know, that's pretty
2 much all there is.
3 There is one item that would be,
4 I believe, and correct me if I'm wrong, Mr. McHale,
5 one item that would need to be addressed, at least
6 obtain preliminary approval and that would be the
7 fire requirement. I think there is 100 thousand
8 gallons of storage for fire. The plan there is to
9 put a basin on the site that has the capacity of
10 100 thousand gallons that is also tied into an
11 onsite well that has a system on there that when
12 that water level gets below the mark that would
13 provide 100,000 gallons, it would replenish it.
14 We've just not gotten to that point of putting it
15 on the plan because of the shifted focus.
16 MR. SINCAVAGE: So, I think
17 there was an indefinite time extension request?
18 MR. ARMSTRONG: I don't think
19 it's indefinite, I think we have until -- I think
20 the current time extension that's in play is until
21 December 20th. So we are still okay with respect
22 to time.
23 MR. SCOTT DRUMBORE: Yes. And
24 hopefully by that point --
25 MR. ARMSTRONG: This is one of
37
1 the plans that have been sitting around for a
2 while.
3 MR. SCOTT DRUMBORE: I
4 completely agree. And I did receive your letter
5 actually a couple months ago. I think we actually
6 responded to that.
7 MR. ARMSTRONG: You did. Which
8 is why there was no recommendation made.
9 MR. SCOTT DRUMBORE: Actually,
10 we planned on having more of a response at that
11 point or better direction of where we were going,
12 and unfortunately, at the time, we are still in the
13 process of getting a direction.
14 MR. ARMSTRONG: Definitely give
15 us a heads up before the next month's meeting.
16 MR. SCOTT DRUMBORE: We
17 certainly will.
18 MR. SINCAVAGE: I need a motion
19 to table.
20 MR. VANDERVLIET: So moved.
21 MR. SINCAVAGE: Motion. Second
22 to the motion?
23 MR. MILLER: Second.
24 MR. SINCAVAGE: Motion and
25 second. All those in favor please say aye.
38
1 MR. MILLER: Aye.
2 MR. VANDERVLIET: Aye.
3 MRS. LAMBERTON: Aye.
4 MR. SINCAVAGE: Second item on
5 our agenda is Glorious Church land development
6 plan. Anyone here representing Glorious Church?
7 Has anyone heard anything about Glorious Church?
8 MR. ARMSTRONG: I think they are
9 still waiting to schedule that conditional use
10 application for hearing. I don't know if anything
11 has been scheduled.
12 MS. HAASE: They have actually
13 submitted a request for the township. They may be
14 altering their plans. Right now the township
15 solicitor is working with the church's solicitor.
16 MR. SINCAVAGE: So we are okay
17 with time frame?
18 MR. ARMSTRONG: That one is
19 actually an open ended time extension from before
20 my time.
21 MR. SINCAVAGE: I need a motion
22 to table Glorious Church land development plan.
23 MR. MILLER: So moved.
24 MR. VANDERVLIET: Second.
25 MR. SINCAVAGE: All those in
39
1 favor please say aye.
2 MR. MILLER: Aye.
3 MR. VANDERVLIET: Aye.
4 MRS. LAMBERTON: Aye.
5 MR. SINCAVAGE: Aye.
6 Glorious Church conditional use
7 application. I need a motion to table.
8 MR. VANDERVLIET: So moved.
9 MR. MILLER: Second.
10 MR. SINCAVAGE: Motion and
11 second.
12 All those in favor please say
13 aye.
14 MR. MILLER: Aye.
15 MR. VANDERVLIET: Aye.
16 MRS. LAMBERTON: Aye.
17 MR. SINCAVAGE: Aye.
18 Elaine Brockett. Has anyone
19 heard anything about this?
20 MR. ARMSTRONG: I believe we do
21 have a written time waiver received from the
22 applicant on this plan.
23 MR. SINCAVAGE: Until?
24 MR. ARMSTRONG: Until January
25 30th of 2008.
40
1 MR. SINCAVAGE: Need a motion to
2 table.
3 MR. MILLER: So moved.
4 MR. VANDERVLIET: Second.
5 MR. SINCAVAGE: Motion and
6 seconded. All those in favor please say aye.
