[CALL TO ORDER]
[00:00:52]
MEETING PROPER PROVIDENCE TOWNSHIP.
UM, I'D LIKE TO START WITH ONE COMMENT BEFORE WE GET STARTED AND I, I'D LIKE TO THANK THE, MY FELLOW BOARD MEMBERS FOR, UH, ELECTING ME CHAIRMAN AGAIN IN 2023.
I APPRECIATE THE SUPPORT FROM ALL THE OTHER BOARD MEMBERS.
UM, AND WITH THAT, UH, WE'LL MOVE TO THE AGENDA.
I THINK THERE'S COPIES OF AGENDAS OUT THERE, AND, UH, WE HAVE 'EM IN FRONT OF US.
AND, UM, DO WE WANNA TAKE A ROLL CALL, JEFF, OR NO? I, I THINK WE CAN SEE ON THE TAPE WHO'S HERE.
[PUBLIC COMMENT FOR NON-AGENDA ITEMS]
THE AGENDA THEN, WITHOUT A ROLL CALL WOULD BE TO, UH, TAKE PUBLIC COMMENTS FOR NON-AD AGENDA ITEMS. IS THERE ANYBODY HERE THAT WANTS TO MAKE A COMMENT ON SOMETHING HAPPENING IN A TOWNSHIP ON THE NON AGENDA BASIS? I'M SORRY, I MISSED THAT PRAYER TODAY.UM, AND THAT, THAT'S A, THAT'S A GREAT SENTIMENT AND THANK YOU FOR, FOR MENTIONING THAT WE ALL ALL SAY A PRAYER FOR THAT.
[APPLICATIONS TO BE HEARD ON JANUARY 18, 2023:]
MOVE ON TO, UH, UH, THE APPLICATION TONIGHT, WHICH IS, UH, THE PARKHOUSE RESIDENTIAL CARE COMMUNITY FOR SENIOR CITIZENS.UM, AND WITH THAT, UM, I'M GOING TO, UH, START WITH MR. MULLEN IF, UH, YOU WANNA, IF I CAN'T, UH, OH, I'M SORRY.
I KEEP FORGETTING THAT, DON'T I?
[GENERAL DISCUSSION ITEMS]
SOLICITOR WANTS TO MAKE SOME COMMENTS.UH, LAST NIGHT AT THE, UH, SUPERVISOR'S MEETING, UH, THERE WERE SOME PEOPLE HERE, UH, ON PARKHOUSE, NOT AS MANY AS TONIGHT, BUT THERE WAS A GOOD NUMBER OF PEOPLE HERE.
AND I MADE A, AN EXPLANATION OF THE CONDITIONAL USE PROCESS THAT A LOT OF PEOPLE APPROACHED ME AND SAID THEY FOUND HELPFUL.
AND A COUPLE OF THE SUPERVISORS ASKED ME TO MAKE THOSE COMMENTS TO THIS GROUP, UH, TONIGHT.
UH, SO FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO WERE HERE LAST NIGHT, I'M SORRY THAT YOU HAVE TO HEAR IT TWICE.
THE, UM, THERE ARE TWO THINGS ON THE AGENDA.
THERE'S THE, THERE'S THE, THE PLAN ITSELF, WHICH IS IN THE FIRST STEP OF THE THREE TENTATIVE, TENTATIVE, PRELIMINARY, FINAL, AND WE'RE AT THE TENTATIVE STAGE FOR THAT.
BUT THEN THERE'S ALSO THE CONDITIONAL USE, WHICH IS SORT OF SITS OVER TO THE SIDE OF THE THREE STEPS.
AND IT CAN HAPPEN IN ANY SEQUENCE, EXCEPT THAT YOU HAVE TO HAVE YOUR CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL BEFORE YOU GET FINAL APPROVAL ON THE PLAN CONDITIONAL USE, WHICH MEANS YOU, UH, YOU'RE ENTITLED TO THE USE IF YOU PROVE YOU MEET.
THE ADDITIONAL CRITERIA IN THE ORDINANCE IS A PIECE OF LITIGATION, AND IT BEGINS WITH THE FIRST SWORN WITNESS IN FRONT OF A COURT STENOGRAPHER, AND IT ENDS WITH THE LAST WITNESS.
AND THEN WHEN THE EVIDENCE IS DONE BEING PRESENTED, UH, THE BOARD HAS 45 MORE DAYS AFTER THAT WITHIN WHICH TO RENDER A DECISION FOR OR AGAINST.
BECAUSE IT'S LITIGATION, THE SUPERVISORS SIT IN A CAPACITY THAT'S VERY RARE FOR THEM.
99% OF THE TIME, ELECTED TOWNSHIP SUPERVISORS ARE LEGISLATIVE IN NATURE.
AND FOR CONDITIONAL USE HEARINGS FOR, FOR THAT ONE THING, THEY WEAR A DIFFERENT HAT, WHICH IS A JUDICIAL HAT.
SO THE PROCEEDING THAT HAPPENS HERE IN A CONDITIONAL USE HEARING, UM, IS NO DIFFERENT THAN IF IT WERE BEING HAPPENING IN COURT.
THEY ARE CALLED A QUASI JUDICIAL, QUASI JUDICIAL BODY WHEN THEY ARE OVERSEEING A CONDITIONAL USE HEARING, BECAUSE IT IS LITIGATION AND BECAUSE THEY ARE ACTING AS FIVE JUDGES AND NOT FIVE LEGISLATORS, ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT THINGS IS THAT THEY, THE APPLICANT BE GIVEN A FAIR TRIBUNAL AND AN UNBIASED TRIBUNAL IN THE PRESENTATION OF THEIR EVIDENCE ON THE CONDITIONAL USE APPLICATION.
UM, THERE ARE, UH, PUBLISHED CASES THAT WHERE A DENIAL OF CONDITIONAL USE WAS
[00:05:01]
REVERSED BY THE COURT BECAUSE THE TRIBUNAL WAS NOT FAIR OR AN EVIDENCED SOME BIAS OR, OR HAD A STRONG STATED BIAS PRIOR TO THE HEARING, UH, THAT DENIED THE APPLICANT AFFAIR HEARING.AND SO, IN RESPONSE TO MANY OF THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE STATED, UM, EITHER FIGHT FOR US OR WHY AREN'T YOU FIGHTING FOR US? OR, UM, YOU KNOW, WHO DO YOU WORK FOR? AND ALL THOSE KIND OF COMMENTS.
UH, MY ANSWER TO YOU IS THAT THE BOARD, THE SUPERVISOR'S TAKING A POSITION PRIOR TO HEARING THE EVIDENCE IS A REVERSIBLE MISTAKE THAT WOULD RISK ANY RULING ON THE MERITS.
AND IT WOULD, IT, IT WOULD, IT WOULD POSSIBLY CAUSE A REVERSAL IN FAVOR OF THE APPLICANT IF THE, IF THE BOARD VOTED TO DENY, UM, THEN IT COULD BE REVERSED SOLELY ON, ON THE BASIS THAT IT WAS NOT A LEVEL PLAYING FIELD GOING IN.
AND SO, AND IT WILL BE A LEVEL PLAYING FIELD GOING IN.
AND IF THE, IF THE APPLICANT PROVES EVERYTHING THAT HAS TO BE PROVEN, THEN THEY'LL GET THE APPROVAL.
AND IF THEY DON'T, THEY WON'T.
AND THE BOARD WILL STRICTLY ANALYZE AND SCRUTINIZE THE TESTIMONY TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY HAVE MET THEIR BURDEN PRIOR TO VOTING.
IF THEY HAVEN'T MET THEIR BURDEN, UH, THEN THE BOARD WILL VOTE.
THE, THE, THE SUPERVISORS DO HAVE THE OPTION, AND I SUSPECT THAT THEY MAY WELL EXERCISE THAT OPTION OF HIRING AN ADDITIONAL ATTORNEY SO THAT I'M REPRESENTING THE BOARD STILL.
AND THEN THERE'S ANOTHER ATTORNEY WHO CAN PRESENT ADDITIONAL SUPPLEMENTAL EVIDENCE, UH, IN, IN ADDITION TO WHATEVER EVIDENCE IS SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT.
UM, BUT NO MATTER WHAT ANYONE, I, I DID STATE AT THE LAST PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING THAT WHEN I LOOKED AT THE CRITERIA IN THE, UH, ORDINANCE AND LOOKED AT THE CASE OUT OF CHESTER TOWNSHIP, UM, SUPERFICIALLY, IT, IT DOES APPEAR TO THE OTHER CONSULTANTS AND TO ME THAT THEY LIKELY MEET THE CRITERIA THAT ARE IN THE ORDINANCE.
HOWEVER, THEY STILL HAVE TO PROVE THAT THEY DO, THEY HAVE TO PRESENT THE EVIDENCE TO PROVE THAT THEY DO, AS I SAID LAST NIGHT, WHO EVEN KNOWS IN THE COURSE OF PRESENTING THEIR EVIDENCE WHETHER SOME OTHER DOOR OPENS OR SOMETHING THAT DIDN'T OCCUR, UM, TO THE TOWNSHIP, THAT IS SOME OTHER BASIS FOR DENIAL.
BUT GOING INTO THE HEARING, WHICH IS NOT YET SCHEDULED, BY THE WAY, UM, BUT GOING INTO THE HEARING, UM, THE, THE, THE HALLMARK OF IT HAS TO BE A, A, A FAIR AND UNBIASED FORUM, WHICH IS WHY YOU WILL NOT OR SHOULD NOT, AND I DON'T THINK, WILL NOT HEAR SUPERVISORS STATE IN ADVANCE A POSITION ON THIS.
IT DOES NOT MEAN THAT THEY DON'T UNDERSTAND THE ISSUES.
IT DOES NOT MEAN THAT THEY AREN'T STILL YOUR NEIGHBORS WHO LIVE IN THIS TOWNSHIP, AS DO I, BY THE WAY.
IT DOES NOT MEAN THAT THEY DON'T UNDERSTAND THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE, THE APPLICATION AND OF THE DECISION.
IT SIMPLY MEANS THAT THEY'RE FOLLOWING THE RULES IN GIVING THE APPLICANT A FULL AND FAIR HEARING.
AND SO ANYTIME THERE ARE, THERE ARE A NUMBER OF EMAILS THAT HAVE CIRCULATED WHERE PEOPLE HAVE SAID, UH, I WANT YOU TO DENY THIS BECAUSE IT DOES NOT CONFORM TO THE ORDINANCE.
MY REPLY TO YOU IS WE DON'T KNOW YET IF IT CONFORMS TO THE ORDINANCE.
THAT'S WHAT THE HEARING IS FOR.
THAT'S WHAT THE EVIDENCE IS ABOUT AT THE HEARING.
THE APPLICANT HAS NO BURDEN TO PRESENT THEIR WHOLE CASE IN ADVANCE OF THE HEARING.
AND SO WE DON'T HAVE THAT EVIDENCE.
AND SO IT'S IMPOSSIBLE TO TAKE A POSITION ON EVIDENCE THAT YOU HAVE NOT HEARD YET.
BUT THE BOARD DOES UNDERSTAND ALL OF THE ISSUES THAT THE PUBLIC HAS RAISED IN MULTIPLE MEETINGS NOW, AND THE ARGUMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE, AND ALL OF THOSE ISSUES THAT HAVE BEEN RAISED WILL BE FULLY VETTED AT THE HEARING.
AND NOT ONLY WILL WILL THE TOWNSHIP PROBABLY, UH, HAVE A, A SECOND ATTORNEY, UH, WORKING ON THE CASE, BUT ANYONE WHO ESTABLISHES STANDING, ANY TOWNSHIP RESIDENT CAN ALSO REQUEST PARTY STATUS AND, AND PARTICIPATE ON THEIR OWN AS A PARTY TO THE LITIGATION IF THEY PROVE STANDING.
SO THERE'S A LONG WAY TO GO, BUT THAT LONG WAY TO GO IS ENTIRELY WITHIN THE CONFINES OF THE HEARING.
THE TRANS, THE TRANSCRIPT IS IF WHEN AN APPEAL'S TAKEN, THAT TRANSCRIPT IS SENT TO COURT AND IS REVIEWED BY A JUDGE, IT'S MOST OF THE TIME THEY DON'T ACCEPT NEW EVIDENCE THEY CAN.
BUT MOST OF THE TIME THEY REVIEW THE TRANSCRIPT, THE LAWYERS ARGUE THEIR POSITION, THEY READ WHAT HAPPENED, AND THEY DECIDE WHETHER IT WAS ON THE UP AND UP OR IT WASN'T.
SO THAT RECORD HAS TO BE A FULL AND ALSO A CLEAN AND
[00:10:01]
ALSO A FAIR RECORD.THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT EVERYONE'S NOT WELCOME TO STATE THEIR POSITION.
EVERYBODY HERE WHO WANTS TO SAY SOMETHING IS GOING TO BE ENTITLED TO SAY SOMETHING JUST AS THEY WERE LAST NIGHT AND THE PRIOR PLAN, PLANNING COMMISSION, UH, MEETING.
SO I'M NOT TRYING TO IN ANY WAY, UM, DETER PEOPLE FROM MAKING WHATEVER COMMON OR OPINIONS THEY WANT TO OFFER ABOUT THE APPLICATION.
BUT, UM, WE, I THOUGHT IT WAS VERY IMPORTANT FOR EVERYBODY TO UNDERSTAND THE ENVIRONMENT IN WHICH WE'RE WORKING WITH RESPECT TO, UM, THE CONDITIONAL USE HEARING.
AND I DO KNOW THAT SEVERAL PEOPLE, I GOT A COUPLE PHONE CALLS TODAY AND I SPOKE TO PEOPLE AFTER THE MEETING LAST NIGHT.
UM, THEY, THEY DID NOT FULLY UNDERSTAND THAT, I GUESS MY COMMENTS LAST AT THE LAST PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING INCLUDED SO MANY OTHER ISSUES THAT IT MAYBE GOT LOST IN THERE.
SO I WANTED TO REEMPHASIZE JUST WHAT THE CONDITIONAL USE HEARING PROCESS IS.
THERE IS ALSO THE, THE TENTATIVE SKETCH APPLICATION, UM, PENDING THAT IS USUALLY A MUCH MORE ROUTINE PROCESS, UM, WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS.
WE HAVE OUR CIVIL ENGINEER AND OUR TRAFFIC ENGINEER HERE AND THE LAND PLANNER AND ME, AND WE ALL REVIEW THEM.
AND THEN THE APPLICANT INDICATES WHETHER THEY CAN COMPLY WITH THE COMMENTS IN THE REVIEW LETTERS.
AND IF THEY DOT ALL THEIR I'S AND CROSS ALL THEIR T'S, UM, THEY'RE REQUIRED TO GET, UH, APPROVAL OF THE SKETCH PLAN.
BUT IT'S STILL, ANY APPROVAL IS ULTIMATELY STILL CONTINGENT UPON THE CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL, WHICH IS A FORMAL HEARING.
THE TENTATIVE SKETCH APPROVAL IS NOT A FORMAL HEARING.
SO THAT IS APPROXIMATELY WHAT I SAID LAST NIGHT.
UM, I WILL, UH, BOARD MEMBERS, DID YOU HAVE ANY, UM, INITIAL QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS BEFORE WE GO TO MR. MULLEN? OKAY, MR. MULLEN.
WELL, BASICALLY, IS THIS ON, IT SOUNDS LIKE? YEP.
UH, BASICALLY AS WE COMPLETED LAST WEEK'S OR LAST MONTH'S MEETING, UH, AS I UNDERSTOOD IT, THE, WE WERE LOOKING FOR A RESOLUTION OR APPROVAL AND PLANNING COMMISSION SAID, NO, WE'RE GONNA HAVE A SECOND MEETING.
AND THE PURPOSE OF THAT MEETING IS TO ALLOW PEOPLE WHO COULD NOT BE HERE TO ATTEND AND ALSO TO LET PEOPLE REVIEW THE MATERIALS AND GET MORE FAMILIAR WITH 'EM.
UH, WE PRETTY MUCH DESCRIBED WHAT IT IS THAT WE PROPOSE.
UH, REMEMBER WE HAVE TWO THINGS HERE, THE TENTATIVE SKETCH PLAN, AND, AND THAT'S PRETTY VANILLA.
I MEAN, IT'S EITHER IT MEETS THE SETBACKS AND IT MEETS THE HEIGHT AND IT MEETS THE STORM WATER.
I WANNA SAY THAT, THAT A SKETCH PLAN'S NOT REQUIRED TO MEET STORM WATER.
SO, UH, THERE WAS A LOT OF CHATTER GOING BACK AND FORTH ABOUT STORM WATER AND FLOODING.
AND NONE OF THAT HAS BEEN LOOKED AT YET FROM THE, AND DOESN'T HAVE TO BE FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE TENTATIVE OF PLAN.
SO WE HAVE REVIEW LETTERS, AND WE'VE INDICATED THAT WE WILL ADDRESS ALL THE COMMENTS ON ALL THE REVIEW LETTERS.
SO I DON'T THINK THERE'S REALLY MUCH ARGUMENT ABOUT THE TENTATIVE PLAN, UH, INSOFAR AS THE CONDITIONAL USE GOES.
WE DID DESCRIBE GENERALLY WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
AS MR. BREIN SAID, WE'RE NOT GONNA BE PRESENTING HERE OUR COMMUNITY IMPACT STATEMENT IN OUR MARKET STUDY AND OUR TRAFFIC REPORT.
WE'RE NOT GONNA HAVE THOSE THINGS HERE BECAUSE THEY'RE GONNA BE PART OF THE HEARING THAT'S GONNA BE HELD BY THE SUPERVISORS.
SO REALLY, WE HAVE NOTHING TO ADD TONIGHT, BUT HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS PEOPLE MAY HAVE.
UM, AND BEF AND YOU JUST MENTIONED OUR, OUR, UH, CONSULTANTS.
I'D JUST LIKE TO TURN TO THEM FOR A MINUTE, JUST SO THE PUBLIC UNDERSTANDS THAT WE'VE REVIEWED THE LETTERS AND IF THEY HAVE ANY COMMENTS.
I KNOW YOU SAID YOU, YOU'LL, UH, YOU'LL AGREE TO ANY OF THE, UH, THINGS THAT THE, UH, CONSULTANTS HAVE SAID, BUT I'LL START WITH ANTHONY.
ANY, UH, YOU MAKE ANY COMMENT ON WHAT THE TRAFFIC PLAN IS AT THIS POINT? YEAH, THANKS.
UM, YEAH, SO OUR REVIEW LETTER FOR THE TENTATIVE SKETCH WAS ISSUED JUNE 24TH.
UM, YOU KNOW, AS MR. MULLIN SAID, UH, YOU KNOW, IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE, UH, YOU KNOW, WILL COMPLY.
UH, YOU KNOW, WE HAVEN'T SEEN A FORMAL TRAFFIC STUDY ISSUED FOR THE SITE AT THIS POINT.
YOU KNOW, IT'S TENTATIVE SKETCH.
UH, SO WE PROVIDED BASICALLY A PR, YOU KNOW, UH, AERIAL REVIEW.
UM, WE'VE ASKED FOR STUDY INTERSECTIONS AND ALL THE, UH, YOU KNOW, APPROPRIATE INFORMATION AND THE REQUIRED INFORMATION FOR, UM, THE TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY.
UM, AND AT THAT POINT, YOU KNOW, WE, WE NEED THAT INFORMATION BEFORE WE CAN GET INTO ANY DETAILED, UH, TRAFFIC ANALYSIS AND LEVELS, ALL THE, THE, THE TYPICAL THINGS THAT WE LOOK FOR FROM A TRAFFIC STANDPOINT.
UM, AS MR. PRESIDENT SAID IN HIS OPENING COMMENTS, I MEAN, THIS IS THE FIRST STAGE, UH, OF PLAN SUBMISSION.
THESE PLANS DON'T HAVE A LOT OF DETAILED, NOR THEY'RE REQUIRED TO.
UH, SO TYPICALLY WHAT WE DO IS WE PUT TOGETHER A REVIEW LETTER, BASICALLY LISTING ALL THE ITEMS THAT WE NEED IN ORDER TO COMPLETE A MORE FORMAL REVIEW, WHICH IS, AND THAT IS WHAT WE'VE DONE IN OUR REVIEW LETTER.
[00:15:01]
MR. MULLEN AND HIS, HIS GROUP PUT TOGETHER A REVISED PLAN ADDRESSING OUR COMMENTS, THEN WE CAN DIG DEEPER AND GO INTO THE WEEDS, SO TO SPEAK, AND PUT TOGETHER A MORE FORMAL LETTER.SO, UM, THAT'S REALLY WHERE WE'RE AT AT THIS POINT.
AND I WOULD JUST THROW IN FOR PEOPLE WHO WEREN'T HERE BEFORE WITH A TENTATIVE SKETCH PLAN.
AND THE REASON IT USES THE WORD SKETCH IS BECAUSE THE PLANS ARE NOT ENGINEERED.
SO THAT'S, IT'S, IT'S VERY CONCEPTUAL AS THE FIRST STEP OF THE THREE STEPS.
THEN FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL, THE PLANS ARE FULLY ENGINEERED, AND THAT'S REALLY WHERE THE WORK IS.
THAT'S REALLY WHERE THE CONSULTANT'S JOBS, WHERE THEY REALLY KICK IN DOING A REVIEW OF THE FULLY ENGINEERED PLANS.
AND BECAUSE THE PLANS ARE NOT ENGINEERED AT TENTATIVE, THAT'S WHY THERE'S NOT YET ANY OBLIGATION TO EXPLAIN, UH, STORMWATER, FOR EXAMPLE, BECAUSE IT HAS NOT YET BEEN ENGINEERED.
UM, SO THAT'S, I GUESS WITH THAT, WE'LL GO TO JEFF, DO YOU HAVE A LIST OF PEOPLE WHO WISH TO COMMENT OR, UH, YES.
VICTORIA SCHWARTZ 2 68 BAXTER DRIVE IS LISTED FIRST.
FIRST I'D LIKE TO SAY THANK YOU TO EVERYONE FOR ALLOWING ME THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK.
UM, I AM GONNA JUST ANSWER, OR I SHOULD SAY, ASK A COUPLE QUESTIONS WHETHER OR NOT THEY'RE ABLE TO BE ANSWERED.
AT THIS POINT IN TIME, UM, A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE PASSIONATE, AS YOU CAN SEE, THEY'RE HERE.
THE MICROPHONE, PLEASE CAN'T HEAR YOU BACK.
SORRY, CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW? OKAY.
UM, THERE IS A LOT OF PEOPLE HERE, SO I'M SURE WE ALL HAVE THE SAME KIND OF BENEFIT.
SO I'M JUST GONNA KIND OF THROW OUT SOME FACTS, BUT THEN ALSO SOME QUESTIONS AND WHETHER THEY CAN BE ANSWERED, THAT'D BE FANTASTIC.
IF IT'S GONNA HAVE TO COME BACK AS, UH, WE STAYED WITH ANSWERS, THAT'D BE GREAT TOO.
THE FIRST THING I WANNA ACKNOWLEDGE IS THAT CURRENTLY IN THE UPPER PROVIDENCE TOWNSHIP, THERE IS ONLY 5% OPEN SPACE REMAINING IN THE ENTIRE TOWNSHIP.
THERE ARE LOTS OF OTHER DEVELOPMENTS THAT ARE COMING ABOUT, BUT I WANNA POINT THAT OUT BECAUSE A LOT OF PEOPLE MAY NOT KNOW THAT THAT'S ALL WE HAVE LEFT IS 5% OPEN SPACE.
OKAY? SOMETHING LIKE THIS IMPACTS THAT 5% OPEN SPACE.
SO I'M JUST THROWING THAT OUT THERE AS A FACT.
SECOND OF ALL, UM, I DO HAVE A QUESTION, AND I KNOW WE SPOKE A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT.
YOU WERE MAKING STATEMENTS ABOUT THE ORDINANCES AND SO FORTH OF THE, UM, AND I HOPE I GET THIS CORRECT, THE, UM, O S C AND ALSO THE I N ORDINANCES.
AND AS, UM, MR. MULLEN STATED BEFORE THAT THESE WERE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE, UH, PRIVATE HOMES, BUT THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO BE UNDER THE INTERPRETATION OF PERSONAL CARE, POSSIBLY ASSISTED LIVING KIND OF ESTABLISHMENTS, SO FORTH UNDER THE ORDINANCES THAT CURRENTLY EXIST.
UM, YOU CAN'T HAVE THAT, AT LEAST THAT'S AS IT STATES.
SO MY QUESTION IS, ARE EACH INDIVIDUAL HOUSING GONNA HAVE A LICENSING TO OPERATE AS THAT PERSONAL CARE OR ASSISTED LIVING, OR ARE THESE GONNA BE PRIVATE PERSONAL HOMES? SO I JUST WANT A LITTLE CLARIFICATION ON THAT, AND I APOLOGIZE IF THAT QUESTION MAYBE IS A LITTLE, UM, DISTORTED.
UH, THE NEXT THING THAT I DO WANNA ASK, AND I KNOW THAT WE TALKED ABOUT, UM, WE TALKED ABOUT STORM WATER MANAGEMENT AND SO FORTH AND THE INFRASTRUCTURE, BUT HERE'S A QUESTION IN TERMS OF THE, UM, WHERE IS IT AT, UH, I APOLOGIZE, THE SEWER ESTABLISHMENT.
HAS ANY TESTS BEEN DONE ON THE SEWER TO MAKE SURE THAT IT CAN ACTUALLY, UM, HAVE AN ACTUALLY, UM, HAVE THE CAPACITY TO HANDLE 1,203 HOMES? I MEAN, THAT'S A, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT SHOULD, YOU KNOW, BE DONE IF IT HASN'T BEEN DONE.
THE SEWER PLANT HAS TO BE ABLE TO HAVE THE CAPACITY, HAVE THAT, THAT'S ADDITIONAL.
UM, I'LL LET OTHER PEOPLE TALK ABOUT THE STORMWATER INFRASTRUCTURE.
THEY HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT.
UM, BUT ONE THING THAT I DO WANNA STATE, AND THIS IS SOMETHING THAT I THINK IS VERY IMPORTANT, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, UM, MISLEADING OR MISGUIDING KIND OF, UM, UNDERHANDED DEALINGS, AND I DON'T MEAN THIS TO BE DISRESPECTFUL TO MR. MULLINS OR HIS LAW FIRM, BUT RECENTLY MR. MULLINS LOST A COURT CASE FOR MISREPRESENTATION FOR THE FRIENDS OF WAR SESTER, WHICH IS A NON-FOR-PROFIT ORGANIZATION THAT WAS OPPOSED TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF PALMER VILLAGE.
AND NOW WHAT WAS HAPPENED, AND WHAT HE ACTUALLY LOST, REGARDLESS OF THE MANY CASES OF APPEALS, WAS THE FACT THAT A LETTER WAS SENT FROM EITHER MR. MOSS DIRECTLY OR MAYBE PROBABLY HIS LAW FIRM, UM, WAS STATING THAT IT WAS, UM, FROM THE WAR SESTER, THE FRIENDS OF WAR SESTER, L L C, WHICH, UM, IS A CORPORATION HE ESTABLISHED TO IMPERSONATE THE NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION, WHICH EVEN HAD THE, THE LOGO OF A TREE, WHICH IS WHAT THAT ORGANIZATION, A NONPROFIT HAS.
NOW, I'M NOT SAYING HE INTENTIONALLY
[00:20:01]
TRIED TO PER, YOU KNOW, TO BE SOMEBODY QUOTE UNQUOTE, BUT HE WAS AND DID LOSE THE COURT CASE OF MISREPRESENTATION OF THE FRIENDS OF WAR SESTER.UM, BUT HIS LETTER, WHICH WENT OUT TO RESIDENTS STATED THAT THE FRIENDS OF WAR SESTER, THE NONPROFIT, WHICH WAS AGAINST THE PALMER VILLAGE, HE STATED THAT THEY WERE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF PALMER VILLAGE.
AND THAT WENT OUT TO ALL OF THE, UM, OTHER ADDITIONAL OWNERS AND LANDOWNERS, WHICH CAUSED A LOT OF CONFUSION, A LOT OF PEOPLE BEING UPSET AND MISREPRESENTED ONE, NOT ONLY THAT ORGANIZATION, BUT MISREPRESENTED HIMSELF.
SO ALLS I'M SAYING IS IF THAT IS SOMETHING THAT HE CAN DO THAT IS UNETHICAL AND LITTLE DIRTY HANDED BUSINESS, IT HAPPENS.
I'M NOT SAYING IT'S COMPLETELY OUT THERE.
I'M IN BUSINESS, I'M A PHARMACEUTICALS, BUT IF I MISREPRESENTED MY COMPANY IN ANY WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM, REGARDLESS OF THE DRUG THAT I WAS SELLING OR EVEN THE PRODUCT THAT I WAS SELLING, THERE ARE CONSEQUENCES.
SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THAT SECOND LAWYER, WE NEED HIM.
BECAUSE IF SOMEONE CAN TURN AROUND, AND EVEN IN IT WAS THE SLIGHTEST THING, IF SOMEONE CAN TURN AROUND AND MISREPRESENT AND PRETEND TO STATE SOMETHING ELSE, THEN WHO THE HECK IS TO SAY THAT HE WON'T DO IT HERE? SO, I'M SORRY, I ASK, PLEASE MAKE SURE THE EVIDENCE IS LEGIT.
IT'S NOT TO SAY THAT HIS REST OF HIS BUSINESS DEALINGS MAY BE LIKE THAT, BUT IF YOU COULD DO THAT FOR ONCE AND MISREPRESENT AND UPSET A WHOLE MAJORITY OF PEOPLE THAT LIVE CLOSE TO THIS OTHER ORGANIZATION OR THIS OTHER AREA, THEN WHO'S THE HECK TO SAY HE CAN'T DO IT HERE.
SO PLEASE, PLEASE MAKE SURE EVERYTHING HE PUTS IN IS 100% TRUE.
NO NEGATION, NO BEHIND THE SCENES.
HEY, LET'S SEE WHERE WE CAN KIND OF MANIPULATE.
THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY ON THE, ON THE, WELL, ON THE ISSUE OF THE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, THAT IS PART OF WHAT WILL BE INVOLVED IN THE CONDITIONAL USE HEARING.
UM, WHETHER THE WAR SISTER CASE IS CONTROLLING.
UM, THE APPLICANT'S POSITION IS THAT MEDICAL CARE AT DIFFERENT LEVELS IS AVAILABLE TO THE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES, AND THAT THEREFORE THEY COUNT WITHIN THE OVERALL FACILITY.
BECAUSE THAT, ROUGHLY SPEAKING, IS HOW IT WENT DOWN IN, WAS I DO BELIEVE SEWER CAPACITY IS ALREADY CONFIRMED.
UM, DIFFERENT LINES MIGHT NEED TO BE IMPROVED TO HANDLE FLOW, BUT I BELIEVE THE CAPACITY IS THERE.
AND ON THE LAST PART, I WOULD ASK, ED, DO YOU WANT TO ADDRESS THE, WHAT SHE'S SAYING ABOUT THE CASE IN THE, I'D BE HAPPY TO SAY, UH, UH, MS. SCHWARTZ, YOU SHOULD CHECK WITH AN ATTORNEY BEFORE YOU MAKE STATEMENTS LIKE YOU JUST MADE, BECAUSE IN FACT, NOBODY LOST THE COURT CASE.
IT WAS NEVER HEARING A HEARING IN THE CASE.
YOU'RE MIS YOU'RE MISREPRESENTING COMPLETELY WHAT HAPPENED IN THE CASE.
SO YOU BETTER CHECK YOUR FACTS AND BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU SAY.
WELL THEN, IN, IN THAT CASE THEN, MR. MULLINS, MAY I ASK PLEASE, IF I MAY, AND I, I APOLOGIZE IF I HAVE MISREPRESENTED, BUT I THINK, UM, IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE IF YOU COULD GIVE ME WHERE I CAN CHECK MY FACTS TO MAKE SURE THAT I'M REPRESENTING AND BEING RESPECTFUL TO YOU AND YOUR ORGANIZATION.
THE, BECAUSE IF I'VE MISTOOK MISTEPPED AND, AND MISREPRESENTED MYSELF AND, AND THE INFORMATION, THE LITIGATION, I NECESSARILY APOLOGIZE, BUT I ASK, THE LITIGATION, I THINK YOU SAID WAS APPEALED.
THERE WERE NE THERE WAS NEVER AN APPEAL, THERE WAS NEVER A HEARING, THERE WAS A SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE AND IT WAS RESOLVED.
AND THE TERMS, TERMS OF THE SETTLEMENT ARE CONFIDENTIAL AND WE'RE NOT, BUT YOU DID LIE, BUT WE'RE NOT PERMITTED TO, I'M SORRY.
SORRY, I I COULDN'T HEAR RABBIS.
WE'RE NOT, WE'RE NOT PERMITTED TO DISCUSS IT.
OKAY, FOLKS, PLEASE, PLEASE, I JUST WANTED TO KNOW WHERE I COULD LOOK AT THAT PROPERLY, SO I WOULDN'T BRING THAT UP AGAINST YOU.
THERE IS NO RECORD FOR YOU TO LOOK AT.
I GUESS MAYBE IF YOU'D REACHED OUT TO THE FRIENDS OF WARCHESTER, THEY COULD GIVE YOU SOME INFORMATION.
BUT THE TERMS OF THE RESOLUTION WERE CONFIDENTIAL, SO NOBODY'S ALLOWED TO DISCUSS IT.
BUT YOU'VE GIVEN ME INFORMATION, MR. MOS, AND I APPRECIATE THAT.
I ASK YOU PLEASE TO, UH, KEEP YOUR COMMENTS TO YOURSELVES, PLEASE, AND LET'S, LET'S KEEP IT RESPECTFUL.
UH, BRAD BERKOWITZ, 1 38 BENNINGTON ROAD.
SO I MADE A LOT OF THOUGHT ON THIS, AND THEN AFTER WHAT YOU SAID, I KIND OF QUESTIONED SOME OF WHAT I WROTE.
UM, I THINK IT'S STILL VALID, BUT YOU MAY HAVE ADDRESSED SOME OF THESE POINTS, SO I'M GONNA TRY TO WING IT A LITTLE BIT.
[00:25:01]
UM, I ADMIT WHEN I MOVED HERE, I WASN'T AWARE OF ALL THE DRAMA AROUND THE PARKHOUSE PROPERTY BACK IN 2013.UM, SO THIS HAS ALL KIND OF CAUGHT ME OFF GUARD, BUT ONE OF THE MAIN DRAWS FOR ME WHEN I CAME TO THIS AREA WAS THE OPEN SPACE, THE QUIET, THE LOW DENSITY, THE LACK OF, UH, CONGESTION IN THIS IMMEDIATE AREA, RIGHT? UM, I UNDERSTAND THAT SOME DEVELOPMENT IS INEVITABLE, UM, NOT JUST HERE, BUT ANYWHERE IN THIS COUNTRY, QUITE HONESTLY, WHERE THERE'S OPEN SPACE.
I ALSO RESPECT THE RIGHT OF THE PROPERTY OWNER TO DEVELOP, UM, HIS OR HER LAND, AS LONG AS IT'S ETHICAL AND IT RESPECTS THE ZONING ORDINANCES AND WHAT'S BEST FOR THE COMMUNITY AND, EXCUSE ME, EVEN ALLOW THEM TO MAKE A LITTLE PROFIT.
BUT I THINK THERE'S THREE COMPONENTS.
IT'S NOT JUST WHAT'S GONNA BENEFIT THE LANDOWNER THE MOST.
I'M AWARE THAT MY NEIGHBORS ARE ALREADY EXPRESSED A LOT OF CONCERNS, UM, THROUGH EMAILS AND PREVIOUS MEETINGS.
I'M NOT GONNA REGURGITATE THOSE.
I'M HUNG UP ON A FUNDAMENTAL, QUITE HONESTLY.
LIKE I LOOK AT THIS MAP OR THIS TENTATIVE PLAN.
UM, I LOOKED AT THE 2021 ZONING MAPS THAT ARE PUBLISHED ON THE TOWNSHIP'S WEBSITE, AND I'M JUST STILL STRUGGLING WITH HOW THIS COMPLIES WITH THAT.
AND I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU SAID.
NOW, THERE, THERE WILL BE A HEARING FOR THE CONDITIONAL STUFF, BUT I MEAN, JUST FUNDAMENTALLY THE ZONING MAP SHOW OPEN SPACE WITH AN OVERLAY FOR INSTITUTIONAL USE, RIGHT? SO CONSIDERING THAT, I MEAN, I LOOK AT THE PROPOSED TENTATIVE PLAN.
UM, AND I GUESS FIRST OF ALL, IT'S FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, AND I'M NOT A CIVIL ENGINEER, LIKE I KNOW I'M NOT A LAND GUY, I'M NOT A POLITICAL GUY.
UM, I JUST REALLY STRUGGLE FROM BASICALLY UNDERSTANDING HOW THIS PROVIDES ANY CONTINUITY WITH THE OPEN SPACE ZONING.
IT BASICALLY, I'M SORRY, OBLITERATES, ANY OPEN SPACE OTHER THAN THE LAND AREAS THAT COULD NOT BE DEVELOPED.
FROM WHAT I CAN TELL, AND BASED ON MY RECOLLECTION, IS BASICALLY WHERE THAT LITTLE CREEK RUNS THROUGH THE PROPERTY.
UM, SECOND OF THE 1200 PLUS HOUSING UNITS PROPOSED, IT APPEARS, AND AGAIN, BASED ON THIS IS MY LAYMAN'S INTERPRETATION, LESS THAN 5% OF THOSE UNITS, IT'S JUST ONE BUILDING I THINK TUCKED AWAY IN THE CORNER THAT IS ACTUALLY A TRADITIONAL LICENSED MEDICAL CARE FACILITY FOR SENIOR CITIZENS.
ALL REST IS HOUSING, TOWNHOUSES, APARTMENTS, VARYING DEGREES.
SO MAYBE THERE IS A PLAN TO HAVE EACH ONE LICENSED INDIVIDUALLY WITH CARE BROUGHT IN DAILY.
I DON'T KNOW, I HAVEN'T SEEN THAT PLAN, BUT I'M JUST STRUGGLING WITH BETWEEN THE OPEN SPACE AND THE CONDITIONAL USE FOR LICENSE FACILITY, HOW THIS COMPLIES WITH IT BASED ON THE INFORMATION I HAVE IN FRONT OF ME RIGHT NOW.
UM, IF THE PLANNING BOARD BELIEVES THIS PLAN DOES COMPLY WITH THESE THINGS, AND I ADMIT I DON'T KNOW HOW THE PROCESS WORKS, I'M ASSUMING THIS GOES TO THE PLANNING BOARD HERE, AND THEN YOU GIVE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE SUPERVISORS WHETHER OR NOT IT COMPLIES.
I MEAN, IF THAT'S NOT RIGHT, PLEASE TELL ME, BUT I'M ASSUMING THAT'S THE CASE.
AND IF IT IS, I'M JUST ASKING YOU GUYS.
SO PLEASE, IF YOU GUYS END UP BELIEVING THIS SHOULD BE RECOMMENDED AS IS, AND IT COMPLIES WITH THE ZONING TO PROVIDE SOME PUBLICLY DOCUMENTED RATIONALE WHAT THAT IS, BECAUSE I HONESTLY FAILED TO SEE HOW THIS COMPLIES AT ALL.
UM, THE OTHER QUESTION I WANTED TO ASK, AND I THINK THIS CAME UP, UM, FROM THE PREVIOUS LADY, IS IF THERE ARE SOME AMBIGUITIES IN THE ZONING ORDINANCES THAT COULD BE MANIPULATED BY RIFKIN OR OTHERS TO BASICALLY ALLOW WIGGLE ROOM TO GET SOMETHING LIKE THIS IN, I WANT TO ASK, I KNOW WE TALKED ABOUT SECOND COUNSEL.
I DON'T KNOW HOW THE ZONING HEARING STUFF GOES, BUT IF THE SUPERVISORS ARE TO BE, UM, I GUESS OPEN-MINDED AND I, I FORGET THE WORD, LIKE, YOU KNOW, FAIR, LIKE, YOU KNOW, LIKE RECEPTIVE, WHO REPRESENTS THE PEOPLE, WHO REPRESENTS ALL THE PEOPLE HERE THAT ARE OPPOSED TO IT? AND I, I MEAN, CAUSE I, I HONESTLY CAME INTO THIS THINKING, YOU GUYS AND THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ARE ALL ELECT, WELL, I DON'T KNOW ABOUT YOU GUYS, BUT THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ARE ALL ELECTED OFFICIALS FROM THE PEOPLE HERE TO REPRESENT WHAT'S NOT WHAT'S IN THE TOWNSHIP'S BEST INTEREST.
SO I MEAN, IF, IF, IF IT'S NOT THEM, BASED ON WHAT YOU'RE TELLING ME RIGHT NOW, WHO IS THAT? AND THAT, THAT'S THE QUESTION I HAVE.
WELL, YOU, YOU, YOU, ANYBODY HERE CAN EITHER REPRESENT THEMSELVES OR HIRE A LAWYER TO ALSO REPRESENT THEM OR A GROUP OF YOU.
THAT'S HOW ALL CONDITIONAL USE HEARINGS GO.
SO, SO IF YOU MEAN I DON'T, I DON'T, I'M NOT HEARING WHAT ALL THE COMMENTS ARE.
I'M JUST TRYING TO ADDRESS YOU.
SO, SO, SO THE, THE, ALTHOUGH THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS IS ACTING IN A JUDICIAL CAPACITY IN THE EYES OF THE LAW, IF THEY'RE, IF THEY ARE PROVIDING A FAIR HEARING AND LISTENING TO ALL THE EVIDENCE THAT DOES PROTECT YOU, YOU, THEY DON'T PROTECT YOU IN THE SENSE THAT THEY'RE AGGRESSIVELY TAKING A POSITION IN THE MATTER, BUT THEY ARE LOOKING OUT FOR YOU IN THE SENSE THAT THEY'RE LISTENING TO ALL THE EVIDENCE AND DOING WHAT THE LAW TELLS 'EM TO DO.
BE BUT TO, TO TAKE A, TO ANSWER YOU MORE DIRECTLY, I WOULD SAY THE, THE ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION IS THERE'S NO OTHER ON THIS SIDE OF THE FENCE, THERE'S NO OTHER SWORD ON SWINGING ON YOUR BEHALF.
YOU WOULD HA SIT, YOU CAN, YOU CAN COME BE A PARTY AND SWING A SWORD.
YOU CAN HIRE A LAWYER TO COME SWING A SWORD, BUT THAT'S AS FAR AS THIS BOARD CAN TAKE IT IN THE CONTEXT OF CONDITIONAL USE.
THANKS FOR THAT CLARIFICATION.
[00:30:01]
I MEAN, I KIND OF EXPECTED MORE OUT OF THE PEOPLE WE'RE PAYING TO DO THEIR JOBS, HONESTLY, BUT IF THERE IS GONNA BE SECOND COUNSEL, I WOULD KIND OF REQUEST THAT WE GET SOMEBODY THAT'S EQUALLY, OBVIOUSLY RIFKIN'S GUY IS GONNA LOOK FOR WAYS TO MAKE IT IN HIS BENEFIT.I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK FOR SOMEONE THAT'S GONNA TAKE A VERY STRICT INTERPRETATION OF THE ZONING ORDINANCES AND SAY, DOES THIS TRULY COMPLY WITH THAT? UM, AND THE LAST THING I HAVE TO JUST SAY HONESTLY IS, AGAIN, I'M NOT GONNA GET INTO EVERYTHING.