7 MR. MILLER: Aye.
8 MR. VANDERVLIET: Aye.
9 MRS. LAMBERTON: Aye.
10 MR. SINCAVAGE: Aye.
11 New business. I'll announce
12 that we did receive time waivers from E and T Real
13 Estate, Lands of Elaine Brockett and Pyramid
14 Network Services.
15 MR. ARMSTRONG: You can also
16 actually revise that to include Blakeslee because
17 they signed one this evening.
18 MR. SINCAVAGE: This brings us
19 to Windy Corners Realty. Anyone here representing
20 Windy Corners? This is a sketch plan submission.
21 MR. DAVID MURPHY: David Murphy.
22 MR. LAWRENCE MILES: Lawrence
23 Miles.
24 MR. GREG FINO: Greg Fino.
25 MR. DAVID MURPHY: We are
41
1 proposing modifications of existing civil
2 engineering plans that we feel are improvements on
3 what the original plan called for. There were
4 several issues. If you want to go down -- if you
5 want to take a moment and read it. I don't know
6 how you want to deal with each issue.
7 MR. ARMSTRONG: This is a sketch
8 plan before the planning commission, why don't
9 you --
10 MR. LAWRENCE MILES: We are
11 basically looking for some guidance from the
12 planning commission.
13 MR. ARMSTRONG: Well, why don't
14 you explain to the planning commission exactly what
15 your sketch plan is showing, what you're planning
16 on doing.
17 MR. LAWRENCE MILES: We added
18 pavement along here.
19 MR. ARMSTRONG: Actually, wait.
20 Is there background to this property or is it a
21 brand new sketch plan?
22 MR. LAWRENCE MILES: No.
23 MR. DAVID MURPHY: No.
24 MR. McHALE: They have an
25 approved land development plan and they are under
42
1 construction at this point in time, but they made
2 modifications in the field that do not match the
3 approved land development plan.
4 MR. ARMSTRONG: Okay.
5 MR. VANDERVLIET: Are they
6 finished with those modifications?
7 MR. McHALE: No, sir, they are
8 going to be asking for additional modifications
9 tonight as well, and they wanted to get input.
10 MR. LAWRENCE MILES: We are
11 looking for guidance.
12 MR. VANDERVLIET: Have they made
13 modifications before coming in here on the existing
14 plan?
15 MR. LAWRENCE MILES: Yes.
16 MR. DAVID MURPHY: Yes.
17 MR. LAWRENCE MILES: Due to the
18 construction issues and stuff that was really
19 beyond our control.
20 MR. ARMSTRONG: And that's set
21 forth in this narrative you just handed us?
22 MR. LAWRENCE MILES: Yes.
23 MR. SINCAVAGE: Okay. I went
24 out to the site today, took a look at it, just so
25 the board knows, so I was a little bit familiar
43
1 with it. The first item on here is the tree
2 screening. My understanding is that some of this
3 natural screening towards -- the north of the
4 property?
5 MR. LAWRENCE MILES: Yes, that's
6 north.
7 MR. SINCAVAGE: -- to the north
8 of the property was cut and it was supposed to be
9 maintained in the natural screen out there.
10 MR. LAWRENCE MILES: It was
11 removed to implement the drainage plan. There are
12 large timber that was basically -- a lot of it was
13 in end stage and diseased. We couldn't get the
14 swales in there without disturbing the route system
15 even more, so we removed those trees. We want to
16 replace that with natural screening, actually
17 better screen. They were all -- it was all pole
18 timber, so it didn't offer much --
19 MR. DAVID MURPHY: In the way of
20 blocking.
21 MR. LAWRENCE MILES: In the way
22 of privacy screening from the residential area.
23 MR. VANDERVLIET: How large were
24 the trees?
25 MR. DAVID MURPHY: They were 30
44
1 and 50 feet.
2 MR. LAWRENCE MILES: They were
3 in the 25 foot next to the building and with some
4 of them in trouble, we were worried about removal
5 and falling on the building.
6 MR. DAVID MURPHY: Basically,
7 they were in end stage. Their time limit was up.
8 So that, you know, who can tell -- a tree at end
9 stage can go on for 20 years, but it can also go on
10 for five.
11 MR. ARMSTRONG: But the plan
12 that was approved, that area was supposed to remain
13 untouched, correct? You're not saying that your
14 stormwater -- but the stormwater I'm sure you have
15 on your plan as well.
16 MR. LAWRENCE MILES: It was on
17 the following phase plan.
18 MR. ARMSTRONG: Did you move the
19 stormwater?