I DO HAVE THE CONCERNS ABOUT, YOU KNOW, FLOODING, STORM WATER MANAGEMENT, YOU KNOW, ENVIRONMENTAL LIKE POLLUTION, TRAFFIC, YOU KNOW, THE, THE WILDLIFE THAT'S GONNA BE DISPLACED BECAUSE OF THIS.
I JUST REALLY HOPE, I, I HOPE I ASKED THAT THERE BE A DOCUMENTED IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF ALL THAT BEFORE FINAL APPROVALS GIVEN.
AND IF THAT COMES OUTTA THE HEARING, GREAT.
UM, IF THIS IS A PLACE TO GET THE COMMENT IN THAT, SAY, I'D LIKE TO SEE IT AS PART OF THE HEARING, PLEASE PUT IT IN RECORD ALONG WITH WHAT EVERYBODY ELSE, YOU KNOW, ALREADY REQUESTED.
HONESTLY, I'M JUST WANNA, YOU KNOW, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND KIND OF JUST SAY I'M, YOU KNOW, OPPOSED TO THIS BASED ON WHAT I SEE AND KIND OF WAS HOPING, YOU KNOW, YOU GUYS AND THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS WOULD HAVE THE PEOPLES IN THE COMMUNITY'S BEST INTEREST IN HEART.
HI, UH, MY NAME IS ELVIN RODRIGUEZ.
UM, I'M JUST HERE IN SUPPORT WITH BRAD.
I LIVE IN THE SAME RESIDENCE AND I'VE BEEN HERE FOR ABOUT NINE OR 10 YEARS.
AND, UH, I'M JUST AGREE WITH EVERYTHING HE'S SAYING.
I HONESTLY DON'T HAVE ANYTHING ELSE I TO SAY, BUT THAT WAS ABOUT IT.
PEN PACKER, PART OF THE, CAN EVERYBODY HEAR ME FIRST BEFORE WE START? YEAH.
THE ORDINANCES IN FRONT OF ME, I THINK IT SAYS WHAT IT SAYS AND DOESN'T SAY WHAT IT DOESN'T SAY.
IT SAYS LICENSED NURSING, ET CETERA, ET CETERA, ET CETERA.
NOW, IS THERE SOME CONFUSION ABOUT THAT? I UNDERSTAND WHAT LICENSED MEANS.
HOW CAN THAT BE CONFUSING? IT, IT WILL BE LICENSED, IT WILL BE A LICENSED FACILITY.
AS I UNDERSTAND THE PRESENTATION YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, WHETHER EACH INDIVIDUAL HOME HAS A LICENSE THAT'S PART OF THE, THAT'S A PART OF WHAT IS GOING TO BE THE HEARING.
THEY'RE, THEY ARE GOING TO MAKE THE ARGUMENT THAT ALL OF IT COUNTS AS A LICENSE FACILITY AND THERE MAY BE EVIDENCE PRESENTED BY SOMEONE ELSE THAT THAT DOESN'T ALL COUNT AS A LICENSED FACILITY.
THAT'S WHAT THE WHOLE HORSES CASE WAS ABOUT.
WHO'S GOING TO OWN AN INDIVIDUAL HOME? THE PERSON WHO OWNS THE PROPERTY NOW, OR THE PERSON WHO LIVES THERE, I'LL ANSWER THAT.
THE, UH, PEOPLE WHO PURCHASED THE HOMES WILL BE PART OF THE OVERALL FACILITY, WHICH IS DESIGNED TO PROVIDE AGING IN PLACE.
AND ALL OF THE HOMES WILL HAVE THE BENEFITS OF THE, UH, NURSING AND CARE FROM THE, UH, ASSISTED LIVING.
BUT THERE WILL, EACH INDIVIDUAL HOME WILL NOT BE LICENSED, BUT IT WILL BE HOME.
AND UNLIKE A TYPICAL C CRC, SOMEBODY DOES HAVE TO PAY $600,000 TO MOVE IN THERE AND THEN PAY FOR MONTHLY FOOD.
THEY CAN HAVE THEIR OWN HOUSE AND THEN AS NEEDED, THEY'LL GET CARE IS THE CARE PROVIDED BY THE TOWNSHIP, THE COUNTY, REALLY, THIS IS MORE OF A, I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY SOME QUESTIONS ARE, WE'RE TRYING TO BE HELPFUL AND ASK SOME QUESTIONS, BUT YOU'RE TAKING ON THE DIRECT ISSUE THAT'S GOING TO BE A PART OF THE CONDITIONAL USE HEARING.
SO I WOULD ASK YOU TO DEFER THE HARD QUESTIONING ON THE, I UNDERSTAND YOUR POSITION ON THE LICENSING ISSUE, BUT WE'RE JUST REALLY HERE TO TAKE COMMENTS ON HOW YOU FEEL ABOUT IT AS OPPOSED TO GETTING INTO A CROSS EXAMINATION HERE ABOUT LICENSING.
DIRECTLY, THE WAY I FEEL ABOUT IT IS, I'LL REPEAT, IT SAYS WHAT IT SAYS, IT SAYS LICENSED NURSING, ET CETERA, ET CETERA.
AND MY HOUSE UNDER THE DEFINITION IS BEING PROPOSED SEEMS THAT I LIVE IN AN INSTITUTION OF SENIOR CARE.
ARE WE TAXED DIFFERENTLY AS INSTITUTIONS OR AS RESIDENTS? WILL THESE RESIDENTS BE TAXED AS MINE IS? WILL THEY PAY SCHOOL TAXES, ET CETERA? YES.
AND IS IT THE SAME RATE OF TAXATION
[00:35:01]
AS EVERYBODY ELSE IN THE TOWNSHIP HAS? THEIR HOME WILL BE ASSESSED BY THE BOARD OF ASSESSMENT AND WHATEVER THE ASSESSED VALUE IS MULTIPLIED BY THE TAX RATE, IS THE TAX THAT THEY WILL PAY.SO IF THEY PAY $600,000 FOR A HOME, THEY'LL PAY THE SAME TAXES THAT SOMEBODY ELSE IN THE TOWNSHIP WHO HAS A $600,000 HOME PAYS.
I'LL LEAVE IT WHERE I SAID IT.
I BELIEVE THIS SAYS EXACTLY WHAT IT SAYS.
VICTORIA BRIGHT, 360 4 VISTA DRIVE.
THANK YOU FOLKS FOR TAKING THE TIME.
AGAIN, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO GET INTO THE, GET INTO THE MIC PLEASE.
I'M GONNA, I'M GONNA SPEAK UP.
I HAVE TO, UH, ACTUALLY I'M GONNA TURN THE MICROPHONE.
I AM, UH, AT 360 4 VISTA DRIVE.
NOW, I SPOKE LAST NIGHT AND I RECOGNIZE THAT SOME OF MY, UH, PRESENTATION COVERS A LOT OF WHAT HAS ALREADY BEEN DISCUSSED.
I THINK SOME OF MY NEIGHBORS ARE GOING TO DEFAULT THEIR TIME TO ME SO I CAN COVER THOROUGHLY WHAT ONE OF THE MAIN POINTS ARE THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE.
UM, SPECIFICALLY AROUND THE, UH, REFERENCE TO THE INSTITUTIONAL CODES STATING THAT LICENSED NURSING, CONVALESCENT HOMES, RESIDENTIAL CARE FACILITIES FOR SENIOR CITIZENS, PERSONAL CARE, HOME ASSISTED LIVING RESIDENTS, OR ADULT DAYCARE, IF IN THE SAME BUILDING AS A PERSONAL CARE HOME OR ASSISTED LIVING RESIDENCE, THAT'S YOUR ZONING ALLOWANCE.
THAT'S WHAT IS ZONED IT READS AND IS MEANT TO READ IN ITS ENTIRETY LICENSED.
SO THE PROPOSAL IS NOT PROPOSING AN ACTUAL CONTINUING CARE FACILITY.
IT'S PROPOSING A QUOTE, RESIDENTIAL CARE FOR SENIOR CITIZENS, NOT A CONTINUING CARE.
THAT'S NOT WHAT THE APPLICATION STATES.
IT'S A CON, A CONTINUING CARE FACILITY IS A DIFFERENT MODEL THAN WHAT THIS MODEL IS.
A RESIDENTIAL CARE COMMUNITY OR FACILITY UNDER THE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES REGULATIONS IS EITHER UNDER THE CHAPTER 2,600 OR 2,800.
I'M SURE YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH THESE.
SO, SO YOU WOULD BE FAMILIAR WITH THE CHAPTER 20 AS WELL AROUND LICENSURE.
AND IN THE CHAPTER 2,800 UNDER ASSISTED LIVING, THERE IS ACTUALLY A STATEMENT THAT SAYS WHAT THE DEFINITION OF A CARE FACILITY IS.
SO IF I COULD TAKE A MOMENT TO READ WHAT THAT DEFINITION STATES, IT MIGHT CLARIFY WHAT THIS IS NOT ON MY LITTLE, UH, CHEAT SHEETS HERE.
OF COURSE, I HAD TO PRINT IT OUT CUZ I CAN'T READ MY PHONE.
UM, THE DEFINITION OF AN ASSISTED LIVING RESIDENCE, A PREMISE WHERE THE OWNER OF THE REAL PROPERTY OF THE PREMISE HAS NO OWNERSHIP CONTROL OR AFFILIATION WITH ANY PROVIDER OF HOME-BASED OR COMMUNITY-BASED SERVICES.
AND NUMBER TWO, THIS IS UNDER 2,800 AN INDEPENDENT LIVING UNIT ON A CAMPUS OF A CONTINUING CARE RETIREMENT COMMUNITY, GOVERNED BY PROVIDER REGISTRATION AND DISCLOSURE ACT, WHATEVER THE ACT IS, IF THE RESIDENTS IN THE UNIT RECEIVE OR HAVE LEGITIMATE OPPORTUNITY TO RECEIVE PERSONAL CARE SERVICES.
SO IF THIS WERE TO BE A TRUE CONTINUING CARE COMMUNITY, ALL 1,203 RESIDENTS MUST BE ABLE TO HAVE ACCESS IN THEIR OWN HOMES.
TWO, FIRE SAFETY, RESIDENT HEALTH, NUTRITION, TRANSPORTATION MEDICATIONS, SAFE MANAGEMENT TECHNIQUES, STAFFING, A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT GENERAL REQUIREMENTS.
RIFKIN, I'VE SAT WHERE YOU ARE SITTING AND THEY ABSOLUTELY WILL HAVE IN THEIR OWN HOME, ABSOLUTELY IN THEIR OWN HOME, ALL THE THINGS YOU LICENSED NURSING IN THEIR OWN HOME.
I'M NOT GONNA ARGUE WITH YOU ABOUT WHAT IT SAYS AND WHAT IT DOES THAT'LL BE PRESENTED AT THE HEARING AND WE'LL PRESENT OUR POSITION.
YOU CAN PRESENT YOUR POSITION.
[00:40:01]
YOU'RE OFFERING.OH, BY THE WAY, THIS IS NOT DR.
THANK YOU
UH, WE DIDN'T DO INTRODUCTIONS.
THIS IS GARY BERMAN AND HE IS ONE OF THE MEMBERS OF THE LLC THAT OWNS THIS PROPERTY.
SO IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT ALL OF THE PROPOSED HOMES, AND ACCORDING TO THE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES REPRESENTATIVE THAT I SPOKE TO TODAY, WHO DOES LICENSING FOR THE STATE SAID ONLY LICENSED FLOOR WINGS SPACE, SPECIFICALLY WITHIN A BUILDING, EACH BUILDING WOULD REQUIRE MEETING THE SAME CONDITIONS TO BE CONSIDERED AN ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY.
AGAIN, I'M NOT OPPOSED TO SENIOR HOUSING, I'M NOT OPPOSED TO PROVIDING SUPPORTS TO INDIVIDUALS WHO NEED THEM.
I AM OPPOSED TO 1,203 CLUSTERED HIGH DENSITY UNITS THAT ARE BEING CALLED ASSISTED LIVING, WHEN IN FACT, A 2,400 SQUARE FOOT HOME, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE NURSES IN NUTRITION AND ALL OF THAT AVAILABLE TO THEM.
SO AGAIN, I I QUESTION IF THAT'S WHAT THE CONDITIONAL USE APPLICATION WILL PRESENT.
SO BE IT, BUT IT'S NOT ACTUALLY WHAT YOUR ZONING ALLOWANCE IS CURRENTLY.
THE SECOND THING THAT I'D LIKE TO JUST BRING UP AGAIN, AND I BROUGHT IT UP LAST NIGHT, WAS AROUND THE ACTUAL TOWNSHIP'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
I STILL HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO FIND AN ADOPTED 2020 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ON YOUR TOWNSHIP'S WEBSITE.
MAYBE YOU HAVE IT, I DON'T KNOW.
IT'S SITTING IN SOMEBODY'S DESK DRAWER OR SOMETHING.
BUT THE CURRENT 2010 PLAN, WHICH IS ACTUALLY STILL CURRENT BECAUSE THERE'S NOT BEEN AN ADOPTED 2020 PLAN, HAS NO INDICATION OF ANY TYPE OF HOUSING SPECIALIZED SENIOR HOUSING, RESIDENTIAL CARE COMMUNITIES WITHIN THIS TOWNSHIP ON OPEN SPACE PROPERTY.
SO WE'RE ASSUMING THAT YOU'RE FOLLOWING YOUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
I'M GONNA DEFAULT MY COMMENTS TO SOME OF, AND THE MY TIME TO SOME OF MY OTHER NEIGHBORS, CUZ I CAN SEE WE'RE, UH, WE'RE GETTING A LITTLE WINDED.
BUT AGAIN, MS. MS. BRIGHT, IF I MAY, JUST SO WE WE'RE CLEAR, IF YOU GO TO THE TOWNSHIP'S WEBSITE PLANNING AND ZONING, PLEASE IGNORE THAT NASTY PICTURE.
AND UNDER MAPS AND DOCUMENTS, THE 2010 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS LISTED RIGHT THERE.
THE 2010 PLAN? YES, THE 20 20 20.
WHAT I'M ASKING FOR IS THE 2020.
AND ACCORDING TO THE ACT, IT IS REQUIRED.
THE TOWNSHIPS HAVE, IT'S SUGGEST A 10 YEAR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
IT'S, IT'S THE 10 YEARS OF SUGGESTION.
RARELY DO MUNICIPALITIES STICK TO THAT TIMEFRAME.
OUR PREVIOUS PLAN WAS, I THINK MONTGOMERY COUNTY'S ACTUALLY ON THEIR 2030 OR 2040 PLAN RIGHT NOW.
OUR PREVIOUS PLAN WAS 1994, THEN WE WENT TO 2010.
AND WHILE ADMIT, I WILL TAKE FULL BLAME FOR NOT BEING WRITTEN AT THIS POINT, UM, IT, IT IS SOMETHING THAT WE DO NEED TO WRITE.
RIGHT, BUT IT IS NOT WRITTEN RIGHT.
THE THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DON'T, I WOULD, THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS A, IS A, IS A, A GUIDE PLANNING TOOL, PLANNING TOOL, UM, THAT IT'S USUALLY COMES INTO PLAY WHEN YOU'RE ADOPTING A NEW ORDINANCE AND YOU LOOK TO MAKE SURE THAT IT IS NOT INCONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
HERE WE HAVE AN ORDINANCE IN PLACE, THERE ARE DISAGREEMENTS ON HOW IT APPLIES.
LET'S NOT GO BACK DOWN THAT ROAD, RIGHT? BUT THERE'S AN ORDINANCE IN PLACE.
SO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WOULDN'T REALLY HAVE THE SAME LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE.
AND, AND THE ONLY REASON WHY I BRING IT UP IS, AGAIN, TIMEFRAME HERE IS THERE'S A 2010 PLAN.
THIS PROPERTY WAS SOLD IN 20 14, 20 15, 20 13, SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
SO THAT THE CURRENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT THE COUNTY OR THAT THE TOWNSHIP HAS INDICATES WHAT THE USE OF THIS PROPERTY, THIS PARCEL SHOULD LOOK LIKE.
CERTAINLY THERE'S AN INSTITUTIONAL OVERLAY.
WE UNDERSTAND THAT PARKHOUSE HAS BEEN THERE FOR, FOR FOREVER
UM, BUT I, I DO THINK THAT IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US TO PAY ATTENTION TO THAT.
IF IT WASN'T IN YOUR PLAN, THEN WHY IS IT IN YOUR PLAN NOW? ALL RIGHT, THANKS, NANCY.
CROCKETT, 1 36 FOX HILL DRIVE.
I LIVE ABOUT TWO BLOCKS FROM THERE AND I'M VERY, VERY DISCOURAGED ABOUT THIS.
UM, THIS DISPLAY, IT'S VERY, UM, UPSETTING BECAUSE THERE'S ALREADY
[00:45:01]
BEEN SO MUCH CONSTRUCTION IN THE AREA.I AS WELL MOVED HERE WHEN THERE WAS A LOT OF OPEN SPACE.
I'VE BEEN HERE 21 YEARS AND, UM, I'VE, UH, ALSO WANNA BRING UP THE POINT THAT I READ THAT THIS IS SACRED GROUND.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'VE, UM, HEARD THAT, THAT THERE'S 1700 PEOPLE BURIED IN THIS LAND.
AND, UM, YOU KNOW, IN ADDITION TO ALL OF THE OTHER REASONS THAT EVERYBODY ELSE BROUGHT UP, WHICH ARE ALL REALLY, REALLY CONCERNING AND VERY IMPORTANT POINTS, I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE FACT THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, THIS IS BURIAL GROUND AND HAS THAT BEEN BROUGHT UP YET? YES, YES.
AND, UH, BUT OUR LAST MEETING, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WERE AT THE MEETING IN DECEMBER.
NO, I WAS NOT, WA WAS BROUGHT UP THERE AND, UH, ED AT THAT POINT SAID THAT THEY WOULD DO THE WHATEVER NECESSARY STUDIES WERE NEEDED TO LOCATE AND, AND MOVE OR WHATEVER HAS TO BE DONE IN THOSE, IF IT'S FOUND.
OKAY, SO THAT WAS BROUGHT UP AT OUR LAST MEETING.
I, I STILL DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW ALL THAT IS BEING ALLOWED I, OR CONSIDERED, WELL, IT'S BEING, IT'S CERTAINLY BEING CONSIDERED BROUGHT UP.
WE ALREADY HAVE LESS THAN 5% OPEN SPACE AND NOW THEY WANNA TAKE AWAY OUR BURIAL GRAMS. I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY WE'RE EVEN CONSIDERING THIS.
THANK YOU MARTIN BAUER, 1 36 FOX RUN ALSO OF, UH, UH, FOX RUN DRIVE.
I, I FEEL THAT, UH, THE WASTE OF OPEN SPACE HERE AND THE USAGE, UH, I DIDN'T EVEN REALIZE IT WAS LESS THAN 5% IN THE TOWNSHIP.
AND I, FOR ONE, PROBABLY WITH A LOT OF PEOPLE HERE, UM, THIS JUST DOESN'T FEEL RIGHT.
IT DOESN'T SEEM RIGHT OR FEEL RIGHT.
AND, UH, YOU KNOW, I HATE TO SEE THAT OPEN SPACE.
UH, I, I UNDERSTAND DEVELOPMENT NEEDS TO BE DONE, BUT, UM, I I DON'T THINK WE HAVE A LOT OF AN OPEN SPACE IN THE TOWNSHIP LEFT.
SO, UM, YOU KNOW, THAT'S, THAT'S THE QUESTION THAT I HAVE IS WHAT ELSE DO WE HAVE IN THE TOWNSHIP? AND, UM, YOU KNOW, I I THINK IT'S NOT RIGHT.
JUDY SHEETZ, ONE 17 OLD STATE ROAD.
HI, UM, MY NAME IS JUDY SHEETZ.
I LIVE IN THAT UPPER LEFT-HAND CORNER ACROSS OLD STATE ROAD AT ONE 17.
I'M GONNA BE FACING 25 FOOT TOWNHOMES, UH, SIX OF 'EM IN A ROW.
I'M GONNA BE LOOKING AT THE BACK OF THEM.
I DON'T KNOW WHY THEY ALWAYS DO THIS.
DEVELOPMENTS FACE THEM AWAY FROM THE PUBLIC ROAD.
I THINK THAT SHOULD BE TURNED AROUND.
AN OLD STATE ROAD WILL HAVE TO BE WIDENED.
MY NEIGHBOR WHO LIVES, UH, JUST TO THE LEFT OF THIS PROPERTY, HIS GARAGE IS ALMOST UP AGAINST OLD STATE ROAD.
SO THEY'LL BE TAKING OFF OF MY SIDE OF THE ROAD TO WIDEN OLD STATE ROAD.
I HAVE A FOUR OR FIVE FOOT BANK, UH, WHICH THEY'LL HAVE TO DIG OUT.
AND MY DRAIN FIELD RUNS INTO THAT BANK OR TOWARDS THAT BANK.
I'M NOT SURE HOW CLOSE TO THAT BANK.
SO I'M CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT'S GONNA HAPPEN THERE.
BESIDES ALL THAT, THERE IS SO MUCH RUNOFF FROM THE FIELDS BEHIND ME, AND I SEE ALL THIS IMPERVIOUS AREA BEING LITERALLY COVERED.
I DON'T KNOW WHERE ALL THIS WATER IS GOING TO GO.
I KNOW YOU SAID THIS IS PART OF CONDITIONAL USE AND IT'S NOT.
I'M PROBABLY WASTING MY TIME HERE.