20 MR. LAWRENCE MILES: We really
21 couldn't move it. We are within the 25 foot
22 setback. We had no way of moving that swale.
23 MR. McHALE: But there may have
24 been other alternatives that could have been
25 entertained. What is done is done out there now,
45
1 and it's just how do we move forward and get input
2 on how to provide screen.
3 MR. SINCAVAGE: I observed that
4 there is a house located on John Fetch's property
5 to the north here, I would say maybe 30 feet from
6 the property line to his house.
7 MR. DAVID MURPHY: Yes, 30 to
8 50.
9 MR. SINCAVAGE: There is a
10 swale. It's about 10 foot off the building. From
11 my observations there were some dead trees there.
12 The swale is put in there now. Mr. Murphy and I
13 looked at it and he said that he proposed putting
14 in some trees. What trees did you talk about?
15 MR. DAVID MURPHY: Back there,
16 Colorado Blue Spruce, about 10 foot on center,
17 maybe a little bigger. The problem with using blue
18 spruce, like I see on some of these plans where she
19 has them, they are wonderful for the first five --
20 you know, if you put in an 8 foot tree, they are
21 wonderful for the first 5 years. After that, they
22 are going -- they are no longer enhancing the area.
23 They actually become cumbersome because now you're
24 dealing with a 30 to 50 foot tree. Aesthetically
25 it's not helping.
46
1 My understanding, in a lot of
2 cases, we also want aesthetics for commercial
3 property to be a big issue. But screening like in
4 the back here, that's fine, a cover of blue spruce
5 would do well. On this side here where there is
6 residential, Colorado Blue Spruce would do well.
7 Up here, this is adjacent to commercial property.
8 This is going to be a 30 to 50 foot tree down the
9 road as having no aesthetic value. So what I'm
10 suggesting, that for the lifetime of the property,
11 if we put in flowering crab or a like specie, whose
12 mature height is 15 feet, 20 feet and it's also,
13 you know, more pleasing to the eye, I suggest that
14 over what was chosen as the blue spruce, because
15 after a while, you see these trees out there, they
16 will become that height and they are no longer
17 aesthetically pleasing, where if we change species
18 we can make it -- it will be perpetual. They only
19 reach a certain height and that's it, along with
20 they're very attractive through the spring. All
21 along they are a much more attractive framework
22 through the winter and everything is a little more
23 positive there.
24 MR. SINCAVAGE: Okay. Going to
25 the screening on the west side here, I observed
47
1 that a swale does continue along the west side of
2 the building and then comes down towards the front
3 of the property. I observed the tree line as shown
4 on the plan here, Mr. Murphy said that he will also
5 plant some screening in that area --
6 MR. DAVID MURPHY: Right.
7 MR. SINCAVAGE: -- to supplement
8 that natural screening. The houses here are
9 significantly far back from the property and I
10 would guess about 100 to about 150 feet. So it's
11 quite a bit of distance in there.
12 MR. MILLER: Do you have any
13 kind of lighting on the rear side?
14 MR. LAWRENCE MILES: Lighting?
15 Yes.
16 MR. DAVID MURPHY: Lighting on
17 the rear?
18 MR. LAWRENCE MILES: On the
19 sides.
20 MR. MILLER: There is stuff on
21 the side.
22 MR. LAWRENCE MILES: Not like
23 parking, just evening light, maybe 40, 50 watt
24 bulbs --
25 MR. McHALE: Aren't there fire
48
1 exit doors or access doors on that side?
2 MR. MILLER: I was just thinking
3 about on the residential.
4 MR. LAWRENCE MILES: Not like a
5 bright parking lot light, so to speak. I believe
6 those wall lights are like 40 watts. They're just
7 a soft light for -- they will go on photocell, turn
8 themselves off and on.
9 MR. SINCAVAGE: Dust to dawn?
10 MR. LAWRENCE MILES: Yes.
11 MR. SINCAVAGE: Then in this
12 area, David, if you could explain what happened
13 there.
14 MR. DAVID MURPHY: Okay. We had
15 a -- well, it started out, we got digging here and
16 we got into a huge stump burial site. This was a
17 cemetery for stumps. Darling could tell you, we
18 should have taken pictures, but it explained a lot
19 of our problems over time in all of these
20 incredible sink holes that would show up. I'm
21 always thinking animals and I could never see a
22 sign of an animal, so I had no understanding what
23 occurred until of course we started prepping for
24 this. And it was a considerable cemetery. So we
25 started -- getting back to the natural screening, I
49
1 took it back further on my own course, to, you
2 know, with every intention of, you know, I want to
3 fill in this setback completely to here, especially
4 because it impacts residential I thought I'd maybe
5 double space with Colorado Blue Spruce which then
6 would be impenetrable. I could augment it with a
7 tree more like a shrub called a speckled alder
8 which only reaches a height of 15 feet at maturity,
9 but is incredibly dense. Car lights cannot go
10 through there, but in the winter it would show more
11 like a forsythia, very stemmy, heavily stemmy,
12 where, again, car light penetration versus the
13 existing pole timber that was here -- also dealing
14 with a lot of end stage trees in here that just,
15 you know -- were there some healthy ones? Yes.
16 But there was a lot of end stage trees that we were
17 dealing with also, so they came out, as opposed to
18 in the future dealing with hazards on falling on
19 the building, paying, you know, astronomical prices
20 to get them down, you know, by professionals. So,
21 you know, I took them out with the intention of
22 replacing or making sure, at the very least, that
23 there is a very good block here form the
24 (inaudible) property. Then as we get over here, it
25 turns commercial again going up. So on this side,
50
1 I'm just proposing the same thing. I'm going
2 for -- I would rather go for an ornamental effect
3 that would be pleasing to the eye for the passerby.
4 MR. SINCAVAGE: Okay. That
5 takes care of the screening. Is there any comments
6 from Phyllis on the screening?
7 MS. HAASE: On the screening, I
8 only ask that you put down exactly what you're
9 going to be placing on the property, exactly how
10 many of what, so I have something, when I go out to
11 inspect it, so I have something to refer to.
12 The property on the southwest is
13 in a commercial district, however it's a
14 nonconforming residential.
15 MR. SINCAVAGE: Right. So we
16 need the screening in there just as you said.
17 Right in here there is a house
18 on this side. Right here there's a house like 10
19 feet from the property line. As Phyllis said,
20 we'll require resubmission with the detail showing
21 the tree plantings as you're stating.
22 Do you have any comments on
23 screening? Okay.
24 MR. VANDERVLIET: I don't see
25 deciduous as a good screen in the winter.
51
1 MR. DAVID MURPHY: But that's
2 also what was there.
3 MR. VANDERVLIET: I don't care
4 what was there. If we are asking for screening, we
5 are asking for something that is 24 hours a day,
6 365 days a year. I think that you can get
7 evergreens that stunt their growth at a height.
8 MR. DAVID MURPHY: Actually I am
9 looking into --
10 MR. VANDERVLIET: You can also
11 put deciduous trees in with them.
12 MR. DAVID MURPHY: The speckled
13 alder --
14 MR. VANDERVLIET: And the thing
15 is, you should have been here earlier on this
16 subject as soon as it happened that you started
17 thinking about it, not after the fact.
18 MR. DAVID MURPHY: Well, there
19 you're correct and that was our ignorance.
20 MR. SINCAVAGE: So your plan
21 will show evergreens mixed with deciduous?
22 MR. DAVID MURPHY: Yes.
23 MR. SINCAVAGE: With the alder
24 and the Colorado --
25 MR. DAVID MURPHY: Yes. I was
52
1 trying to avoid --
2 MR. VANDERVLIET: I heard that
3 Colorado Blue Spruce are going to be no good
4 because they'll get to 80 feet and they will be no
5 good as screening any more. That's what I heard
6 you say.
7 MR. DAVID MURPHY: No. What I
8 said is they will lose their -- you're also -- it's
9 a two-fold situation. When you're going towards
10 the front of the property, you are also looking for
11 aesthetics, am I right? When you're dealing with a
12 50 foot tree, the aesthetics follows off
13 considerably, as opposed to if we can get into a
14 shorter specie that will accomplish it and stay
15 low, that you win on a double plus. We get
16 screening plus you get a nice attractive effect.
17 MR. VANDERVLIET: That's what
18 I'm saying.
19 MR. DAVID MURPHY: What is
20 called for is Colorado Spruce. They grow big. I
21 am not at this moment familiar with or can call out
22 an evergreen that won't be attacked by a deer that
23 would stay in the range of say 10 to 20 feet. Once
24 you go over 20 feet, I think now you're dealing
25 with something that's loosing its aesthetics.