UH, BUT IT IS GOING TO BE RUNNING DOWN INTO THAT STREAM, WHICH IS FEEDING INTO THE SCHUEL RIVER.
AND YOU, WE KNOW WHERE THE SCHUEL RIVER GOES FROM HERE DOWN TO MONTCLAIR AND PORT PROVIDENCE.
THEY ARE GOING TO SEE THE FRONT OF THIS.
THIS IS NOT GONNA JUST AFFECT THE NIMBY, THE WA JUST IN THIS BACKYARD.
WE'RE GOING TO BE AFFECTING QUITE A FEW OTHER PEOPLE, AND I'LL
[00:50:01]
HOPE YOU CONSIDER THEM AS WELL.THANK YOU, SUE ALLERS, 300 LOVERS LANE.
BASICALLY, I WAS GONNA SAY WHAT THIS NICE LADY JUST SAID ABOUT, I'M REPRESENTING LOWER PART OF MONTCLAIR, UM, WITH ALL THIS RUNOFF, AS WE ALL KNOW, WITH IDA HITTING, EVERYBODY WAS FLOODED, OKAY? IT WAS, UM, DOWN BY, UM, CANAL STREET, WALNUT STREET, JACOB AND AMELIA.
SO THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE REALLY HAVE TO LOOK INTO AND MAKE SURE THAT THIS WATER, THIS, THIS STORM WATER IS GONNA BE RUNNING INTO THE SCHUEL, WHICH IS ALWAYS HIGH.
NOW WHEN IT RAINS ONLY A LITTLE BIT, UM, WE REALLY NEED TO CONSIDERATE, CONSIDER HOW THESE OTHER HOMEOWNERS ARE FEELING.
THEY DON'T WANNA LOSE THEIR HOME.
THESE ARE THEIR INVESTMENTS FOR LIFE AND WE HAVE TO PROTECT THEM.
MARK CONNOLLY, 2 0 9 MONTGOMERY AVENUE.
I WANNA THANK THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR HANDLING THIS HOT POTATO.
I CAN'T IMAGINE WHAT GOES THROUGH YOUR MIND WHEN YOU READ THIS AND A PRESENT AT MEETINGS LIKE THIS.
SO JUST A COUPLE COMMENTS AND SOME QUESTIONS.
UM, IN A PACKET THAT'S ONLINE AND DISTRIBUTED, THE PROFESSIONAL'S WORK IS EXHIBITED.
ON PAGE 27, THE PLANNER SAYS, IN MY PROFESSIONAL OPINION, THE PLAN APPEARS TO MEET CONDITIONS.
AND THEN IN PAGE 36, THE COUNTY SAID THAT THE PLAN GENERALLY SUPPORTS THE APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL.
THESE ARE VERY VAGUE AND OPEN COMMENTS.
UH, I'M A, I'M AN ENGINEER AND I SAY IN MY PROFESSIONAL OPINION OFTEN, BUT I ALSO HAVE TO SHOW MY WORK PRODUCT TO MAKE THE CASE A DIFFICULT DECISIONS AND DESIGNS.
I'M NOT SURE THAT THIS HAS REALLY PASSED THAT TEST.
AND IF IT HAS, I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THE DOCUMENTS.
I ECHO THE FIRST SPEAKER SAYING, WHERE IS THE INITIAL ANALYSIS THAT SAYS THIS ZONING, THIS APPLICATION IS CONSISTENT.
I DON'T WANT TO SAY THAT WORK HASN'T BEEN DONE, BUT I THINK THAT IN THIS SITUATION, IT NEEDS TO BE PRESENTED.
AND I, MY UNDERSTANDING IS, IS THAT THAT WILL HAPPEN.
HOWEVER, THAT'S NOT YOUR SITUATION.
YOU DON'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION.
SO THIS QUESTION IS VERY, VERY, VERY RELEVANT TO WHAT YOU ARE GOING TO DECIDE.
AND IN MY OPINION, YOU DON'T HAVE, UNLESS THERE ARE OTHER DOCUMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN PRESENTED BY THE COUNTY AND THE PLANNER TO SAY DEFINITIVELY WHY THEIR ANALYSIS RESULTED IN THIS.
I THINK IT CASTS SOME SERIOUS DOUBT WHEN YOUR CONSIDERATION, SO I HAVE A REQUEST.
MY REQUEST IS THAT THE STANDARD THAT YOU USE IN MAKING YOUR DECISION FOR THE SUPERVISORS FOLLOWS BOTH THE LETTER AND THE INTENT OF THIS ZONING.
AND I KNOW THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A QUALITATIVE AND A QUANTITATIVE DECISION, BUT THIS IS THE HARD WORK THAT YOU NEED TO DO.
YOU HAVE TO READ THROUGH THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN WRITTEN AND DECIDE WHAT THE INTENT IS.
AND I SUGGEST THAT YOU USE THIS AS THE WAY YOU STRUCTURE YOUR VOTE.
THIS PLAN FOR YOU TO SAY YES TO HAS TO, YOU HAVE TO AGREE BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT.
I THINK THERE'S PLENTY OF PEOPLE AND A LACK OF EVIDENCE THAT CREATES DOUBT.
AND I HOPE I USE, I HOPE YOU USE THIS STANDARD AND PASS THIS HOT POTATO ONTO THE SUPERVISORS SO THAT WE CAN GET ONTO THE REAL UNDERSTANDING THAT IT'S, MY UNDERSTANDING WILL COME THROUGH THE CONDITIONAL USE OF WHETHER THIS IN FACT IS A, A HEALTHCARE FACILITY CONSISTENT WITH THE ZONING.
BEYOND, THANK YOU, BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT, THAT'S NOT THE, THAT'S ACTUALLY A CRIMINAL LAW STANDARD.
BUT THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS OVERALL.
SUSAN DENBY, 1 35 BENNINGTON ROAD.
HI, CAN YOU HEAR ME? HI, SUSAN DENBY,
[00:55:01]
1 35 BENNINGTON.THANK YOU FOR HAVING THIS HERE, UH, THIS PLANNING MEETING AGAIN.
AND, AND I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING THAT'S SAID HERE, AND I CAN'T EXPRESS HOW MUCH IT MAKES ME SICK TO SEE 1200 UNITS GOING IN A VERY SMALL SPACE WHERE I LIVE DOWNHILL FROM THAT.
AND ALL I DO IS SEE THAT OPEN SPACE AND IT IS ONE GIANT HILL DOWN.
AND ALL I SEE IS THE RUNOFF GOING ON ONE 13 WHEN IT GOES AROUND THE BEND AND WASHES OUT THE ROAD.
AND MY ROAD ON DRY ALBUS FLOODS EVERY TIME IT RAINS.
NOW, WE DON'T HAVE A HUNDRED YEAR FLOODS ANYMORE.
WE HAVE THEM EVERY SPRING AND MORE.
BUT MY, THE REAL REASON, THE QUESTION I WANNA ASK, BECAUSE EVERYBODY'S GIVEN SOME GOOD ONES HERE, IS WHO WRITES OUR ORDINANCES? WHO'S, WHO'S IN CHARGE OF THAT? WHO DOES THAT? UH, WELL THAT'S THIS TOWNSHIP WHO WRITES OUR ORDINANCE.
IT'S A, IT'S A COLLECTIVE EFFORT THAT HAPPENS OVER YEARS.
IT'S WITH WHO, WHO IS IN CHARGE OF THE SUPERVISORS.
THE SUPERVISORS VOTE TO ADOPT ORDINANCES.
THEY ARE WRITTEN BY, BY A COMBINATION OF PEOPLE, UH, ME, THE LOCAL PLANNING COMMISSION, THE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION, UH, INPUT FROM THE ENGINEERS, UH, JEFF, UM, SOMETIMES FROM A, AN, AN APPLICANT'S ATTORNEY, SOMETIMES THEY WILL WRITE A DRAFT OF AN ORDINANCE AND PRESENT IT WHEN THEY'RE MAKING A REQUEST FOR A ZONING CHANGE.
UM, SO ALL REALLY, IT'S A VERY COLLABORATIVE EFFORT AND ULTIMATELY VOTED ON BY THE SUPERVISORS.
AND HOW OFTEN DO YOU DO THAT? WELL, THERE MIGHT BE AN ORDINANCE OF SOME KIND ADOPTED EVERY MONTH OR, OR EVERY COUPLE OF MONTHS, BUT IT, IT NOT NECESSARILY A ZONING ORDINANCE.
I MEAN, OKAY, IT'S NOT AN EVEN NUMBER.
I DON'T, I WOULDN'T KNOW WHAT NUMBER TO SAY.
CAUSE I, I READ THROUGH THE ORDINANCES AND THEY WERE, YOU KNOW, LOT, LOTS OF TAKE IN AND SOME OF THEM WERE KIND OF NEBULOUS AND SOME OF THEM DID HAVE SOME OPEN INTERPRETATION.
AND I WOULD HOPE THAT YOU WOULD STICK WITH A SPIRIT OF UNDER HAVING AN UNDERLAY OF THE OPEN SPACE.
AND I KNOW IT'S INSTITUTIONAL, BUT I DON'T SEE HOW OUR ORDINANCES COM ARE ANY IMPACT WITH WARCHESTER.
WHO WRITES WARCHESTER ORDINANCES AND WHAT DOES THAT HAVE TO DO WITH THIS PLACE? O OBVIOUSLY, AS I SAID BEFORE, WERE, WHETHER THE WAR CASE APPLIES OR DOESN'T APPLY WILL BE ONE OF MANY ISSUES AT THE HEARING.
BUT I CAN TELL YOU EVEN BEFORE GOING TO THE HEARING THAT THE WISTER CASE, ONCE, ONCE EVERY CASE HAPPENED IN ONE TOWN, CASES GO UP AND THEY JUST GET DECIDED BY JUDGES WHO THEN ISSUE A PUBLISHED DECISION.
AND THEN THAT BECOMES THE LAW OF THE LAND ON THAT PARTICULAR DECISION.
THE LAW OF THE LAND EVERYWHERE.
BUT NOW YOU CAN FIND, YOU CAN FIND, HANG ON YOU, YOU CAN FIND WAYS TO TRY TO DIFFERENTIATE IT FACTUALLY OR TO SAY, WELL, THIS IS WHY WE'RE DIFFERENT.
THIS IS WHY IT DOESN'T APPLY TO US.
BUT IT BECOMES THE LAW OF THE LAND.
SO WHEN THE SUPREME COURT RULES THAT YOU HAVE TO GIVE RIGHTS TO A DEFENDANT BEFORE YOU QUESTION HIM, YES, IT APPLIES EVERYWHERE TO EVERY STATE AND TO EVERY TOWN.
IT'S THE SAME THING WITH NOW WITH THE STATE DECISIONS, STATE COURT DECISIONS, IT ONLY APPLIES EVERYWHERE WITHIN THE STATE.
ANOTHER STATE MIGHT BORROW FROM IT IF THEY DON'T HAVE RULING ON THAT TOPIC.
SO IT'S MORE LIMITED IN THAT SENSE.
BUT YES, THAT RULING ONCE IT WAS, ESPECIALLY AFTER BEING AFFIRMED BY COMMONWEALTH COURT, BECAME SOMETHING THAT EVERY TOWN IN THE STATE WOULD HAVE TO LOOK AT ON THAT ISSUE.
SO THEN EVERY COUNTY OR EVERY, UH, TOWNSHIP NEEDS TO CHANGE THEIR ORDINANCES TO REFLECT THAT.
THEY, NOT EVERYBODY, SOMEBODY, SOME PLACES MIGHT HAVE, THEY MIGHT HAVE NO ORDINANCE ON IT OR THEY MIGHT HAVE A HIGHLY DETAILED ORDINANCE ON IT, OR THEY, BUT THE, THE, THE, THE SUPERFICIAL SIMILARITY BETWEEN HERE IN WARCHESTER IS THAT IT'S ROUGHLY THE SAME LANGUAGE AND ROUGHLY THE SAME LACK OF DEFINITION OF THE TERMS. OKAY, THANK YOU.
UM, AND WAS WARCHESTER CREATED TO BE IN A LANDSCAPE WHERE THE CHARACTER AROUND IT WAS NOTHING LIKE WHAT IT WAS BEING, PL WAS BEING PLOPPED INTO THAT, THAT LITTLE SPACE, THE WAR TOWNSHIP SAID TO THE DEVELOPER, YOU'RE JUST TRYING TO PUT IN SINGLE FAMILY HOMES THAT AREN'T REALLY SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.
AND, AND IT'S NOT REALLY AN EXTENDED CARE FACILITY BECAUSE YOU'RE JUST TRYING TO JAM IN SINGLE FAMILY HOMES INTO A PLACE THAT DOESN'T MEET THAT DEFINITION.
WHICH SOUNDS VERY MUCH LIKE WHAT MANY PEOPLE HAVE SAID IN THESE LAST TWO MEETINGS.
THERE IS AN UNDENIABLE SIMILARITY.
I'M NOT SAYING IN THE END THAT THE CASE WILL PREVAIL IF THERE ARE FACTUAL DISTINCTIONS, BUT TO SAY THAT YOU DON'T EVEN HAVE TO LOOK AT IT IS JUST NOT RIGHT.
WELL, I WOULD ASK YOU TO NOT FOLLOW IT AND UNDERSTOOD AND BE A, BE A LEADER INSTEAD OF BEING A FOLLOWER.
[01:00:02]
THANK YOU.RAY ROCCHIO, 3 43 74 VISTA DRIVE.
HI, I'M, UH, RAY ROCCHIO, 3 74 VISTA DRIVE.
HOPEFULLY EVERYBODY CAN HEAR ME.
UH, FIRST I'D LIKE TO SAY I'M EXCITED.
UM, UH, UNFORTUNATELY I'M RESPONSIBLE FOR A PETITION GOING AROUND.
I JUST CHECKED, IT LOOKS LIKE WE'RE UP TO 713 PEOPLE, UH, CHANGE.ORG, SAVE PARKHOUSE.
IF ANYBODY ELSE WANTS TO SIGN UP LEFT HAND, WE'D BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO HAVE YOU.
UM, I HAVE JUST A COUPLE QUICK QUESTIONS.
UH, IT SEEMS LIKE EVERY DAY, EVERY HOUR THINGS ARE MOVING PRETTY QUICK HERE AND I LEARN NEW INFORMATION.
SOMETIMES THAT'S NOT ALWAYS RIGHT OR CORRECT, BUT, UH, ONE OF THE THINGS I WAS CURIOUS ABOUT FOR THE SOCIETY HERE THAT'S SITTING BEHIND ME TO FIGURE OUT WHAT NEXT STEPS MIGHT BE.
SO THIS WOULD MOVE TO A CONDITIONAL HEARING, AND IF I HEARD JEFF WRIGHT EARLIER, ONE OF THE CONDITIONS FOR THAT MIGHT BE THAT WE NEED SOME MORE INFORMATION FROM THE GENTLEMAN SENDING TO MY RIGHT HERE IS WHAT, IS THERE SOME KIND OF STEP THAT HAS TO HAPPEN BEFORE WE MOVE TO A CONDITIONAL HEARING JUST SO EVERYBODY HERE KNOWS WHAT THAT WILL BE SO WE DON'T GET CAUGHT OFF GUARD BY IT? RIGHT NOW, WE DO NOT HAVE A CONDITIONAL USE HEARING SCHEDULED.
IF WE, IF WE WERE TO SCHEDULE ONE, THEY WOULD PRESENT THEIR TESTIMONY, THEIR INFORMATION WILL BE PRESENTED, THEN IT'S NOT NECESSARILY GONNA BE OVER ONE NIGHT.
WE WOULD HAVE TIME TO REVIEW SOME OF THAT INFORMATION OF WHATEVER THEY PRESENTED AND WE WOULD MOVE FORWARD WITH THE HEARING.
IT REALLY IS BASED ON WHAT THE SUPERVISORS AND HOW THEY RUN AND HOW THEY, WHAT INFORMATION THEY'RE LOOKING FOR AND WHAT INFORMATION'S PRESENTED.
SO YOU SENT A LETTER, I BELIEVE IN SEPTEMBER, END OF SEPTEMBER, SAYING, HERE'S SOME REVIEWS OF THE PLAN.
YES, WE'D LIKE SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.
IS THERE ANYTHING IN THERE THAT WOULD BE A LITMUS TEST FOR US GOING TO A CONDITIONAL USE HEARING OR IS IT NOT NECESSARILY NEEDED? NO, AS WITH OTHER DEVELOPMENTS, UH, AGAIN, THIS APPLIES TO ALL DEVELOPMENT, LAND DEVELOPMENT IN THE TOWNSHIP AT TENTATIVE SKETCH, IT'S A VERY, VERY BASIC SKETCH.
A LOT OF MY LETTERS DEAL WITH, WE'RE GONNA NEED THIS INFORMATION TO PRELIMINARY, OR WE'RE GONNA NEED THIS INFORMATION MOVING FORWARD.
WE'RE GONNA NEED THESE PLANNED CLARIFICATIONS MOVING FORWARD.
AN APPLICANT CAN MOVE FORWARD WITHOUT DOING THOSE.
IF THEY SO CHOOSE THE BOARD HERE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION HERE CAN ASK THEM, THEY CAN MOVE FORWARD IF THEY SO CHOOSE.
AND THE, THE BOARD CAN ASK ALSO.
MOST OF THAT IS REQUIRED AT PRELIMINARY PLAN BECAUSE IT'S MORE FACTUAL AND HARD ENGINEERING AND THAT, AND THAT'S WHERE WE TEND TO GET THE BULK OF THE INFORMATION.
I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE MM-HMM.
BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE THEY CAN JUST GO THERE IF THEY WANT TO, IT'S BERLIN MEMORY AND THEN WELL, WE CAN, AND CONDITIONAL USE IS IS EVEN MORE LOOSEY-GOOSEY THAN THAT.
THEY CAN GO WHENEVER THEY WANT TO.
THEY CAN GO ANYTIME UP TO FINAL PLAN APPROVAL, BECAUSE THAT'S JUST THE WAY THAT'S STRUCTURED WITH THE MULTI MUNICIPALITIES PLANNING CODE.
THERE'S NO DEFINITE DATE YOU HAVE TO DO IT.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE TOWNSHIP, HISTORICALLY, WE'VE TEND TO RUN CONDITIONAL USES AND TENTATIVE SKETCH AT THE SAME TIME.
IN THIS CASE, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S HOW IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN OR NOT.
IT'S UP TO THE APPLICANT AND WITH ANY OF THIS.
UM, SO PART OF THE PETITION THAT WAS PUT TOGETHER, UH, THERE'S A NUMBER OF MEMBERS THAT HELPED.
I CERTAINLY DIDN'T DO IT BY ANY MEANS.
I'M NOT CAPABLE OF IT, BUT JANINE WAS A GREAT HELP IN, IN BUILDING IT IN SOME OTHERS.
BUT ONE OF THE POINTS THAT CAME OUT AS A MEETING OF, UH, A MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY WHO MET OVER AT WAGMAN'S, UH, A COUPLE WEEKS AGO, IT WAS STATED THAT THE COUNTY, UH, WHEN THEY SOLD THE LAND ORIGINALLY, THAT ONLY 15% WAS DEEMED DEVELOPABLE DUE, DUE TO FLOW RATES OF WATER RUNOFF.
UH, IT'S NOT REFLECTED IN THE CURRENT PLAN.
A NUMBER OF PEOPLE SPOKE ABOUT THAT.
YOU KNOW, IF THE FLOODING ISSUES CONTINUE, UH, IT WILL INCREASE SIGNIFICANTLY.
AND I GUESS I FIND THAT MOST INTERESTING NOW WHEN I LOOK AND SEE WHO WAS PART OF THE COMMISSION AT THAT TIME AND THE LAST TIME I CHECKED, HE WAS JUST SWORN IN AS A GOVERNOR, UH, A DAY OR SO AGO.
SO I'D REALLY LOVE TO SEE IF ANYBODY FROM THE SUPERVISOR ON THE PLANNING COMMITTEE COULD FIND OUT IF THAT WAS TRULY JUST SOMETHING THAT WAS SAID OR IF THE COUNTY MISREPRESENTED THE FACT THAT ONLY 15% WAS DEEMED DEVELOPABLE.
CUZ CLEARLY THAT'S MORE THAN 15%.
SO ANYTHING WE COULD DO TO GET SOME RESOLUTION TO THAT WOULD BE GREAT ALSO.
[01:05:01]
ROAD.SO I JUST WANTED TO SAY I'VE LIVED HERE MY WHOLE LIFE.
I'M ALMOST JODY, SO BEEN LOTS OF CHANGES.
WHEN I WAS LITTLE, I REMEMBER ALL THE OPEN SPACES.
YOU COULD SLED DOWN ANY HILL YOU WANTED.
AND THEN I SAW THIS AND, YOU KNOW, ALL THE STUFF THAT'S BUILT UP.
DEVELOPMENT HAPPENS, PEOPLE MOVE FORWARD.
IF YOU PUT THE STUFF TOGETHER THAT'S BEEN BUILT BEFORE, I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH OF IT THAT WOULD MAKE, BUT THAT'S A LOT.
AND THAT'S ONE OF THE ONLY BIG OPEN SPACES WE HAVE LEFT.
SO I WOULD LIKE IT TO STAY THERE.
WILLIAM FELTON, 1 33 OLD STATE ROAD.
THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TONIGHT.
UM, YOU KNOW, IT'S MY HOPE AND OPINION THAT, UH, THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS SHOULD NOT BE COMPELLED TO APPROVE A DEVELOPMENT PLAN, WHICH DOES NOT COMPLY WITH THE ZONING, AND WHICH WILL IN THE LONG RUN, BE A BURDEN TO THE TOWNSHIP, THE MUNICIPAL SERVICES, AND THE CITIZENS OF THE COMMUNITY.