53
1 MR. VANDERVLIET: It's all in
2 the eye of the beholder, but I won't argue the
3 point.
4 MR. DAVID MURPHY: True enough.
5 MR. SINCAVAGE: We'll receive a
6 plan showing the details on that?
7 MR. DAVID MURPHY: Correct.
8 MR. SINCAVAGE: Bob, do you have
9 a question?
10 Okay. Moving on, the next
11 general item was the retention basin, which is
12 towards the front here, which was supposed to have
13 a cedar split rail fence around it. When I
14 observed it out in the field, you can see the
15 blacktop is right to the edge of the retention
16 basin here in the front. I suggested to Mr. Murphy
17 that he consider putting a mound of dirt there and
18 he suggested putting shrubs in there to act as
19 screening around that as opposed to putting up a
20 split rail fence. It was kind of -- I think it
21 looked a little more attractive than putting up a
22 split rail fence that looks kind of crappy after a
23 couple of years. So you're okay with that?
24 MR. DAVID MURPHY: Okay.
25 MR. SINCAVAGE: Bob, are you
54
1 okay with that in terms of protection?
2 MR. McHALE: That should work,
3 as long as it covers the perimeter of the parking
4 area, just to keep people from driving on there.
5 MR. DAVID MURPHY: I thought
6 that was a very good idea. One that we didn't
7 think of.
8 MR. SINCAVAGE: And also, around
9 the new retention basin, which is going behind to
10 the west of the existing building, there is a
11 retention basin there that we are going to get into
12 a little bit later, but you also said you will
13 landscape that.
14 MR. DAVID MURPHY: Absolutely.
15 MR. SINCAVAGE: That has to all
16 be shown on the plan. Okay?
17 MR. DAVID MURPHY: I have
18 tentatively hand drawn that on.
19 MR. SINCAVAGE: We'll need a
20 real submission because we are going to get into
21 some more detail here.
22 Additional black topping at the
23 rear of the existing building to the left.
24 MR. LAWRENCE MILES: That's the
25 shaded area right here. This was left undone.
55
1 There was a door right here that we've had a
2 constant water problem even before we started this
3 building. So what we did was put a swale through
4 here to direct the water towards the retention
5 basin and -- this is another egress door that comes
6 out -- this section is the physical therapy
7 department. They asked for handicap access to both
8 doors. So actually what we did is we lined up with
9 that building. It added about I think a total of
10 800 square feet of paving, which is a pretty
11 accurate estimate of what's there, just to service
12 that door.
13 MR. DAVID MURPHY: What was
14 there prior, on the original drawing was a ditch, a
15 significantly deep ditch coming out right around
16 this door. Anybody having to exit this door it was
17 a complete hazard. It dropped down, you know, one
18 to two feet at a steep angle. It didn't -- it just
19 wasn't a logical move, where I think what we did
20 enhanced it.
21 MR. SINCAVAGE: Bob, do you have
22 a comment on that?
23 MR. McHALE: No, sir.
24 MR. SINCAVAGE: Okay. So we are
25 okay that the additional square footage of
56
1 impervious surface will be accounted for, because
2 something has to be done with the detention basin.
3 MR. McHALE: They've enlarged
4 the basin significantly. That should also be
5 accounted for. I don't know if it would require
6 going through the whole set of calculations.
7 MR. SINCAVAGE: Just show it.
8 MR. McHALE: Yes, because they
9 will be providing as-built drawings of the
10 stormwater management facilities as well.
11 MR. DAVID MURPHY: I had shown
12 Mark the proposed detention pond and you can see
13 with the flagging how narrow -- actually it's a
14 full -- it really is almost foolish. You're only
15 dealing with -- maybe it's this wide, this high,
16 and a percentage of water is not caught by it at
17 all. There is a ditch that was submitted that
18 actually runs right around and free flows. So if
19 you get a spring, the soil saturated, we are
20 dealing with delay, we get three inches of rain and
21 it's going right around and it's flying down
22 unchecked at all. The way we did it, it captures
23 100 percent of the water and then we'll let it fall
24 out the weir in the fashion of what the weir is
25 designed for.
57
1 MR. SINCAVAGE: That has to be
2 shown on the plan. We got into these handicapped
3 spaces.
4 MR. LAWRENCE MILES: On the
5 original plan, she had a center location on the
6 handicap space across the porch. We made that
7 all -- there is a 48 foot porch in front of the
8 building. We made that all handicap accessible.
9 There is a walkway toward both front doors and we
10 put handicap on each side. So it's just a matter
11 of flip flopping it. There is actually better
12 handicap access now. The building is laid out
13 where there is a horseshoe on the inside of the
14 hallway. They go to both doors. So it didn't
15 really make any sense because the porches were
16 tight, only five foot, and it was very difficult
17 for someone in wheelchair to get a turn on that
18 porch and go towards that door and then make
19 another turn. So now they have access directly up
20 both doors.
21 MR. SINCAVAGE: You will show
22 that on your revised plan?
23 MR. LAWRENCE MILES: Yep.
24 MR. SINCAVAGE: Phyllis, are you
25 okay with that?
58
1 MS. HAASE: Yes, I am, however
2 you will need to talk to Bill Weber for the ADA
3 accessibility. Any changes you make that's related
4 to ADA has to go through Bill Weber. We can't make
5 that.
6 MR. DAVID MURPHY: Okay.
7 MR. LAWRENCE MILES: Okay.
8 MR. SINCAVAGE: You're proposing
9 two additional signs for entrance from Route 940?
10 MR. DAVID MURPHY: Right.
11 MR. LAWRENCE MILES: On both
12 sides here. We don't have to put them in. If
13 there is some reason why we should have, we'd just
14 put entrance and exit signs just to facilitate --
15 make it more accessible.
16 MR. DAVID MURPHY: That they can
17 see where they are supposed to come in and where
18 they are supposed to come out.
19 MR. SINCAVAGE: There is a limit
20 on the size. I forget what it is.
21 MS. HAASE: There is a limit.
22 If you want to call me on Monday I can give it to
23 you. I think it's 2 and a half feet, 3 feet.
24 MR. LAWRENCE MILES: I don't
25 think it will be near that.
59
1 MS. HAASE: But you will need to
2 get a permit. As far as the signage, you do need
3 to get a permit for signage.
4 MR. DAVID MURPHY: For all
5 signage?
6 MS. HAASE: Correct.
7 MR. SINCAVAGE: That should be
8 shown on the plan. You have to get a permit for
9 that.
10 MR. DAVID MURPHY: We need to
11 get a permit before we submit here?
12 MR. SINCAVAGE: No.
13 MS. HAASE: No. Before you
14 erect the sign.
15 MR. LAWRENCE MILES: Okay.
16 MR. SINCAVAGE: Bollards were
17 eliminated to the front of the building?
18 MR. LAWRENCE MILES: Originally
19 it was a proposed drive-through. We are no
20 longer -- that's been abandoned, so we just want
21 the relief in putting them in. That was just to
22 protect the building from somebody hitting it. You
23 know, the drive-through window for the pharmacy.
24 It's no longer a pharmacy there.
25 MR. SINCAVAGE: So your new plan
60
1 will show that revision?
2 MR. McHALE: Take the text off
3 the drive-through.
4 MR. LAWRENCE MILES: Yes.
5 MR. SINCAVAGE: Redesign for the
6 proposed detention basin in order to retain 100
7 percent of the runoff?
8 MR. DAVID MURPHY: That's what
9 we were just talking about.
10 MR. SINCAVAGE: You're okay with
11 that? Once it's replaced on the drawings.
12 The next one is a top coat. All
13 this has been paved with a base coat. They are
14 requesting a waiver to put in the top coat until
15 spring of 2008 due to the lateness of the year.
16 MR. DAVID MURPHY: And the
17 record rain fall in October.
18 MR. LAWRENCE MILES: Just let
19 everything settle up.
20 MR. McHALE: We ought to get a
21 date on that.
22 MR. DAVID MURPHY: Well, that's
23 weather dependent in the spring also.
24 MR. SINCAVAGE: No later than
25 July 15th or something like that.
61
1 MR. DAVID MURPHY: Right.
2 Something like that. We want it good and dry. So,
3 you know, it goes in right.
4 MR. SINCAVAGE: We need a date
5 definite.
6 MR. DAVID MURPHY: Absolutely.
7 MR. SINCAVAGE: You put that on
8 the plan.
9 MR. McHALE: This top coat, all
10 the landscaping, are you planning on putting that
11 in immediately after the planning commission and
12 the board of supervisors approve it? You're
13 looking at December, January.