AND I WOULD ASK THAT THIS COMMISSION SHOULD RECOMMEND DENIAL OF THIS PLAN.
WE'VE HIT THE END OF OUR ORGANIZED LIST.
IF SOMEONE WOULD LIKE TO COME UP.
I TELL THAT GENTLEMAN, STAND UP.
FIRST NAME AND ADDRESS, PLEASE.
JOHN MCGUIGAN, 1 0 3 BENNINGTON ROAD.
I WANNA THANK THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR YOUR HARD WORK.
I KNOW IT'S A VOLUNTEER POSITION AND IT'S NOT EASY.
I WANNA ADDRESS MY COMMENTS TO THIS GENTLEMAN.
COULD YOU DO ME A FAVOR? COULD YOU TURN AROUND AND LOOK AT ALL THESE PEOPLE HERE? I DID YOUR VOICE.
I WOULD LIKE YOU TO DO IT AGAIN.
ALL THESE PEOPLE IN THIS ROOM WORKED HARD TO GET THEIR SHARE OF THE AMERICAN DREAM, TO BUY A HOUSE, TO RAISE THEIR FAMILY, TO SEND THEM TO GOOD SCHOOLS.
YOU COME ALONG WITH YOUR INVESTORS AND YOU SPECULATE AND LAND, AND YOU SPEND MONTHS COMING UP WITH A SCHEME TO SHORT CIRCUIT THE SYSTEM AND PUT SOMETHING LIKE THIS SO YOU CAN MAKE AN ALMIGHTY DOLLAR.
WELL, SIR, YOU'RE ENTITLED TO YOUR OPINION.
MY CLIENT HAPPENS TO OWN THE GROUND, PAYS TAXES ON THE GROUND.
IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE.
YOU MADE ALL OF US COME OUT HERE TONIGHT BECAUSE OF YOU.
AND GUESS WHAT? YOU COME HERE NEXT MONTH, WE'LL BE HERE.
YOU COME HERE THE MONTH AFTER THAT, WE'LL BE HERE.
I APPRECIATE WE KEEP IT, KEEP IT PROFESSIONAL, PLEASE.
WE'RE ALL, THIS IS A VERY TENSE SITUATION.
BUT PLEASE, LET'S, LET'S KEEP IT PROFESSIONAL.
CAN EVERYBODY HEAR ME? UH, SEAN BIEL, UH, SIX HAW.
MARLENE, IT'S CONSIDERED, IT'S CALLED ROAR FOR PENNSYLVANIA.
UM, I UNDERSTAND YOU WANNA MAKE SOME MONEY, BUT I COULD SEE MAYBE A QUARTER OF THIS DEVELOPMENT, BUT NOT THIS S**T SHOW.
MY PARENTS GREW UP IN, UH, 1 36 WALNUT STREET, AND THEIR HOUSE GOT FLOODED.
I COULD SEE THIS BEING A NIGHTMARE, MAKING IT EVEN WORSE THAN IT WAS.
THEY HAD WATER UP TO THEIR, THEIR KNEES BEING EVACUATED.
WE HAD TO DIG THEM OUT FROM THE COMPLETE MESS.
IT WAS, UM, YOU DO THIS, IT'S JUST GONNA GET WORSE FOR PROVINCE, UH, ALL THE WAY DOWN.
IT'S JUST GONNA BE, YOU KNOW, BAD.
MAYBE A QUARTER OF IT, BUT NOT THIS.
[01:10:04]
HOW YOU DOING, RYAN? SCHLEGEL? 16 DERBY CIRCLE.OH, YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO SPELL THAT ONE FOR ME.
YOUR ADDRESS AGAIN? 16 DERBY CIRCLE.
THANK YOU FOR THE TIME TO SPEAK TODAY.
UM, SINCE FROM A HEARING STANDPOINT, ARE ALL IMPACT STUDIES, UM, PUBLIC KNOWLEDGE, ARE WE ABLE TO REVIEW THOSE FROM STORMWATER MANAGEMENT, FEASIBILITY, MARKET STUDIES, PHASE ONE, ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTS PRIOR TO A HEARING THAT IS STARTED? NO, NOT, NOT IN CONNECTION WITH THE HEARING.
THE HEARING EVIDENCE STARTS THE, ON THE FIRST NIGHT OF THE HEARING.
SOME OF THOSE COME UP SOMETIMES IN CONNECTION WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT PLAN ITSELF.
UM, STORMWATER IS, IT'S TOO EARLY ON THAT PART OF IT.
BECAUSE THAT'S NOT TOTALLY NO ENGINEERING'S DONE.
NOW FROM ONCE ENGINEERING IS COMPLETED AND STORE MANAGEMENT IS DONE, CAN THERE BE A REQUEST? CUZ THERE'S A LOT OF CONCERN WITH FLOODING CUZ OF, WITH IDA AND WITH THE AMOUNT OF RUNOFF THAT WILL CONTINUE POTENTIAL LOSS OF LIFE, JUST WELL DEBATE PURE FLOODING.
COULD THAT BE A REQUEST AS PART OF THE STORM WATER MANAGEMENT WITH THE, THE FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR THAT AS A GENERAL STATEMENT? AND, AND PEOPLE ARE GONNA BE MAYBE QUICK TO SAY, WELL, I KNOW OF THAT ONE TIME THAT'S AN EXCEPTION OR INTERESTING AS A GENERAL STATEMENT, WHEN A PROPERTY IS, GOES FROM BEING UNDEVELOPED TO DEVELOPED THE STORMWATER CAPTURE MAKES IT BETTER, NOT WORSE.
NO, THEY OVER, THEY OVER-ENGINEER THE BASIN.
THE BASINS ARE OVER-ENGINEERED.
I'M NOT AWARE OF ONE THAT I THINK WE MIGHT HAVE HEARD OF.
ONE THAT WE HEARD FAILED ONCE THAT I DON'T THINK THEY'RE, THEY FAILED BECAUSE THEY'RE OVER-ENGINEERED.
SO OF ALL THE ISSUES, I MEAN, STORMWATER CAPTURE GETS BETTER.
SO, UM, OF ALL THE DIFFERENT COMMENTS, AND I UNDERSTAND ALL OF 'EM, THAT'S THE ONE I PROBABLY UNDERSTAND THE LEAST BECAUSE THAT SITUATION GENERALLY IMPROVES WITH DEVELOPMENT, NOTWITHSTANDING EVERYONE'S OPINIONS ABOUT THE PLAN.
AND WITHOUT HAVING AN ENGINEERED PLAN, IT'S RIGHT.
I JUST WAS CURIOUS TO SEE IF THAT'S ALL PUBLIC KNOWLEDGE DURING THE HEARING PROCESS, BECAUSE THIS, THIS IS ALL PRELIMINARY.
ALL, EVERY STEP IS, ONCE WE HAVE SOMETHING, IT'S SUBJECT TO RIGHT TO KNOW, BUT TO GIVE TO ANYBODY IN THE PUBLIC.
KRISTEN TROUTMAN 1320 BLACKROCK ROAD.
UM, I DID SPEAK AT THE SUPERVISOR'S MEETING LAST NIGHT.
UM, MY CONCERN IS THE INSTITUTIONAL OVERLAY FOR THIS PARCEL.
UM, YOUR, UM, ORDINANCE SAYS THE INSTITUTIONAL DISTRICT SHALL BE DEEMED TO BE AN OVERLAY ON DESIGNATED PROPERTIES AND UPPER PROVIDENCE TOWNSHIP.
THIS PARCEL IS NOT ON YOUR OFFICIAL LIST.
YOUR OFFICIAL LIST WAS AMENDED IN DECEMBER OF 2017.
THIS WAS SUBDIVIDED OFF AND IT HAS A BRAND NEW PARCEL NUMBER, AND IT IS NOT ANYWHERE IN THE TWO PAGES ON YOUR LIST, THE 32 OR SO ACRES WHERE THE NURSING HOME CURRENTLY SITS IS.
UM, AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I READ, AND I I'M NOT A LAWYER, UM, PARAGRAPH B UNDER THE CONCEPT SAYS, SHOULD THE INSTITUTIONAL DISTRICT BOUNDARIES BE REVISED AS A RESULT OF LEGISLATIVE OR ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS OR JUDICIAL DECISION? THE ZONING REQUIREMENTS APPLICABLE TO THE AREA IN QUESTION SHALL REVERT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE UNDERLYING ZONING DISTRICT.
WITHOUT CONSIDERATION OF THIS ARTICLE, THE UNDERLYING ZONING DISTRICT IS OPEN SPACE CONSERVATION, WHICH EITHER ONE OPEN SPACE OR I N DOES NOT ALLOW FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.
YOU YEAH, I, I THINK SHE JUMPED RIGHT AHEAD OF YOU.
HI, NANCY CROCKETT AGAIN FROM 1 36 FOX RUN.
I JUST WANTED TO PIGGYBACK OFF OF THE OTHER GENTLEMAN'S UH, QUESTIONS.
AND, UH, UH, MR. BREON, YOU HAD MENTIONED THAT WASTEWATER GETS BETTER WITH NEW DEVELOPMENTS.
IS, IS THAT APPLICABLE TO FLOODPLAINS? BECAUSE YOU CAN'T BUILD IN FLOODPLAINS GENERALLY, BUT THIS IS RIGHT AROUND A FLOODPLAIN.
IS IT NOT? I CAN'T BUILD WITHIN THE FLOODPLAIN.
[01:15:01]
A FLOODPLAIN, BUT IS IT? WELL, I'M NOT SAYING THERE'S NO FLOODPLAIN ANYWHERE ON THE PROPERTY.I HAVEN'T GOT THAT FAR INTO IT.
I'M JUST GIVING YOU AS A GENERAL STATEMENT.
YOU HAVE TO GET SPECIAL RELIEF IN IT TO EVER BUILD IN A FLOODPLAIN.
SO THERE'S REALLY NO STUDIES THAT SHOW THAT THE WASTEWATER, UH, GETS WASTE BETTER STORMWATER IN STORMWATER, STORMWATER GETS BETTER WITH IN THE FLOODPLAIN AREAS.
IS THAT CORRECT? NO, I'M SAYING, I'M SAYING THE OVERALL AMOUNT OF STORM WATER THAT LEAVES A PROPERTY UNCONTROLLED WHEN IT'S NOT DEVELOPED, BECOMES CONTROLLED AFTER THE BASINS ARE BUILT.
THE, THE, THE WATER HAS TO BE HELD BACK ON SITE.
THE, THE, THERE'S NO ENGINEERING YET.
WELL, I DON'T THINK WE EVEN KNOW YET HOW ALL THE STORM WATER'S BEING ADDRESSED.
WE'VE SAID SEVERAL TIMES WE'RE AHEAD OF STORMWATER RIGHT NOW.
I CAN SEE WHERE IT WOULD GET BETTER WITH, YOU KNOW, DEVELOPMENTS IN TYPICAL AREAS AND REGIONS.
BUT THIS IS NOT A TYPICAL REGION.
IT'S, YOU KNOW, I'M, I'M SURE YOU UNDERSTAND THAT BEING RIGHT THERE BY THE BRIDGE AND THE, ALL RIGHT.
BLAKE WELLING, 1 35 BENNINGTON ROAD.
UM, I'M ANOTHER ENGINEER WHO LOOKS AT THIS PLAN AND LOOKS AT THE TOWNSHIP ORDINANCE DEFINITION OF A RESIDENTIAL CARE FACILITY.
AND I DON'T POSSIBLY, I CAN'T CONCEIVE OF HOW THIS CONSTITUTES A FACILITY.
I, I, I LOOK AT COMPLIANCE EVERY DAY AS PART OF MY ROLE IN MY JOB.
I DON'T SEE HOW THIS MEETS THE LETTER SPIRIT INTENT OF A LICENSED HEALTHCARE FACILITY.
SECOND POINT I'D LIKE TO MAKE, I UNDERSTAND THAT THE CONDITIONAL USE HEARING HAS NOT BEEN SCHEDULED.
WHAT IS THE SCHEDULING, ADVANCED SCHEDULING, UH, REQUIREMENTS, NOTICING REQUIREMENTS, UH, ARE THERE, UH, ANY CAPABILITIES TO DELAY OR, OR ISSUE A MOTION TO DELAY? I AM CONCERNED ABOUT THIS GROUP HAVING SUFFICIENT TIME TO PREPARE AND BE, UH, BE REPRESENTED FULLY IN THAT CONDITIONAL USE HEARING.
THE MUNICIPALITIES PLANNING CODE LIMITS ME TO 60 DAYS FOR A HEARING.
I THINK THE APPLICATION DATE IS MAY OF LAST YEAR.
IN ALL OF OUR APPLICATIONS, WE HAVE A, A CLAUSE THAT SAYS YOU WAIVE THE MPC REQUIREMENTS.
RIGHT NOW, I DO NOT HAVE ANY TIME LIMIT OR ANY TIME CONSTRAINTS ON THIS APPLICATION.
THAT ISN'T TO SAY THAT AN APPLICANT, IT'S IN THE APPLICANT'S COURT.
THEY CAN REMOVE THAT AT ANY TIME.
RIGHT NOW, THERE IS NO SCHEDULE, THERE IS NO DISCUSSION OF A SCHEDULE OF A CONDITIONAL USE HEARING.
BUT WILL THIS GROUP HAVE ADVANCED NOTICE? WILL THEY HAVE TIME TO PREPARE? I THINK I CAN.
I, IF YOU, ANYBODY, I THINK, AND THIS IS IN THE NPC, I NOTICED FOR ZONING HEARINGS, UH, AT THE Z H B, UM, IF YOU PUT SOMETHING IN WRITING TO THE TOWNSHIP THAT YOU WISH TO BE INCLUDED IN THE NOTICES THAT GO OUT, THEN YOU'LL BE INCLUDED.
AND ALSO CONDITIONALLY YOU, THEN YOU'LL, YOU'LL HAVE AS MUCH TIME AS ANYBODY HERE, CUZ AS SOON AS WE SCHEDULE IT, THEN YOU WOULD GET THAT NOTICE.
CONDITIONAL USES ARE ALSO THE PROPERTY ASSIGNED.
WE ADVERTISE IT, IT'S PUT ON OUR TOWNSHIP WEBSITE, AND THAT'S WELL IN ADVANCE BECAUSE THE, THE, THE ADVERTISING HAS TO BE, I THINK A MONTH BEFORE, UH, THE, THE SIGNAGE HAS TO BE AT LEAST TWO WEEKS BEFORE MONTH, TWICE IN THE PAPER.
TWO SUCCESSIVE WEEKS, NOT FURTHER OUT THAN 30 DAYS AND NOT CLOSER THAN SEVEN.
SO THAT'S WHEN IT WOULD BE, AND THEN YOU WOULD HAVE THAT MUCH TIME AT, YOU KNOW, DEPENDING ON WHEN IT RAN, YOU'D HAVE SOMEWHERE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF A COUPLE WEEKS AHEAD OF THE FIRST HEARING.
AND THAT'S ALL THE TIME THAT ANYBODY GETS.
WE CAN'T, THAT'S JUST HOW IT GOES.
DOESN'T REALLY, Y YEAH, I, I THINK I UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU'RE, WHERE YOU'RE HEADING, BUT THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS, NOBODY, NOBODY HAS THE EVIDENCE UNTIL THE HEARING STARTS.
YOU SAY, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE NOT ANY MORE DISADVANTAGE THAN WHATEVER LAWYER THE TOWNSHIP USES ME, THE BOARD, ANYBODY, THE HEARING.
WHEN THE HEARING STARTS, YOU START RECEIVING EVIDENCE.
I'M SORRY, COULD YOU CLARIFY? SO PLEASE COME TO THE MIC.
UM, BRAD BURKE, WHAT'S, AGAIN, I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY MY UNDERSTANDING THEN.
SO THE CONDITIONAL USE HEARING IS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC, CORRECT? YES.
AND FROM WHAT YOU JUST SAID, IF I HEARD RIGHT, WE'LL HAVE SEVEN TO 30 DAYS NOTICE
[01:20:01]
BEFORE IT ACTUALLY HAPPENS.WELL, IT, IT, IT DEPENDS WHAT DATE IS SELECTED, ROUGHLY? THAT'S CORRECT.
THE FIRST, THE FIRST AD GENERALLY RUNS ABOUT THREE WEEKS BEFORE THE HEARING.
LIKE ON THE WEBSITE OR, AND THEY'RE ALSO ALL PUT ON THE, ON THE TOWNSHIP WEBSITE.
ALL THE, THE SCHEDULE IS ON THE TOWNSHIP WEBSITE TOO.
AND THEN WHO DO YOU CONTACT IF YOU WANNA BE PERSONALLY INFORMED, YOU'D, I GUESS WE'LL SEND IT TO JEFF.
I HAVE A FEW, I DON'T HAVE THAT MANY, BUT I'VE GOT A FEW, SO THANKS.
HI, ANDERSON 1 23 PATRIOT DRIVE COLLEGE.
UM, I DON'T WANNA GET INTO THE WEEDS ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT IN THIS HEARING, THEY'RE GONNA PROVE THAT THIS IS GONNA MEET THE, THE, UM, DEFINITION.
I, I WAS ASSUMING THIS WAS GONNA BE LIKE A CONTINUING CARE RETIREMENT COMMUNITY, LIKE THE ONE THAT WAS IN MY HOMETOWN GROWING UP WHERE YOU DIDN'T BUY AN ACTUAL PROPERTY, YOU BOUGHT INTO A COMMUNITY, YOU PAID AN AMOUNT, UM, YOU KINDA WENT THERE TO DIE.
YOU KNOW, YOU START IN THE HOUSE AND THEN YOU MOVE INTO THE, THE MEDICAL FACILITY.
UM, SO I'M STILL JUST WONDERING ONE, WHY THERE'S NO, LIKE, WHAT IS YOUR BUSINESS PLAN? LIKE, CAN WE NOT SEE THE BUSINESS PLAN OF THIS MODEL BEFORE THE HEARING? TO TO UNDERSTAND, I MEAN, THEY HAVE TO HAVE IT BECAUSE IT'S GOTTA MAKE ECONOMICAL SENSE TO THEM TO DO THIS.
SO WHY CAN'T WE SEE SOMETHING? SO WE TAKE THOSE QUESTIONS AWAY AS TO WHAT THE PLAN IS FOR THIS CARE THROUGHOUT ALL THOSE UNITS.
AND SECONDLY, TO BE IN THE SPIRIT.
UH, THE ORDINANCE IS OPEN SPACE WITH AN INSTITUTIONAL OVERLAY.
UH, OPEN SPACE IS A VERY CURIOUS DESIGNATION FOR PRIVATE LAND.
IT'S NOT GENERALLY, OPEN SPACE ISN'T USUALLY, THERE'S NOT USUALLY AN ATTEMPT TO APPLY THAT TO PRIVATELY HELD LAND.
UM, BUT IT REALLY ISN'T IN PLAY WHEN THE PERSON'S, WHEN THE APPLICANT'S PURSUING THE OVERLAY.
SO, BUT THE DEFINITION OF THAT WAS TALKING ABOUT A SCHOOL OR A CHURCH OR SOMETHING THAT MOST OF US WOULD THINK WOULD HAVE A LONG WINDING DRIVE TREELINE DRIVE INTO A BUILDING SOMEWHERE MORE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE PROPERTY.
I THINK THE BIGGEST PROBLEM WITH THIS IS THAT THE OPEN SPACE THAT'S PRESERVED IS IN THE, THE PART OF THE LAND THAT YOU CAN'T EVEN DEVELOP.
SO I ACTUALLY LEFT MY DENTIST APPOINTMENT TODAY AND DROVE AROUND THIS PROPERTY JUST TO A REALLY APPRECIATE WHAT WE HAVE HERE BECAUSE I THINK I'VE BEEN TAKING IT FOR GRANTED FOR A LONG TIME, DRIVING BY.
AND NOW I, I TOOK THAT DRIVE TO LOOK AND SAY, WOW, IT'S AMAZING THAT WHAT WE COULD BE LOOKING AT, ESPECIALLY DRIVING DOWN OLD STATE ROAD, THE FACT THAT THIS COMMUNITY OR THIS RENDERING IS EVERY BUILDING IS RIGHT BUTTONED UP TO ALL THE ROADS.
THERE'S ABSOLUTELY NO APPRECIABLE OPEN SPACE FOR THE COMMUNITY TO SEE DRIVING AROUND THIS PROPERTY WITHOUT GOING INTO THE PROPERTY AND GOING TO THE FLOODPLAIN OR SOMETHING.
SO THERE'S NOTHING TO SEE FOR US ANYMORE IF THIS, THIS GETS BUILT.
IT'S JUST GONNA BE TALL HOUSES, BACKS OF HOUSES LIKE YOU MENTIONED.
AND I AM DEFINITELY AGAINST THIS AND HOPE THAT YOU WILL FIGHT FOR US.
I'M SORRY I COMPLETELY MISSED YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.
KIM ANDERSON, 1 23 PATRIOT DRIVE.
SO I'M BOB DE LARO 3 0 1 VISTA DRIVE.
AND JUST THREE POINTS I WANNA MAKE.
FIRST POINT, I SUPPORT ALL THE SPEAKERS THAT WERE UP HERE TONIGHT.
THEY'VE MADE A LOT OF GREAT POINTS.
I CAN'T ADD ANY MORE POINTS TO THAT, BUT SUPPORT ALL OF THOSE THINGS THAT THEY'RE SAYING.
UH, SECOND THING, I SUPPORT THE IDEA OF THE SECOND LAWYER TO GET INVOLVED TO DO THE RESEARCH.
EVERYBODY'S BEEN DOING RESEARCH HERE AND COMING UP WITH GREAT POINTS.
I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE FORMAL.
I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S ANYTHING THAT WOULD STOP THE SECOND LAWYER.