14 MR. DAVID MURPHY: If I can get
15 the plant material, which is part of it, and let's
16 say if all of a sudden it turns on us and we can't
17 dig through the frost --
18 MR. McHALE: If they can't do
19 that, they're going to have to bond.
20 MR. DAVID MURPHY: We can bond
21 for the trees. That's fine.
22 MR. McHALE: And the top wearing
23 course.
24 MR. DAVID MURPHY: And the top
25 coat. That's fine.
62
1 MR. VANDERVLIET: Put the
2 specifications with it.
3 MR. DAVID MURPHY: Of what they
4 will be?
5 MR. VANDERVLIET: What they will
6 be and what they are. What you're expecting of
7 what they are.
8 MR. SINCAVAGE: Like Phyllis
9 said, she needs to be able go out there and say
10 this is what is on the plan, this is what was put
11 in. If you show 10 flowering crab and she needs to
12 see where they are and be able to count them and
13 say you got the 10 in, once it's on the plan.
14 MS. HAASE: Just so you
15 understand, when the planning commission recommends
16 approval, it goes to the board of supervisors and
17 they sign off and record at the county. When I go
18 out to inspect your site, it has to look exactly
19 like that plan. If there is any deficiencies,
20 that's what would require you to come back through
21 this process, and we don't want you to have to do
22 that again. So you need to make certain that
23 everything you're planning on doing is built
24 dimensionally correct and the same amount of
25 evergreens or whatever you're showing, parking
63
1 spaces, etcetera is exactly what is on this plan.
2 MR. McHALE: So the evergreens
3 would be specified into height and deciduous trees,
4 the caliper diameter, all that information needs to
5 be shown.
6 MR. SINCAVAGE: Needs to be
7 shown on the plan.
8 MR. DAVID MURPHY: Okay. That's
9 fine. It could be an approximate window there?
10 MR. SINCAVAGE: I think it goes
11 like 2 to 3 inches in diameter.
12 MR. DAVID MURPHY: Well, the
13 caliper, if you go to 1 inch --
14 MR. McHALE: Four to 6 feet.
15 MR. DAVID MURPHY: Dry root,
16 you're going three quarters.
17 MR. McHALE: We don't want to
18 see 2, 3 foot trees out there.
19 MR. DAVID MURPHY: No. No.
20 They come in at -- when you get an inch caliper,
21 they are this tall planted.
22 MR. McHALE: Well, but typically
23 we see and inch and a half to 2 inch caliper trees.
24 MR. DAVID MURPHY: Right. If
25 you buy them dry rooted, that's generally what you
64
1 can get. I plant thousands of them, so, yeah, I'm
2 pretty familiar with it. But the evergreens, you
3 know, there can be a fluctuation in there,
4 depending on where we get them. You know, 6 to 8
5 feet would be fine, you know, saying something like
6 that.
7 MR. McHALE: Whatever you put on
8 your plan, though, when she goes out, she'll check.
9 MR. DAVID MURPHY: Right, but if
10 it turns out to be -- it can happen depending on
11 where our sourcing is at a 9 foot tree.
12 MR. McHALE: That doesn't
13 matter.
14 MR. VANDERVLIET: I think it
15 should be a minimum of 6 foot.
16 MR. DAVID MURPHY: Of all
17 species?
18 MR. VANDERVLIET: No, of the
19 evergreens. The other ones, let's put them a
20 little higher so we know they are mature.
21 MR. DAVID MURPHY: Right.
22 MR. SINCAVAGE: Okay.
23 Discrepancy in the grading, utility and lighting
24 plan have been brought to our attention by Phyllis
25 Haase. What changes?
65
1 MR. DAVID MURPHY: I don't know.
2 MR. SINCAVAGE: You go on to say
3 that the reason the changes were instituted was to
4 correct and improve the original plan as issues
5 arose during actual construction. Is there any
6 significant land development change than what was
7 approved?
8 MR. DAVID MURPHY: Just what we
9 are talking about now.
10 MR. LAWRENCE MILES: The only
11 other thing we didn't discuss were these islands
12 were originally open and we paved them and painted
13 them in just to facilitate snow removal.
14 MR. SINCAVAGE: I did observe
15 that when I was there. They paved there and they
16 are asking to have these striped. I had asked if
17 they had been curbed originally. The plan doesn't
18 show that they were curbed, so I assume that they
19 were just open landscaped areas.