YOU KNOW, YOU MENTIONED HAVING THE, THE SECOND LAWYER FOR THE SUPERVISORS.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S INVOLVED IN MAKING THAT HAPPEN OR IF THERE'S SOMETHING THAT COULD PREVENT THAT FROM HAPPENING, BUT I'D LIKE TO UNDERSTAND THAT A LITTLE BIT SO THAT LAWYER COULD BE INVOLVED TO MAKE THAT REVIEW AND TAKE THE, YOU KNOW, UNDERSTAND THE INTERPRETATIONS, UNDERSTAND THE ISSUES, AND ORGANIZE THOSE ISSUES AND GIVE US TRANSPARENCY INTO WHAT'S HAPPENING THERE TOO, AS OPPOSED TO US JUST HAVING TO SHOW UP AND HEAR WHAT THAT IS.
THERE'S NO COMPLICATION IN THE PROCESS.
THERE'S ONLY, THERE'S ONE DECIDED APPELLATE COURT CASE THAT ALLOWS THE HIRING OF THE OTHER ATTORNEY.
UM, IT DOESN'T SAY, UM, HOW TO DO IT.
THERE'S NO RULES FOR DOING IT.
IT WOULD SIMPLY BE A MATTER OF THE SUPERVISORS AUTHORIZING THE EXPENSE TO RETAIN
[01:25:01]
SOMEBODY.IT ONLY HASN'T BEEN DONE BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T SCHEDULED A HEARING YET.
WELL, SO MY POINT WOULD BE THE MESSAGE BACK TO THE SUPERVISOR THEN WOULD BE, THAT'S AN IMPORTANT THING.
IF THERE'S EXPENDITURE INVOLVED IN DOING THAT, WE SHOULD MAKE SURE THAT WE FIND A WAY TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN.
AND THE LAST THING IS KIND OF WHAT, WHAT I WANT.
AND I THINK IT'S THE SAME THING THAT EVERYBODY ELSE YOU'RE HEARING FROM HERE WANTS.
WE DON'T WANNA ALLOW A SITUATION WHERE THERE'S A DECISION THAT GETS MADE OR ALMOST FORCED UPON US BASED ON STRETCHING INTERPRETATIONS AND SPINNING AND HAVING KIND OF LEGALESE AND JARGON THAT REALLY GOES AGAINST AND DISTORTS THE INTENTION AND THE SPIRIT OF THE ORDINANCE AND THE ACTUAL WORDING OF THE ORDINANCE AS WELL.
AND THAT'S WHY I THINK IT'S SO IMPORTANT TO HAVE THE LAWYER INVOLVED IN THAT TO HELP US THROUGH THAT PROCESS TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S BEING STRICTLY ENFORCED AND IT'S NOT JUST BASED ON INTERPRETATION AND SPIN.
KATHY TURNER, UH, FOUR 11 EGYPT ROAD.
I'M JUST FOLLOWING UP WITH THAT GENTLEMAN.
IF THERE IS AN ATTORNEY HIRED FOR A CONDITIONAL HEAR USAGE HEARING, WHO DECIDES WHO THE ATTORNEY IS? DO YOU GUYS PICK THAT ATTORNEY OR? I WOULD MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD, BUT DO I BE SOME WE REALLY, US GROUP OF PEOPLE DON'T HAVE A DECISION AS TO NO, I'M SORRY.
YOU CAN HIRE YOUR OWN, BUT THAT'LL BE INTERNAL AND IT WILL BE SOMEONE WHO, IF THAT'S DONE, AND I DO BELIEVE THE SUPERVISORS SUPPORT DOING IT, UM, IT WILL BE SOMEONE WHO'S HIGHLY QUALIFIED IN THE AREA OF ZONING.
I KNOW A LOT OF PEOPLE, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE ON THAT POINT.
MAKE SURE THAT WE, THE PEOPLE ARE INCLUDED IN THE DECISION.
HI, UH, STEVE RUSSO, 319 WILLOWBROOK LANE.
I JUST WANNA MAKE ONE COMMENT LOOKING AT THIS MAP, YOU WERE TO ZOOM OUT AND LOOK AT THE HOUSING AROUND IT.
I MOVED INTO THIS TOWNSHIP IN 1996, AND THERE WAS A REQUIREMENT THAT EVERY HOUSE HAD TO BE BUILT ON A BUILDER'S ACRE, 40,000 SQUARE FOOT, NOTHING SMALLER.
NOW, THEY DID MAKE SOME LEEWAY FOR SOME DEVELOPMENTS WHERE THEY SAID, OH, WE'LL LET YOU BUILD TWO HOMES AS LONG AS ON A EACH, ON A THIRD OF AN ACRE, AS LONG AS YOU THEN TOOK THAT OTHER THIRD OF YOUR ENTIRE PROPERTY AND MADE IT OPEN SPACE AND KEPT THAT OPEN.
OKAY, NOW YOU'RE LOOKING AT A PROPERTY WITH EIGHT TO 10 TIMES THE STANDARD DENSITY OF EVERYTHING ELSE IN THE, IN THE AREA.
AND I'M DEFINITELY AGAINST THIS.
I'VE SPENT A LOT OF MONEY ADDING TO MY HOUSE, MAKING SURE IT'S A WONDERFUL PLACE FOR US TO LIVE.
AND I'D HATE TO HAVE TO LEAVE BECAUSE ALL OF A SUDDEN YOU CAN'T MANEUVER IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE OF TRAFFIC AND JUST THE, THE, THIS HUGE DEVELOPMENT.
HI, MY NAME'S GLENN OL 1 97 DRIV BUS ROAD.
UM, I JUST WANTED TO KNOW, WHAT IF WE, HE BUILDS IT AND THEY DON'T COME
IS THERE A POSSIBILITY WHERE, UM, AGE RESTRICTED FACILITY CAN BECOME A NORMAL RESIDENTIAL FACILITY? I UNDERSTAND THAT'S HAPPENED IN THE TOWNSHIP.
WELL, YOU RAISED, OH, I'M SORRY.
UH, YOU, I, MY, UH, AGE RESTRICTED FACILITIES WITHIN THE TOWNSHIP WERE REZONED BECAUSE OF HARDSHIP AND THEY COULDN'T SELL THEIR PROPERTY.
COULD THAT ALSO HAPPEN HERE? WELL, THERE ARE PROPERTIES THAT GET REZONED, UM, AND, AND THERE'S NO RULE THAT SAYS IT COULDN'T BE ANY KIND OF PROPERTY.
UM, BUT TO, TO TWO POINTS IN RESPONSE TO YOUR, TO YOUR COMMENT.
UM, GENERALLY SPEAKING, AND I, AND I THINK, I KNOW I SAID THIS AT THE FIRST PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, BUT OBVIOUSLY THERE'S DIFFERENT PEOPLE HERE, VIABILITY, THE VIABILITY OF A PROJECT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT'S IN PLAY UNLESS THE APPLICANT IS ASKING TO CHANGE THE ZONING ORDINANCE.
[01:30:01]
COMES IN AND SAYS, I CAN ONLY DO, I'D LIKE TO DO THIS JOB, BUT TO DO IT, I NEED TO CHANGE THE ZONING ORDINANCE THIS MUCH.WELL, THAT'S TOTALLY UP TO THE SUPERVISOR'S DISCRETION, WHETHER THEY FEEL LIKE CHANGING THE ORDINANCE.
AND IN THAT INSTANCE, THEY CAN SAY, WELL, WE'LL THINK ABOUT IT, BUT YOU NEED TO SHOW US THAT THIS WILL WORK BEFORE WE'RE GONNA CHANGE THE ORDINANCE.
BUT IF THE APPLICANT'S NOT LOOKING FOR A ZONING CHANGE, VIABILITY ISN'T REALLY IN PLAY, THAT THE TOWNSHIP DOESN'T MAKE DECISIONS ON WHETHER PROJECTS WILL WILL FAIL OR SUCCEED.
UM, ON THE ISSUE OF, UH, CHANGING THE ZONING, UM, THE, THE ZONING COULD EVEN STILL THERE.
IT'S A CONFUSING SCENARIO THAT UNFOLDED HERE BECAUSE OF THE, UM, THE DRIVE TO SAY, YOU KNOW, LOOK, THESE SIGNS THAT SAY SAVE PARKHOUSE FARM, UM, I THINK MOST PEOPLE FROM THE FIRST MEETING DID ACCEPT THAT SOMETHING ULTIMATELY WILL GO THERE.
IT'S, IT'S NOT GOING TO BE OPEN SPACE FOREVER.
IT'S PRIVATELY HELD LAND WITH A RIGHT TO DEVELOP.
SO THERE WAS A, A HUE AND A CRY ABOUT DON'T CHANGE THE ZONING.
THE SUPERVISORS EACH COMMITTED TO NOT CHANGE THE ZONING.
AND I THINK, AND I'LL LET THEM SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES, BUT I THINK THAT THEY, AT LEAST MOST OF THEM, FEEL THAT THEY WOULD NOT BREAK THAT PROMISE TO PEOPLE UNLESS PEOPLE AGREED WITH IT.
IN OTHER WORDS, REALLY THE QUESTION NOW IS IF, IF WE COULD GET WHAT MOST PEOPLE WOULD CALL A BETTER PLAN, WOULD PEOPLE EMBRACE A ZONING CHANGE TO DO THAT? OR DO PEOPLE WANNA STAND ON SAYING, NO, STAND, STAY THE COURSE.
DON'T, DON'T CHANGE THE ZONING.
IF YOU JUST FIGHT HARD ENOUGH, YOU'LL WIN UNDER THE CURRENT ZONING.
SO, UM, I THINK EVENTUALLY THERE COULD, COULD COME A POINT WHERE WE DO ASK PEOPLE TO SAY, LOOK, THE SITUATION IS EVOLVING.
WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT A DIFFERENT PLAN WITH RESIDENTIAL THAT'S NOT THIS, BUT TO DO THAT IT WOULD NEED A ZONING CHANGE.
SO RIGHT NOW THERE'S, IT'S, IT'S CLOGGED BECAUSE OF THE PROMISES NOT TO CHANGE THE ZONING, BUT IT DOES HAPPEN.
AND GOD, I HOPE IT DOESN'T HAPPEN HERE.
WE'VE GOT, WELL, 1200 UNITS WITH NO KIDS AND NO SCHOOL AND NO BUSES.
AND I DON'T THINK IT WOULD HAPPEN HERE BASED ON, I DON'T THINK IT WOULD HAPPEN HERE WITHOUT, WITHOUT PUBLIC BUY-IN FOR THAT IDEA.
BECAUSE THE OTHERWISE THE SUPERVISORS WOULD STAND BY THEIR PROMISE TO NOT DO THAT.
I MEAN, IT DID HAPPEN, LIKE AT LIN ON LINFIELD TRAP ROAD DIRECT WESTRIDGE DEVELOPMENT, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT WAS AGE RESTRICTED AND IT GOT CONVERTED TO RESIDENTIAL.
AND I THINK THERE WAS A, A COUPLE OTHER ONES IN THE TOWNSHIP TOO.
WELL, THERE'S SEPARATE RULES WHEN YOU'RE IN UNDER FAIR HOUSING FOR AGE RESTRICTED, YOU CAN'T JUST TURN AROUND AND TURN IT INTO SOMETHING ELSE.
I DON'T KNOW ALL THE INS AND OUTS OF IT.
UM, BUT THERE IS, THERE IS A LIMIT THAT WAY.
NOT FROM THE TOWNSHIP SIDE, BUT FROM, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU'VE SOLD TO PEOPLE UNDER, UH, THAT COVENANT, YOU CAN'T JUST TURN AROUND AND THEN SAY, JUST KIDDING, AND NOT, YOU KNOW, UNDO IT.
BUT, BUT ZONING CHANGES IN GENERAL DO HAPPEN.
HI, UH, JIM MULLEN, 2 0 6 COUNTRY RIDGE DRIVE.
UM, MY FIRST PLANNING MEETING.
UM, SO, UH, REALLY THANK YOU FOR THE EXPLANATION UP FRONT BECAUSE I KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF EMOTION.
LET ME TAKE THIS OFF, I PROMISE NOT TO START SINGING.
UM, SO A LOT OF EMOTION I KNOW, AND YOU KNOW, THE SUPERVISORS HAVE, HAVE A TALL TASK HERE.
AND THIS IS A VERY, YOU KNOW, FLASH POINT, I GUESS.
UM, I WAS A LITTLE DISAPPOINTED TO HEAR THAT WE DIDN'T REALLY HAVE SOMEBODY, UH, YOU KNOW, CHASING OUR SIDE.
SO I'M, I CONCUR WITH THE SECOND ATTORNEY.
SO WOULD THAT SECOND ATTORNEY BE A LITTLE MORE BIASED TOWARDS OUR OPINION? WELL, THE ALMOST BY DEFINITE, WELL, THERE'S PEOPLE WITH DIFFERENT OPINIONS ON DIFFERENT ISSUES THAT THEY FIND MORE IMPORTANT THAN OTHER ISSUES.
BUT THAT PERSON, WHAT THAT PERSON WOULD BE TASKED WITH, WOULD BE PRESENTING THINGS ON TOP OF WHAT THE APPLICANT PRESENTED TO CREATE A FULL ARGUMENT AND PRESENT THE OTHER SIDE OF THE COIN.
SO, SO HE WOULD BE A LITTLE BIT MORE ON OUR BIASED.
I MEAN, AT LEAST PREPARING FOR, FOR, FOR THAT PERSON WOULD HAVE A MORE, WOULD BE ADVOCATING A SPECIFIC POSITION, WHEREAS SUPERVISORS AND MYSELF ARE NOT OKAY IN THE HEARING.
SO DOES THE HEARING ITSELF STICK TO LIKE STRUCTURAL WATER RUNOFF, STORM RUNOFF? N THAT'S ACTUALLY MORE THE LAND DEVELOPMENT PROCESS.
AND I SAID IT THE OTHER, WELL, THIS IS YOUR FIRST MEETING, BUT
[01:35:01]
REALLY THE MOST REGARDING THE DETAILS OF THE ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION AND ALL THE PRELIMINARY APPROVAL IS THE MOST IMPORTANT STEP.SOME TOWNSHIPS DON'T EVEN HAVE SKETCH PLANS AS A PART OF THEIR ZONING ORDINANCE.
IT'S REALLY THE PRELIMINARY IS THE REAL IMPORTANT ONE.
UM, AND THEN THE, THE HEARING IS GOING TO BE MORE FOCUSED ON THE CR THE, IF YOU GO TO THE CONDITIONAL USE ORDINANCE AND WHERE IT STATES THE CRITERIA THAT YOU HAVE TO MEET, THOSE ARE WHAT THE FOCUS OF THE HEARING WOULD BE.
SO, SO THE, THE REST OF THE BUSINESS PLAN ABOUT OFFERING CARE FOR ALL 1200 HOMES AND NONE OF THAT GETS, THAT'LL BE AT THE HEARING THAT WILL BE TESTED IN THE HEARING.
SO, SO I MEAN, I THINK THAT'S A BIG THING BE, AND I REALLY HOPE THAT THAT GETS FLUSHED OUT BECAUSE I HAVE A FATHER IN A SENIOR LIVING HOME RIGHT NOW, THEY CAN'T GET STAFF AND THERE'S ONLY 80 RESIDENTS, RIGHT? SO THERE'S STAFFING ISSUES AND QUALITY ASSURANCE ISSUES AND TURNOVER AND, AND TRAINING AND, AND, AND TO DO SOMETHING ON THAT MAGNITUDE, HAVING HAD A FATHER IN A HOME FOR FIVE YEARS IS JUST, I I, I CAN'T EVEN FATHOM IT.
SO I HOPE THAT THAT IS, AS MUCH AS THE WATER RUNOFF IS JUST HOW THEY INTEND TO STAFF AND MANAGE AND FULLY MANAGE, IF THEY'RE GONNA OFFER THOSE SERVICES, WHAT THOSE SERVICES ARE, AND THEN HOW THEY TEND TO DO THAT.
BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S ALMOST IS EQUALLY IMPORTANT.
THAT'S THE HEARING STORM, STORMWATER IS LAND DEVELOPMENT, ALL THE OTHER STUFF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT WILL BE THE CONDITIONAL USE HEARING.
HI, MY NAME IS STEVE HENRY, 1 34 GATES HEADWAY.
AND UM, OBVIOUSLY I'M WITH EVERYBODY ELSE, HENRY DISGRACE, WE'RE EVEN HAVING THIS MEETING.
BUT WHAT I'D LIKE TO KNOW IS THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE A HEALTH CA HEALTHCARE.
SO ARE THEY GOING HAVE POLE STATIONS AT ALL THE BATHROOMS OR THEY'RE GONNA HAVE SPRINKLER SYSTEMS THROUGHOUT THE HOUSE, OR THEY'RE GONNA HAVE FIRE DOORS AT THE BEDROOMS, OR THEY'RE GONNA HAVE RAMPS GOING INTO ROOMS? THESE ARE ALL PLACES, ALL THINGS THAT HEALTHCARE PLACES HAVE, AND I BETCHA NOT ONE OF THE THINGS ARE IN THOSE BUILDINGS.
SO IT'S NOT A HEALTHCARE THING.
THANK YOU, MARK LONG 3 47 VISTA DRIVE.
YOU BEING THE SOLICITOR FOR UPPER PROVIDENCE TOWNSHIP, OBVIOUSLY YOU GIVE, UM, ADVICE TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
HAVE YOU LOOKED AT THE ORDINANCE AND WHAT DO YOU THINK THE CHANCES ARE THAT WE CAN DENY IT? AND ARE WE GONNA DENY IT AND FIGHT IT? OR ARE WE JUST DOING THINGS HERE TO HAVE EVERYBODY TO COME OUT AND IT'S GONNA BE PUSHED THROUGH ANYHOW BECAUSE WE'RE GONNA LOOK AT WARCHESTER AND SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT, THE STATE'S GONNA APPEAL, LET THE GO TO THE STATE? OR ARE WE SAYING THAT WE'RE GONNA LOOK AT IT BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY THESE PLANNING COMMISSION, I KNOW THEY'RE THE JUDGE, BUT THEY'RE NOT LAWYERS.
THE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS NOT THE JUDGE.
THEY DO NOT, THEY DO NOT DECIDE THE CASE.
THEY MAKE A NON-BINDING RECOMMENDATION TO THE SUPERVISORS ALL AND SUPERVISORS AND ANY LAWYERS ON THE SUPERVISORS.
SAY AGAIN, ALL THE THE SUPERVISOR'S LAWYERS.
NO, BUT THEY'LL MAKE A DECISION ON IF IT GOES TO THE PLAN, GOES TO THE STATE OR THEY, IF THEY SAY NO, IT GOES TO NORRISTOWN.
BUT AS YOUR RECOMMENDATION CURRENTLY, THERE'S A LOT OF, THERE'S A LOT OF QUESTIONS IN THERE.
MY BASICALLY QUESTION IS THE LAWYER FOR, YOU'RE THE LAWYER FOR UPPER PROVIDENCE TOWNSHIP.
YOU LOOKED AT THE ORDINANCE, DOES IT HOLD WATER? UH, I MADE THE STATEMENT AT THE FIRST PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING THAT SUPERFICIALLY IT APPEARS THAT THEY MEET THE CRITERIA IN THE ORDINANCE, BUT IT STILL HAS TO BE PROVEN.
THERE ARE VERY SUBTLE LEGAL ARGUMENTS THAT ARE GOING TO BE MADE AT THE HEARING.
SO I I, WELL, ANYBODY WHO KNOWS ME HERE, THERE ARE PEOPLE HERE WHO I'VE REPRESENTED BY THE WAY, UH, KNOWS THAT I DON'T DO LIKE THE PERCENTAGES THING ON THE OUTCOME OF, OF CASES.
I CAN TELL YOU THAT AS I LOOK AT IT SUPERFICIALLY, THE EXAMPLE I GAVE LAST NIGHT WAS THAT I STATED BEFORE THE EAGLES PLAYED THE SAINTS, THAT THE EAGLES WOULD BEAT THE SAINTS AND IT WAS A COMMON COMMONLY HELD OPINION.
IT WAS BACKED BY THE LAS VEGAS BOOKIES.
AND YET THAT'S NOT HOW IT HAPPENED.
BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO PLAY THE GAME.
YOU HAVE TO HAVE THE HEARING AS JEFF AND I AS THE CONSULTANTS, AND I LOOK SUPERFICIALLY AT THE APPLICATION.
IT APPEARS COMPLIANT, BUT IT HINGES ON THIS ON ONE CASE WITH A LOT OF SUBTLETIES IN THE ANALYSIS AFTER THE EVIDENCE IS HEARD.
SO I, NO, I CANNOT, YOU SAY, DOES THE ORDINANCE
[01:40:01]
HOLD WATER? THE ORDINANCE IS A VALID ORDINANCE, BUT IN TERMS OF HOW IT'S GOING TO COME OUT, UH, THE BOARD HAS 45 DAYS AFTER THE CLOSE OF EVIDENCE TO SORT THROUGH ALL OF IT AND MAKE A DECISION.AND IT DOESN'T REALLY MATTER THAT ANY OF THEM ARE NOT LAWYERS.
I WILL BE HELPING THEM THROUGH THE PROCESS ON THE LEGAL ISSUES.
CAN I JUST MAKE, YEAH, HANG ON.
IS THERE ANYBODY WHO HASN'T GONE A FIRST TIME YET? WENDY WEATHERALL 3 34 MEADOWVIEW DRIVE.
I WAS AT THE, UH, PREVIOUS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING LAST MONTH AND SPOKE THEN, AND I'D JUST LIKE TO SPEAK AGAIN.
I STILL FEEL THAT SO MANY PEOPLE IN THIS ROOM ARE IN OPPOSITION TO THIS PLAN.
RESIDENTS OF THE TOWNSHIP AND NEARBY TOWNSHIPS.
ONCE OPEN SPACE IS GONE, IT'S GONE FOREVER.
AT THE LAST MEETING WHEN I ASK THE QUESTION, I THINK THE GENTLEMAN SAID THAT THIS WAS GOING TO BE AN AGE RESTRICTED COMMUNITY, YOU KNOW, 60 PLUS OR WHATEVER, GOVERNED BY A HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION.
THAT WAS WHAT I HEARD AT THE LAST MEETING.
I LIVED IN A DEVELOPMENT THAT HAD A HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION.
EVENTUALLY THEY GET A BOARD, PEOPLE ARE ELECTED TO THEIR BOARD.
THEY CAN CHANGE THEIR RULES AT ANY TIME.
SO THAT'S SOMETHING TO KEEP IN MIND AS WELL.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE I CAN SAY EXCEPT THAT READING THAT ORDINANCE, NOT BEING A LAWYER, BUT THINKING ABOUT INSTITUTIONAL, IT'S PROBABLY INSTITUTIONAL BECAUSE THE PARK HOUSE EXISTED THERE FOR A LONG, LONG TIME.
IT JUST BOGGLES MY MIND AND I'M INCREDULOUS THAT 1200 INDIVIDUAL FAMILY UNITS COULD IN ANY WAY BE CONSIDERED NURSING FACILITIES.
IT'S NOT A CONTINUING CARE RETIREMENT COMMUNITY.
IT'S GONNA BE 1200 UNITS AND THEN A LITTLE 40 BED NURSING FACILITY SOMEWHERE ON THE PROPERTY.
I THINK IT REALLY STRETCHES THE BOUNDARIES.
AND I THINK IF THE PEOPLE HERE REALLY WANNA MAKE SURE TO CONTINUE OPPOSITION OF THIS, WE NEED TO HAVE A LAWYER FIGHTING FOR OUR POINT OF VIEW.
I, I MISSED YOUR ADDRESS AND NAME AGAIN.
UM, THANK YOU FOR GIVING US AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK.
I'M A RESIDENT, UH, PROPERTY OWNER AT 1 35 WALNUT STREET IN MONTCLAIR, PENNSYLVANIA.
AND I WOULD JUST LIKE TO TAKE A MOMENT, UM, TO SPEAK THAT I DID GO THROUGH THE FLOODING AND IDA, THE LAST TIME I WAS IN THIS ROOM WAS FOR ONE OF THE, UH, MEETINGS TO DISCUSS HOW, UM, THE GOVERNMENT WAS PLANNING TO BUY OUT PROPERTY OWNERS BECAUSE THEIR HOMES WERE CONSIDERED TO BE, UM, BETTER TO BE MADE AS OPEN SPACE RATHER THAN TO USE FEDERAL, UM, DOLLARS IN ORDER TO PROVIDE INSURANCE PAYMENTS TO REBUILD OUR HOMES, WHICH I, I MAY ADD IN CASE YOU'RE NOT AWARE THAT THERE ARE PROPERTY OWNERS WHO STILL CANNOT LIVE IN THEIR HOMES, WHICH WERE DAMAGED BY HURRICANE IDA ON SEPTEMBER 1ST, 2021.
THAT BEING SAID, WHEN WE LOOK AT THIS PLAN, THIS SKETCH, IF I'M UNDERSTANDING THIS IS MY FIRST TIME AT ONE OF YOUR PLANNING MEETINGS, UM, IN THE LOWER LEFT CORNER, I CAN CLEARLY SEE THE SCHUEL RIVER FLOWING THROUGH AND HAVING HAD THE SCHUEL RIVER FLOW INTO OUR PROPERTY, UM, WHEN THE FLOOD OCCURRED AND SEEING THE TREMENDOUS RESPONSE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES TO EVACUATE RESIDENTS AND PROVIDE EMERGENCY MEDICAL CARE FOR, UH, SENIOR CITIZENS WHO LIVE ON WALNUT STREET, WHO NEEDED TO BE EVACUATED.
UM, THANK GOODNESS THERE WERE NO FATALITIES IN, UM, MONTCLAIR DURING THAT INCIDENT.
HOWEVER, THERE WERE IN MONTGOMERY COUNTY, I BELIEVE THERE WERE FIVE RESIDENTS WHO DID DIE IN THAT, UM, NATURAL DISASTER.
THAT BEING SAID, IF THE CONDITIONAL USE HEARING IS GOING TO LOOK AT THIS BEING AN AREA WHERE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE 60, 65 AND OVER,
[01:45:01]
UM, YOU KNOW, SENIOR CITIZENS, PEOPLE WHO DO NEED DIFFERING LEVELS OF MEDICAL AND UH, SUPPORTIVE CARE, I THINK THAT IT IS NOT IF, BUT WHEN THE NEXT CATASTROPHIC FLOOD DOES OCCUR IN OUR AREA, NOT ONLY ARE THE PEOPLE OF MONTCLAIR AND PORT PROVIDENCE GOING TO NEED EMERGENCY SERVICES, BUT THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN THIS COMMUNITY ARE ALREADY GOING TO NEED THAT EMERGENCY, UM, SERVICE PROTECTION.ONE OF THE PROPOSITIONS IS TO HAVE THOSE SERVICES THERE ON THE PROPERTY OR NEARBY.
UM, I WAS LOOKING THROUGH SOME OF THE NOTES.
IT'S, IT'S A LOT TO DIGEST, I HA HAVE TO SAY.
SO, UM, THAT BEING SAID, IT IS NOT A MATTER OF IF, BUT WHEN THE NEXT DISASTER OCCUR, AND IT WILL BE ON EVERYONE'S CONSCIENCE AND THE LEGAL IMPLICATIONS, PUT THAT ASIDE, BUT IT WILL BE ON SOMEONE'S CONSCIENCE THAT WILL THERE BE A LOSS OF LIFE IN THE MONTCLAIR REPORT, PROVIDENCE AREA, BECAUSE WE DO NOT HAVE THE CAPACITY TO PROVIDE SERVICES FOR THIS AREA.
AND I'M NOT SURE IF THE, UM, POSITION OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT WAS FILLED FOR UPPER PROVIDENCE TOWNSHIP BECAUSE THAT WAS A, A BIG ISSUE AT THAT TIME.
BUT I WOULD BE INTERESTED IN WHAT THE EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT OR OF THE TOWNSHIP WOULD HAVE TO SAY ABOUT THIS TYPE OF PLAN.
THE SERVICE IS NEEDED AND ITS RELATIVE CLOSE PROXIMITY TO A FLOODPLAIN WHERE CATASTROPHIC LOSS OF PROPERTY OCCURRED TO THE EXTENT THAT FEMA AND FEMA ARE PROVIDING FUNDS TO PURCHASE THE PROPERTIES AND KNOCK DOWN RESIDENCES IN THAT AREA, WHICH I GUESS THAT GIVES THE TOWNSHIP SOME MORE OPEN SPACE THAT THEY SO DESIRE.
I'M STEVEN WAGNER, TWO 14 NORWOOD STREET IN MONTCLAIR.
UH, IF YOU, IF YOU LOOK AT THE LITTLE PICTURE UP IN THE TOP RIGHT THERE, YOU SEE HOW THE RIVER WINDS AROUND AND THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS SORT OF SURROUNDED BY WATER.
THE AREA AROUND HERE IS WHEN THE BRIDGES ARE EITHER UNDERWATER OR THERE'S A TRACTOR TRAILER ARE STUCK UNDERNEATH AN OVER OVERPASS LIKE GOING INTO PHOENIXVILLE.
UH, IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO GET AROUND IF THERE'S 1200 BUILDINGS, 1200 HOUSES IN THIS DEVELOPMENT, IN THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.
UH, I'M CALLING IT A DEVELOPMENT CAUSE IT'S LOOK, LOOKS LIKE WHAT IT IS.
HALF OF THE PEOPLE LIVING IN THOSE HOUSES PROBABLY HAVE TWO VEHICLES.
THAT'S LIKE 1800 VEHICLES PLUS FIGURE 500 STAFF TO RUN THE FACILITY.
THERE'S NO DIRECT ACCESS OFF OF ONE 13 ONTO 4 22 TO GO IN EITHER DIRECTION.
SO YOU'RE GOING DOWN BLACKROCK ROAD, YOU'RE EITHER GETTING ON IT ONTO 4 22 AT WAWA, OR YOU'RE COMING DOWN THIS WAY AND GOING THROUGH ROYERS FORD WHERE THE SCHOOLS ARE AND TRAFFIC'S GONNA BE A PROBLEM.
SO THAT'S, THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY.
NOBODY ELSE ON THE LIST THEN? ALL RIGHT.
I JUST WANTED TO ADD, UH, RELEVANT TO PEOPLE STAYING IN TOUCH, I BELIEVE THAT THE WEBSITE, AND PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, HAS SUBSCRIPTIONS TO THE SUPERVISORS MEETING.
SO EVERYBODY, IF YOU WANNA STAY INVOLVED, SUBSCRIBE TO THE SUPERVISORS AGENDAS AND MEETING.
SO, UM, DID, DID THE, WHAT DO YOU, OH, I'M SORRY.
THAT'S, I'M STEPHANIE UR 3 0 1 VISTA.
UM, I TOTALLY AGREE WITH EVERYTHING THAT'S BEEN SAID TONIGHT.
UM, I JUST WANNA PIGGYBACK ON WHAT THE GENTLEMAN JUST SAID ABOUT TRAFFIC.
UM, WE LIVE BACK OFF OF JA BUSS.
UM, NOT VERY HUGE DEVELOPMENTS, BUT WE ONLY HAVE ONE WAY OUT
WE HAVE THE TRAIN BEHIND US, THE RIVER ON ONE SIDE, AND THE OLD CROMBIE PLANT ON THE OTHER.
UM, TORI BRIGHT MENTIONED THIS LAST YEAR, LAST YEAR, LAST TIME WE WERE HERE, AND WE, THAT FOUR-WAY INTERSECTION, WE TOTALLY RISK OUR LIVES COMING OUT OF THERE EVERY DAY BECAUSE NO ONE KNOWS WHAT THEY'RE DOING.
[01:50:01]
TIME ABOUT THEIR POSSIBLY GO BEING A CIRCLE PUT IN THERE.THE CIRCLE WENT IN OVER AT BY WEGMANS, AND THOSE 500 PLUS APARTMENTS AREN'T EVEN FILLED AND NOBODY KNOWS WHAT THEY'RE DOING.
I MEAN, I, I KNOW IT'S NEW, BUT I JUST CAN'T EVEN IMAGINE THE TRAFFIC THAT COMES OVER THE BRIDGE AT NIGHT.
UM, AND THEN I KNOW THE SINGLE LANE BRIDGE WOULD HAVE TO BE REDONE, BUT I KNOW NO TRAFFIC EVALUATIONS OR WHATEVER HAVE BEEN DONE UNTIL THE ENGINEERS COME.
BUT NO ONE'S REALLY, I THINK OLD STATE THAT, I DON'T EVEN KNOW HOW THEY WOULD CHANGE THAT BECAUSE IT'S A BLIND CURVE.
THERE COULDN'T BE A STOP SIGN.
THERE COULDN'T BE A TRAFFIC LIGHT.
I'VE LIVED HERE FOR 26 YEARS AND WE HAVE NUMEROUS TIMES ASKED ABOUT THE FOUR WAY INTERSECTION, AND WE'VE BEEN TOLD THAT ONE 13 S A STATE ROAD AND A LIGHT CAN'T BE PUT THERE.
SO, I MEAN, YOU CAN SIT THERE AND THERE'S A NEAR MISS ALMOST EVERY TIME YOU PULL OUT.
AND BASICALLY IT'S LIKE, UNLESS SOMEONE'S KILLED THERE, THEY'RE NOT GONNA BE ABLE TO DO ANYTHING.
SO I JUST FEEL LIKE THIS IN ITSELF IS COMPLETELY OVERWHELMING TO ME.
NOT AT ALL UNDERSTANDABLE, BUT ALL OF IT THAT'S GOING TO BE AFFECTED BY IT.
EVERYBODY USES THIS WAY TO GET INTO PHOENIXVILLE.
IT'S NOT JUST OUR COUPLE, YOU KNOW, THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE RIGHT THERE.
SO I JUST WANTED TO MENTION THAT.
REGINA KUPFER SCHMIDT 9 78 SECOND AVENUE.
WOULD THAT BE GOOD? OR NOW? K U P F E R S E H.
K U P F E R S C H M I D T I WOULD LIKE TO VOTE.
AND MANY OF THESE PEOPLE, EVEN THOUGH YOU'RE NOT CALLING FOR A VOTE FOR A SECOND LAWYER, I HAVE BEEN AT A FEW MEETINGS RIGHT NOW AND WITH YOU KIND, SIR, I FEEL LIKE IT'S A, AN OPEN AND SHUT CASE, WHICH IT IS NOT AN OPEN AND SHUT PAGE, BUT WITH YOU, US THE BOARD HIM THAT I FEEL LIKE FROM EVERYTHING YOU SAID, AND YOU MAY NOT MEAN TO COME ACROSS THIS WAY, THAT YOU FEEL IT'S AN OPEN AND SHUT CASE.
I THINK YOU MISUNDERSTAND THE SECOND LAWYER.
YOU'RE LAWYER, THE SECOND LAWYER DOESN'T MEAN I'M BEING REPLACED.
I'M SORRY THAT YOU NO, YOU WERE, DO YOU THAT'S FINE.
I, MY WHAT I HAVE TRIED TO EMPHASIZE TO YOU, I JUST WANNA SAY THAT I'M ASKING THAT TO BE A SECOND LAWYER BECAUSE A LOT OF US FEEL WITH YOU THAT IT'S AN OPEN AND SHUT CASE.
THERE, THERE HAVE BEEN, UM, THERE'VE, I'VE, I'VE RECEIVED A NUMBER OF, UM, PERSONAL INSULTS IN CONNECTION WITH THIS APPLICATION.
UM, I I TH I'VE TRIED TO BE AS CLEAR AS I POSSIBLY CAN THAT IT WILL BE CONTESTED AT THE HEARING AND IF THERE'S A BASIS ON WHICH TO DENY IT WILL BE, UH, YES, I GAVE AN OPINION IN ADVANCE THAT SUPERFICIALLY IT DOES APPEAR TO MEET THE CRITERIA OF THE ORDINANCE.
BUT FORTUNATELY FOR YOU MA'AM AND THE OTHERS WHO THINK LIKE YOU, UH, IT IS MORE LIKE, FAR MORE LIKELY THAN NOT THAT THE OTHER ATTORNEY WILL BE, UM, INVOLVED IN THE CASE.
UH, I, WHAT I TRIED TO MAKE CLEAR IS THAT THERE WAS EVEN A CASE WHERE THE ATTORNEY WAS NOT NEUTRAL IN HIS PRESENTATION TO THE WI IN, IN HIS QUESTIONING OF THE WITNESSES AT THE HEARING.
THE CASE WAS REVERSED BECAUSE THE ME WAS NOT NEUTRAL.
AND I HAVE TRIED TO BE, TO BE CLEAR THAT I'M BEING NEUTRAL.
AND IF YOU TAKE THAT AS ME BEING WEAK OR EQUIVOCAL THAT I CAN'T, I, I DON'T, I WON'T SAY I DON'T CARE, BUT I DON'T, OKAY, WE DON'T, SOME OF US, I'M AWARE THAT, THAT EVERYTHING YOU SAY, I'M SORRY, MS. KFR SCHMIDT, SHUT TAPE.
IF YOU ARE GOING TO BE SPEAKING, YOU NEED TO BE IN THE MIC BECAUSE THEY WILL NOT HEAR YOU ON THE TAPE AND YOU WILL NOT BE ABLE TO BE HEARD.
SO IF YOU WANT TO CONTINUE, PLEASE DO STEP UP AND YOU CAN SAY WHAT YOU NEED TO SAY.
I'M NOT SAYING ANYTHING AGAINST YOU PERSONALLY.
I'M SAYING I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU FEEL.
AND YOU MAY FEEL VERY DIFFERENTLY THAN YOU'RE COMING ACROSS.
I'LL ALLOW FOR THAT, BUT I CAN ONLY GO BY.
SOME OF US CAN ONLY GO BY WHAT WE HEAR, AND IT FEELS LIKE YOU THINK IT'S AN OPEN AND SHUT CASE.
IF YOU DON'T, THAT'S WONDERFUL.
BUT LET'S GET A SECOND LAWYER IF YOU DO.
BUT LET'S GET A SECOND LAWYER.
[01:55:05]
ALL RIGHT.UM, MR. MO, UM, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE? I THINK YOU INDICATED OR AT THE BEGINNING THAT YOU DIDN'T HAVE ADDITIONAL WAIT, APPARENTLY WE'RE NOT DONE.
I WAS VISUALLY LOOKING AT MR. GRACE.
I I WAS WONDERING ACTUALLY, BECAUSE I THINK IT'S A FULL HOUSE WE DID THIS LAST MONTH.
UM, IT'S IS THERE A POSSIBILITY THAT THE APPLICANT CAN TALK THROUGH THE SKETCH? TALK THROUGH WHAT? TALK THROUGH THE SKETCH AT THE LAST MEETING.
I THINK WE ASKED WHERE ON THE SKETCH, BECAUSE YOU KNOW, WHEN WE'RE, WE'RE LOOKING AT IT ON A PAGE, YOU CAN'T REALLY SEE WHAT SOME OF THE, THE SPECIFICATIONS ARE AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
YOU HAVE TO COME TO THE TOWNSHIP.
I IMAGINE MOST OF US WORK OR, OR HAVE, UH, NINE TO FIVE KIND OF JOBS THAT PREVENT US FROM ACTUALLY COMING DURING THE WORKING HOURS OF THE TOWNSHIP.
SO I'M WONDERING IF THIS EVENING, COULD YOU FIRST OF ALL TELL US WHERE IS THE ASSISTED LIVING BUILDING ON THIS SKETCH? CAN CAN WE DO THAT? CAN, CAN SOMEONE SHOW US WHERE IT IS? YEAH.
CAN YOU JUST SHOW WHERE THE ASSISTED LIVING IS? THIS IS JAKE PICKERING.
AND DOES THIS GET ON CAMERA? I MEAN, DOES, YES.
I AM JAKE PICKERING WITH BOWLER.
SO THIS BUILDING RIGHT HERE IS THE ASSISTED LIVING
I'LL COME OVER TO YOU SINCE WE'RE GONNA PROBABLY DO THIS.
SO MY QUESTION WAS WHAT'S THE, WHERE IS THE ASSISTED LIVING? AND THAT'S THE ASSISTED LIVING BUILDING RIGHT THERE.
WHICH IS NEXT TO WHAT? OVER HERE? THOSE ARE APARTMENT BUILDINGS.
UM, FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO HAVE EVER VISITED AN ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY OR CHANEL, THERE'S USUALLY A MAIN ENTRANCEWAY.
WHERE'S THE ENTRANCEWAY TO THE ASSISTED LIVING? THAT HAS NOT BEEN DETERMINED YET, BUT BY THE, BY THE ARCHITECT HAS NOT BEEN DETERMINED.
I THOUGHT YOU MEANT THEN JUST TO THE BUILDING.
UH, THE R I KNOW IT'S A LITTLE BLURRY ON THE SCREEN HERE, BUT THE ROADWAYS ARE OUT, IN, OUT IN FRONT HERE.
THIS IS A PARKING AREA TOO, THE MAIN ROAD OF ONE 13 BLACK ROCK ROAD.
I'M JUST CURIOUS IF WE COULD WALK THROUGH THE ACTUAL SKETCH.
UH, WHERE, WHERE'S THE ACTUAL ENTRANCE OFF OF? WHERE'S THE MAIN ENTRANCE FOR THE ASSISTED LIVING? RIGHT HERE.
OFF OF ONE OF THE SURROUNDING ROADS, CORRECT? YEAH.
SO THAT IS ACTUALLY, THERE'S A, THERE'S A DEVELOPMENT RIGHT HERE, IS THAT CORRECT? RIGHT.
AND THEN THIS IS THE ENTRANCEWAY IS WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? YES.
SO WHAT ARE THESE OTHER BUILDINGS ALL AROUND HERE? THESE ARE ALL TOWNS RIGHT HERE.
AND THESE ARE APARTMENT BUILDINGS, CORRECT? YES.
AND THEN ARE THERE, SO ALL IN HERE IS ALL TOWNHOUSES? YES.
ARE THERE, IS THERE NURSING CARE IN THE ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY? ANSWER THAT.
I'M, I'M CUR IT, IT'S ACTUALLY MR. HAMLIN.
HE KNOWS NOTHING ABOUT THE INDIVIDUAL TYPES OF UNITS.
OKAY, SO I'M SORRY, TOWNHOUSE.
WE WENT THROUGH THE WHOLE THING.
ACTUALLY, YOU DID NOT GO THROUGH THE WHOLE THING.
YOU POINTED OUT WHERE AN ASSISTED LIVING BUILDING WAS TWICE.
YOU DIDN'T POINT OUT ALL THOSE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING UNITS OF 2,400 SQUARE FOOT MINIMUM.
WE'RE NOT POINTING ANYTHING ELSE OUT, MA'AM, I'M SORRY.
BECAUSE, BECAUSE IF I GO INTO ONE OF THOSE, I HAVE TO MEET CRITERIA MEDICAL CRITERIA FOR ASSISTED LIVING.
AND AGAIN, WE'RE GETTING BACK INTO ARGUING ABOUT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AND WE'RE NOT GONNA TALK ABOUT IT HERE.
AND, AND YOU COULD COME TO MR. HAMLIN, I WILL COME TO THE HEARING HERE, EVERY SINGLE THING, AND I WILL BRING EVERY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES REPRESENTATIVE
[02:00:01]
THAT I CAN TO COME TO THAT HEARING.INCLUDING OUR SECRETARY OF HUMAN SERVICES.