20 Now, the lighting posts are in
21 there. And the concrete posts and the lighting
22 standards will go on. So that is, you said by
23 striping you were comfortable with that?
24 MR. LAWRENCE MILES: We are
25 definitely comfortable with that, if you guys are.
66
1 MR. SINCAVAGE: He said that
2 it's because of snow removal.
3 MR. DAVID MURPHY: It certainly
4 will ease snow removal by a mile.
5 MR. SINCAVAGE: If you show that
6 on the plan as this being striped out as you have
7 it on the sketch plan --
8 MR. LAWRENCE MILES: It is
9 striped out right now.
10 MR. SINCAVAGE: Anything else
11 from Phyllis? Bob?
12 MR. McHALE: The Maple Road
13 access issue.
14 MR. DAVID MURPHY: Oh, right. I
15 have a signed and notarized right of way. The
16 problem, something with the line, something --
17 MR. ARMSTRONG: Dated today?
18 MR. DAVID MURPHY: Yes. Bill
19 came up today. He was just here. He was the first
20 guy on deck.
21 MR. McHALE: Also regarding the
22 paving, any deformation of that pavement that may
23 occur during the winter, because it is soft and if
24 pot holes develop, they will have to fill the
25 property before paving.
67
1 MR. DAVID MURPHY: That's the
2 purpose for waiting.
3 That's to give me a right of
4 way.
5 MR. McHALE: When the project
6 was originally approved, my understanding was that
7 at that point in time you were looking to purchase
8 that roadway right of way and the board of
9 supervisors, as a condition of that approval, was
10 that he would provide the paperwork that you said
11 you had in place or he was in the process at the
12 time. But nothing ever came about of that
13 information, and now we need to know for sure and
14 have something that documents that there is either
15 appropriate access being -- legal access being
16 provided to Maple Road or that it is purchased as
17 originally intended.
18 MR. ARMSTRONG: So this was a
19 condition of the original approval. It's just
20 never been provided until today?
21 MR. DAVID MURPHY: Correct.
22 MR. ARMSTRONG: I just want to
23 make sure I understand. Is this a copy for us to
24 hold on to?
25 MR. DAVID MURPHY: I would need
68
1 a copy of it. It's the only one.
2 MR. SINCAVAGE: The PIN number
3 has to filled in on this yet.
4 MR. DAVID MURPHY: My attorney
5 has said there probably is not one. This is
6 something that came into effect about 10 years ago,
7 apparently.
8 MR. SINCAVAGE: It's an old
9 paper road that came about from when the Blakeslee
10 family subdivided Blakeslee.
11 MR. DAVID MURPHY: He had said
12 when we submit it, they'll probably assign it a
13 PIN, but there probably is not an existing one
14 today. Does it sound reasonable?
15 MR. ARMSTRONG: I looked at the
16 first paragraph. You just handed it to me tonight.
17 MR. SINCAVAGE: He's saying on
18 the PIN that there is no actual PIN number because
19 it's a road, so there is no PIN number assigned to
20 it by the county.
21 MR. McHALE: But you verified
22 that with the county that there is no PIN number?
23 MR. DAVID MURPHY: No. I just
24 got this today. He signed it today. Bill came up
25 today.
69
1 MR. ARMSTRONG: There should be
2 a legal description attached to this, the legal
3 description of the actual access easement that
4 you're using. I mean -- okay? This is just a
5 sketch plan review tonight, but this, my
6 understanding is, should have been submitted to the
7 township a long time ago, a long time. I'm not
8 sure how long this plan has been approved, but it
9 should have been a long time ago. Okay? So when
10 you do resubmit your plans for whatever
11 modifications you want to make for the plan that
12 was approved, that you didn't comply with -- okay?
13 -- copy this with it. Make sure it's a proper
14 easement agreement and make sure a legal
15 description of the access right of way is attached
16 to this exhibit.
17 I don't know if you have an
18 attorney. Make your attorney aware of this. Make
19 sure that when you resubmit your plans, this is
20 attached with your submission. Okay?
21 MR. DAVID MURPHY: Yes. I
22 understand.
23 MR. ARMSTRONG: Okay.
24 MR. DAVID MURPHY: It's going to
25 be then -- it will be topographical in degrees?
70
1 MR. ARMSTRONG: A legal
2 description with a survey, like a map, showing
3 where the easement is, with a description.
4 MR. DAVID MURPHY: They do not
5 have one in possession. Bill's not aware of --
6