UM, I'M SORRY, COULD YOU REPEAT THAT LAST THING? I'M SURE IT WAS NOT HEARD.
IF WE HAVE TO INCLUDE OUR SECRETARY OF HUMAN SERVICES.
FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, YOU SEEM IMPORTANT.
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE YOU HAD IT ON THE RECORD.
UH, IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE, UH, FROM YOU, MR. MO? UH, WE HAVE NOTHING FURTHER.
I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY, UH, WE UNDERSTAND THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS NOT GONNA REALLY COMMENT ON THE, UH, CONDITIONAL USE, BUT WE WOULD LIKE A RECOMMENDATION ON THE PRELIM, ON THE TENTATIVE PLAN BECAUSE AS YOU KNOW, EVEN IF YOU RECOMMEND THE TENTATIVE PLAN AND THE CONDITIONAL USE IS NOT APPROVED, WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING.
SO, SO WE'RE, UH, MEMBERS, THERE'S, THERE'S TWO ITEMS THAT ARE PENDING.
UM, AND AS EVERYBODY WHO'S COMES TO THESE NODES THAT YOU GENERALLY DO ONE OF THREE THINGS.
YOU EITHER RECOMMEND APPROVAL, YOU RECOMMEND NOT BEING APPROVED, OR YOU CHOOSE NOT TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION.
NOW WE'RE MAKING A RECOMMENDATION ON THE TENTATIVE SKETCH FIRST.
SO LET'S DO WELL TENTATIVE SKETCH EITHER WAY.
YEAH, LET'S DO THE TENTATIVE SKETCH.
AND THEN THE, UM, TENTATIVE SKETCH IS, UM, YOU KNOW, AS WE'VE SAID, THAT'S A VERY, IT'S FAIRLY STRAIGHTFORWARD.
THEREIN WILL COMPLY STATUS ON ALL THE REVIEW LETTERS.
SO, SO I'LL, I'LL, I'LL HANDLE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE TENTATIVE SCRATCH OR DISPROVE THE TENTATIVE SKETCH.
UH, I'LL OBTAIN A MOTION IN THAT AREA.
I HAVE A QUESTION FIRST FOR MR. OH SURE.
MR. MULLEN OR ANY OF THE REPRESENTATIVES OF THE, UH, PROPERTY, WAS DR.
RIFKIN AWARE OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING OR THIS MEETING AND THE DATE THAT IT WAS BEING HELD? WAS HE, HE WATCHED THE LAST MEETING ON TELEVISION.
DID HE, UH, GIVE ANY COMMENTS TO, UH, ANY OF HIS INTENTIONS TO ATTEND EITHER THE DECEMBER MEETING OR THIS ONE? AND IF SO, WHAT WAS HIS REASONING TO NOT BE HERE? AT THIS POINT? WE'RE PROCEEDING WITH THE PLAN AS SUBMIT A, DID HE GIVE ANY COMMENTS TO WHY HE'S NOT PRESENT? I'M SORRY.
DID HE GIVE ANY REASON TO WHY HE CHOSE NOT TO BE PRESENT? NO, I THINK, GARY, YOU WANT TO ANSWER THAT? I'M HERE REPRESENTING THE OWNERSHIP INTEREST.
UH, I, MY, MY PROPERTY'S ON THIS PICTURE.
UM, I HAVE TWO TEENAGE BOYS, UM, ONE WHO'S DRIVING, UH, HE DRIVES DOWN OLD STATE ROAD EVERY DAY, AND HE KNOWS ABOUT THIS PROPOSAL.
AND HE ASKED ME, WHAT, WHAT IS THE PLAN, DAD? WHAT IS THIS? UM, MY OLDEST SON, UNFORTUNATELY, FOR HIM FOR 15 YEARS, HE FOLLOWED ME AROUND AS A MILITARY BRAT.
AND NOW HE GETS TO LIVE IN ONE RESIDENCE, ONE SCHOOL, AND HOPEFULLY STAY IN THIS AREA FOR THE MOST HIS ADULT LIFE.
UM, HE'S ASKING, WHAT, WHAT IS THE, THE PLAN HERE? AND MY QUESTION IS, HAS MR. RIFKIN OR THE LLC OR ANYONE HERE, ARE THEY, ARE THEY ABLE TO EXPLAIN TO THE PUBLIC WHAT THE VISION IS OF THIS IN 40 YEARS? WHAT, WHAT, WHAT IS THE PURPOSE? WHAT, WHAT COULD YOU TELL THE PUBLIC AND MYSELF AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION AS WE'RE, AS WE'RE CONSIDERING A PLAN, AND MAYBE IT'S A TENTATIVE VISION, BUT WHAT IS THE VISION OF THIS? BASICALLY WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING, AND IT, IT'S OUR OPINION.
I'M ASKING IF THERE IS A VISION AND HAS IT BEEN EXPRESSED, AND COULD YOU SHARE IT? YES.
THEIR, THE VISION IS TO PROVIDE A NEEDED HOUSING FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE AGING 62 YEARS AND UP IN A SITUATION THAT DOES NOT REQUIRE THEM TO GO INTO AN ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY WHERE THEY HAVE TO PAY $600,000 AND THEN $3,000 A MONTH, BUT THEY CAN BUY THEIR OWN HOME AND STILL GET THE SAME BENEFITS.
AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GONNA PROPOSE TO DO WITH THIS ENTIRE FACILITY.
WHEN IT'S COMPLETED, THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE HERE WILL BE WELL TAKEN CARE OF AND BE ABLE TO AGE IN PLACE.
AND THAT'S SUSTAINED BEYOND 20, 30, 40 YEARS.
IT, THE VISION IS THAT, UH, THAT'LL BE MAINTAINED.
AND PART OF A, A VALUABLE, POSITIVE PART OF THIS COMMUNITY.
IN FACT, IN FACT, UH, AS YOUR SOLICITOR WILL TELL YOU, WE WILL HAVE TO PRESENT A HOMEOWNER'S DECLARATION FOR APPROVAL BY THE TOWNSHIP.
PART OF WHAT THAT DECLARATION WILL SAY, THAT IF FOR ANY REASON, THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE HERE DO NOT MAINTAIN IT, THAT THE TOWNSHIP HAS A RIGHT TO MAINTAIN IT AND THEN COLLECT FROM THEM THE COST FOR MAINTENANCE.
SO THERE'S NO REASON WHY
PLEASE, PLEASE, IF YOU COULD JUST LET MR. MULLIN FINISH THE LAST COMMENT, I'D APPRECIATE THAT.
[02:05:01]
BASICALLY WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS, IS THAT THERE IS, THERE'S NO FAIL HERE.AND WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN IS THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE HERE ARE GONNA BE ABLE TO AGE IN PLACE, WHICH IS VERY IMPORTANT TODAY.
I MEAN, WE HAVE MARKET STUDY, WHICH WE'LL PRESENT AT THE CONDITIONAL USE HEARING, WHICH SHOWS THAT THERE IS A DEMAND AND A LACK OF THIS TYPE HOUSING FOR PEOPLE WHO NEED IT.
I I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SAY LAST COMMENT TO THE COMMISSION.
UM, I KNOW THIS IS A TENTATIVE SKETCH, AND WE'VE HAD TWO MEETINGS FOR THIS, BUT THE OUTCRY FROM THE PUBLIC AND THE COMMENTS MADE AND THE QUESTIONS ASKED HAVE BEEN NOTHING SHORT BUT IMPRESSIVE.
UM, BUT I DON'T THINK THE APPLICANTS HAVE DONE THEIR DUE DILIGENCE KNOWING THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THIS PROJECT TO THIS COMMUNITY.
WHAT WE'VE SEEN, AT LEAST WHAT I'VE SEEN, IS A MINIMALIST APPROACH.
I'VE NEVER SEEN A PLAN WITH ONE GRAPHIC BROUGHT TO THIS PLANNING COMMISSION.
AND, AND I KNOW I'M THE JUNIOR MEMBER OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION, BUT THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THIS PROJECT, AND YOU BROUGHT ONE GRAPHIC THAT COULD BE BARELY READ.
YOU DID NOT GO THROUGH ALL THE DETAILS AT THE LAST MEETING.
YOU DID NOT SHARE ANY ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
WE'VE HAD ONE MEETING PREVIOUS TO THIS.
A LOT OF QUESTIONS WERE RAISED.
NO ONE HAS MADE ANY COMMENTS AT THIS MEETING TO ADDRESS ANY OF THOSE PREVIOUS QUESTIONS.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS, HISTORICAL STRUCTURE, COMPACTS.
ANOTHER QUESTION WAS BROUGHT UP OF BURIAL GROUNDS.
MR. KRU, WHEN, WHEN THAT QUESTION WAS RAISED, I SAID, WE ARE WELL AWARE OF THE BURIAL GROUND AND WE WILL TREAT THAT WITH RESPECT.
AT NO POINT IN YOUR OPENING STATEMENTS HAVE YOU MADE A COMMENT TO SHOW THE PUBLIC THAT THIS IS IN YOUR BEST INTEREST TO TAKE CARE OF THE COMMUNITY.
IT WAS ONLY IN RESPONSE TO THE QUESTIONS AND THE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS THAT CAME UP IN DECEMBER.
YOU HAD A VERY SHORT RESPONSE.
YOU'VE GIVEN US NO ADDITIONAL GRAPHICS.
THERE'S BEEN NO RESPONSES TO THOSE SPECIFICS.
THERE'S A DISCUSSION OF A HOA AT THE FIRST MEETING.
NO DISCUSSION OF THAT THIS TIME TO THE, THE COMMISSION.
I THINK THIS IS A VERY AMATEUR APPROACH.
THIS ISN'T, WE'RE, WE'RE NOT AT, IN MY PERSPECTIVE FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION, THERE'S A LOT OF ADDITIONAL WORK THAT SHOULD BE HANDLED.
AND WE NEED TO MAKE A MOTION AND TAKE A VOTE ON THAT MOTION.
SO, MR. KPA, IF YOU WANT TO TAKE, MAKE A MOTION THAT THIS IS WHATEVER YOUR MOTION IS, THEN WE'LL VOTE ON THAT MOTION.
COULD YOU, COULD YOU, UH, UH, COULD BE, WE'RE NOT READY YET.
COULD YOU REFRESH TO US WITH OUR OPTIONS ON WELL, THAT COULD BE THE MOTION.
YOU COULD EITHER, YOU CAN MAKE A MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO THE SUPERVISORS, RECOMMEND, UH, THAT IT NOT BE APPROVED OR MAKE A DECISION TO NOT MAKE A RECOMMENDATION OR TO MAKE A NO, NO APPROACH TO IT.
AT THIS POINT, SOMEBODY HAS TO MAKE A MOTION ON ONE OF THOSE THREE AREAS.
I, I WOULD JUST ASK THAT, DOES ANYONE ELSE IN THE COMMISSION HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? I KNOW THAT THE MOST IMPORTANT THING WAS HEARING FROM THE PUBLIC, I BELIEVE, BUT ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS, OR DO WE FEEL THAT WE NEED ANOTHER SESSION? NO, I DON'T.
I, I THINK WE'RE, YOU KNOW, WE, WE UNDERSTAND THE ISSUES.
WE UNDERSTAND THERE IS ISSUES THAT AREN'T ADDRESSED.
WE UNDERSTAND THERE ARE A LOT OF CIRCUMSTANCES THAT HAVE YET TO BE DETERMINED, LIKE THE HEARING THAT WE'VE TALKED SO MUCH ABOUT TONIGHT.
SO THERE'S A LOT OF ISSUES THAT HAVE NOT BEEN FARMED OUT YET.
SO AGAIN, THE MOTION SHOULD BE TO PROVE THE TENTATIVE SKETCH AND THEN WE CAN MOVE TO THE PRELIMINARY USAGE PROOF.
I, UH, I, LIKE I MENTIONED MY MAKE A MOTION.
I, I HAVEN'T HEARD ENOUGH DETAIL.
I THINK THAT DUE DILIGENCE FOR THIS PROJECT.
SO I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE MAKE NO RECOMMENDATION ON THIS AT THIS TIME.
SO ON THE TENTATIVE SKETCH, THAT'S ON THE TENTATIVE SKETCH, APPROVE, YOU MAKE A MOTION NOT TO APPROVE THE TENTATIVE SKETCH.
I MAKE A MOTION NOT TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE BEHALF ON THE TENTATIVE SKETCH.
OKAY? SO I GOT A MOTION NOT TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE PRO TENTATIVE SKETCH TO THE SUPERVISORS.
AND I HAVE A SECOND FROM GILLY, RIGHT? YES.
OKAY, SO THE TENTATIVE SKETCH HAS BEEN DENIED.
SO NOW LET'S GO TO THE, HANG ON, YOU ACTUALLY, EXCUSE ME.
THE VOTE WAS TO NOT MAKE A RECOMMENDATION, RIGHT? DEVON WAS NOT TO
[02:10:01]
MAKE A RECOMMENDATION.NOT THAT'S NOT DENIAL WAS NOT DENIAL.
YOU KNOW, YOU, WE ALL HEARD WHAT WE SAID, SO WE ALL KNOW WHAT WAS SAID.
SO NOW THE VOTE WOULD BE ON THE CONDITIONAL USE.
SO NOW WE HAVE TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE SUPERVISORS ON UNCONDITIONAL USE.
SAME THREE OPTIONS, SAME THREE OPTIONS.
NONE, SOMETHING OR, UH, A DENIAL.
I MAKE A MOTION TO DENY NO ON WHAT? ON HOW THEY SHOULD VOTE.
I'M SORRY, I DIDN'T HEAR THAT.
I MAKE A MOTION TO DENY, TO DENY THE CONDITIONAL USE.
OKAY, SO I'VE GOT A MOTION TO DENY THE CONDITIONAL USE IN A SECOND.
DO I HAVE ANY OTHER COMMENTS? ALL IN FAVOR OF DENIAL.
NOW THIS IS DENIAL OF THE CONDITIONAL USE.
SO IT HAS BEEN DENIED RECOMMENDATION TO THE COMMISSION, TO THE SUPERVISORS.
WILL, THAT WE DENY AT THIS POINT WHAT WE'VE SEEN AND HEARD TO THIS POINT.
IS THAT CORRECT? UH, JOE, FOR THE, THE, YOUR RECOMMENDATION? YEAH.
YOU MADE A RECOMMENDATION THAT THEY DENY THE REQUESTED CONDITIONAL USE RIGHT AT THIS POINT? YEP.
THIS IS NOT A DENIAL, IT'S A RECOMMENDATION THAT THEY DO THAT.
AGAIN, WE ALL UNDERSTAND THAT, AND I KNOW THAT'S LEGAL LE THE LEGALESE, BUT WE ALL UNDERSTAND ED, WHAT WE'VE, WHAT WE VOTED ON HERE.
I'M SORRY, WHO MADE THE REC? WHO MADE THE SECOND? UH, AJ.
SO, UM, ANYTHING ELSE, JEFF, ON THE AGENDA? CAN I SAY THAT ENDS THE PORTION, THIS PORTION OF THE AGENDA AND WE'LL MOVE ON TO WHAT ELSE IS ON THE AGENDA, CORRECT, JEFF? YEAH.
ALL RIGHT, SO WE'RE GONNA MOVE ON TO THE OTHER
[DISCUSSION: FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS]
POINTS, WHAT THAT MEANS.DO YOU WANNA EXPLAIN THAT, JOE? WHAT WE JUST VOTED ON? SO, SO THE, UM, THE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION VOTED TO NOT MAKE ANY RECOMMENDATION EITHER WAY ON THE, UM, TENTATIVE SKETCH PLAN.
AND THEY MADE A RECOMMENDATION THAT THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, WHEN THEY ULTIMATELY VOTE ON THE CONDITIONAL USE, THEY'RE RECOMMENDING THAT THEY DENY THE REQUESTED RELIEF.
SO THAT ENDS THIS PORTION OF THE MEETING.
UM, WE STILL HAVE A MEETING GO ON, SO I'D APPRECIATE IT IF YOU'D LEAVE, IF YOU'RE GONNA LEAVE TO PLEASE DO IT QUIETLY SO WE CAN CONTINUE OUR MEETING.
SO, UH, NEXT ON THE AGENDA, I GUESS IS NEXT MEETING.
I'M GONNA GIVE PEOPLE A MINUTE CUZ OKAY.
OKAY, SIR, WE STILL HAVE A MEETING GOING ON.
I, UH, IT'S DOWN TO DOLL MURMUR AT THIS POINT.
UM, FOR FEBRUARY 1ST, THAT WOULD BE OUR NEXT SCHEDULED MEETING.
UM, RIGHT NOW THE ONLY THING WE HAVE ON THE AGENDA IS THE SPRING FORD SCHOOL DISTRICT, THEIR MINOR SUBDIVISION.
WE'LL, I ASSUME WE'LL BE, I ASSUME THAT WILL STILL BE ON THE AGENDA.
WHAT, WHAT IS THAT? EXPLAIN AGAIN WHAT THAT IS.
IF YOU DRIVE DOWN OAK, THERE'S A ROAD BEHIND THE SCHOOL OAK THAT'S NOT OAK.
IT'S, THERE'S A, I'M DRAWING THE BLANK ON THE NAME OF THE ROAD.
THERE'S A SMALL MINOR SUBDIVISION.
IT'S ALREADY BEEN THROUGH THE PROCESS WITH US.
YOU'VE ALREADY MADE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS THAT IT, IT BE APPROVED, BUT THEY'VE CHANGED THE PLAN.
NOT ALL THAT SIGNIFICANTLY, BUT THEY'VE CHANGED THE PLAN ENOUGH THAT I FELT IT NEEDED TO COME BACK TO YOU TO EITHER AFFIRM YOUR RECOMMENDATION OR TO LOOK AT THE NEW INFORMATION.
IS THAT THROUGH THE PROCESS OF, OF LOOKING AT THE DEVELOPMENT, THE FIRE MARSHAL AND, AND THE TRAFFIC ENGINEER SAID WE NEED A TURNAROUND AREA.
WE NEED SOME OTHER ROAD IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH THERE THAT YOU'RE CREATING THAT WE DIDN'T NEED BEFORE.
SO THAT'S WHAT'S ON THE AGENDA.
THERE'S STILL SOME OPEN QUESTIONS, BUT I THINK WE CAN GET THROUGH IT AT THAT MEETING.
THAT'S THE ONLY THING WE HAVE LISTED FOR THAT AGENDA.
BUT YOU SAY THEY'VE CANCELED IN THE PAST.
THEY'VE PUT THEY HAVE MOVED AROUND IN THE PAST.
THEY WERE SCHEDULED FOR JANUARY 4TH AND THEN THEY MOVED TO THIS DATE.
SO, SO THEY YOU THINK IT'S PRETTY, PRETTY SET THOUGH? I I THINK IT'S PRETTY.
SO, UM, THE NE THE NEXT WOULD BE FEBRUARY 15TH.
UM, SINCE WE DON'T HAVE PARKHOUSE, UH, I'VE PUT THIS TENTATIVELY ON THERE.
UM, WHAT WORKED OUT SINCE NOW WE DON'T HAVE PARKHOUSE, BUT 1 72 HOPWOOD ROAD TOWNHOUSES.
THAT'S THE, THE DEVELOPMENT AT THE TOP OF THE HILL BY GALMAN YEP.
THAT'S ASSOCIATED WITH THEIR PRELIMINARY PLAN
[02:15:01]
IS, IS READY.WELL, LET ME, LET ME REITERATE.
WE HAD A MEETING LAST WEEK THAT STRETCHED ON FOR A COUPLE HOURS.
WE WENT THROUGH SOME OF THE ENGINEERING ISSUES.
WE'VE WORKED THROUGH SOME ENGINEERING ISSUES AND THEY'RE GONNA RESUBMIT SOME PLANS AND WE'RE GONNA HAVE A RE-REVIEW IN TIME FOR THIS MEETING.
SO WHAT THAT WILL DO IS WE'LL TAKE GILMORE'S 11 PAGE LETTER AND HOPEFULLY REDUCE IT DOWN QUITE A NUMBER.
WE'LL SEE
UH, WHAT'S NOT, WE UNDERSTAND I'M NOT BEING UP ON DAVE BY ANY STRETCH.
THAT'S JUST THE WAY THESE LETTERS WORK SOMETIMES, BUT THE IDEA IS THAT WE WANT TO BRING PEOPLE IN WITH A LETTER THAT'S NOT VOLUMINOUS.
WE UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT THAT'S THE, THE, THE GOAL IS TO GET IT SHORTER.
UM, ALSO ON THAT MEETING, I THINK I WAS ASKED TODAY TO PUT, UM, THE FINAL PLAN.
THERE'S VALLEY FORGE BAPTIST IS PUTTING AN ADDITION ONTO THE BACK OF THEIR BUILDING.
I THINK I EMAILED THAT TO EVERYBODY.
WELL, THEY'VE BEEN PUTTING, THEY'VE ALREADY PUT ONE ON NOW THEY'RE PUTTING ANOTHER, THEY ANOTHER ONE.
SO THAT'S AN AMENDED FINAL PLAN THAT WILL BE ON THIS AGENDA.
UM, I THINK EVERYBODY'S REVIEWING IT RIGHT NOW.
I, I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW
THEN THE ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COUNCIL MEETING.
OUR NEXT MEETING FOR THAT WILL BE THE 15TH AT SIX O'CLOCK.
AND WE WILL DETERMINE WHAT'S ON THAT AGENDA.
I MEAN, WE HAVE SOME IDEAS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT, BUT WE'LL FIRM THAT AGENDA UP AS WE GET CLOSER.
SO ANY OTHER COMMENTS TONIGHT? COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS OR, WE HAD FUN TONIGHT, SO NICOLE CAN'T STAND IT, SO IF NOT, I'LL TAKE A MOTION TO, UH, ADJOURN.
I'LL MAKE, I GOT A MOTION FOR BOB SECOND.