[00:00:01]
ALL RIGHTY.[CALL TO ORDER ]
RIGHT.I'M CALLING THIS, UH, MEETING TO ORDER FOR A SPECIAL, UH, TOWNSHIP MEETING FOR THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS THURSDAY, APRIL 18TH.
UM, LET'S STAND FOR THE PPLE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
LEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG, THE UNITED STATES TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS.
ONE, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL HERE, KELLY.
DO YOU WANT ME HEAR HER DOWN THE END? IT DOESN'T MATTER.
[MOTION TO APPROVE BOARD AGENDA ]
OKAY.UM, I WANT TO BRING UP THE FIRST MOTION TO APPROVE THE BOARD AGENDA.
I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE BOARD AGENDA.
[Additional Item ]
AND THEN I AM GOING TO HAND IT OVER TO GREG, OUR SPECIAL COUNSEL, AND HE'S GOING TO EXPLAIN THE PURPOSE OF THIS SPECIAL MEETING.UH, THANK YOU EVERYONE FOR COMING OUT TONIGHT.
SO, TONIGHT'S, UH, SPECIAL MEETING IS FOR THE PURPOSE OF, UH, ALL THINGS RELATED TO THE PARKHOUSE DEVELOPMENT, UM, AND THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY RS FOR HOLDINGS TONIGHT.
THE MAJOR PURPOSE OF THIS EVENING IS THE, A THE APPLICANT IS HERE BASED ON A SUBMISSION FOR A ZONING AMENDMENT THAT WAS SUBMITTED RECENTLY TO GIVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE A PRESENTATION TO BOTH THE BOARD AND THE PUBLIC ON THEIR, UH, APPLICATION TO, UH, DEVELOP THE PROPERTY IN A PARTICULAR WAY.
I BELIEVE YOU'RE ALL AWARE THAT THAT PROPOSAL AND ITS SUBMITTED FORM HAS BEEN POSTED ON THE WEBSITE, UH, FOR SOME TIME NOW, AND YOU'VE PROBABLY HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW IT.
THE, UH, PROCESS FOR SUBMITTING A ZONING, UH, AMENDMENT IS ONE THAT IS OPEN FOR ANYONE TO SUBMIT A ZONING AMENDMENT TO THE TOWNSHIP AND IS IN THE DISCRETION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TO CONSIDER A ZONING AMENDMENT.
AS YOU ALSO ALL KNOW, THE, THERE IS A PROPOSAL UNDER THE TOWNSHIP'S CURRENT ZONING REGULATIONS FOR, UH, DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY, UH, UNDER A USE THAT IS PERMITTED BY CONDITIONAL USE.
A CONDITIONAL USE IS A USE PERMITTED BY THE ZONING ORDINANCE IF AN APPLICANT CAN SHOW THAT THEY MEET ALL THE CRITERIA CONTAINED IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE.
THAT CURRENT PROPOSAL, UH, WHICH WE HAVE, UH, A HEARING, UM, CURRENTLY IN RECESS, UH, TO BE SCHEDULED, WOULD PERMIT UH, 1,203, UH, AGE RESTRICTED UNITS ON THE PROPERTY.
UH, IN DOING ITS DUE DILIGENCE, UH, THE BOARD HAS DETERMINED THAT, UH, THEY ARE GOING TO GIVE THE APPLICANT AN OPPORTUNITY TO ALSO PRESENT ANY ALTERNATIVE PLANS TO THE BOARD AND THE PUBLIC, UH, TO SEE IF THERE IS MERIT IN PURSUING AN ALTERNATIVE, UH, IF THAT IS BETTER FOR THE HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE TOWNSHIP.
UM, ANY, UH, ANY VOTES TAKEN TONIGHT ARE MERELY PROCEDURAL.
UH, THERE IS NOTHING THAT IS GOING TO BE DECIDED OR APPROVED AT THIS NIGHT AT THIS HEARING, I'M SORRY, AT THIS MEETING THIS EVENING.
UH, THIS IS, UH, SOLELY FOR THE PURPOSE OF HEARING THE PRESENTATION BY THE APPLICANT AND MAKING A DETERMINATION IF THE APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL WILL BEGIN MOVING THROUGH THE TOWNSHIP'S PROCESS FOR REVIEW OF ZONING AMENDMENTS.
THAT PROCESS INCLUDES REVIEW BY THE TOWNSHIP AND COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSIONS AND THE SCHEDULING OF A HEARING BEFORE THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, AT WHICH AT THAT HEARING, THE BOARD MAY, UH, TAKE A VOTE TO APPROVE, BUT THAT IS, WOULD STILL LEAVE THE BOARD THE OPPORTUNITY TO DECIDE IF THAT AMENDMENT WILL BE ADOPTED AT THAT TIME FOR THIS EVENING.
UH, WE WILL START AFTER I'VE DONE THESE REMARKS WITH GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT AS THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, UH, TYPICALLY, UM, UH, TAKE, UH, YOU WILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY UNDER THE BOARD'S RULES TO COME FORWARD AND PRESENT UP TO THREE MINUTES OF PUBLIC COMMENT.
AFTER THAT, WE WILL HAVE THE APPLICANT MAKE THEIR PRESENTATION.
IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE APPLICANT WILL MAKE A FULL PRESENTATION THIS EVENING ON THEIR PROPOSAL, UH, FOR ALL ASPECTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT AS RELATED TO THEIR
[00:05:01]
PROPOSED ZONING AMENDMENT.ONCE THE APPLICANT HAS COMPLETED THEIR ENTIRE PROPOSAL, WE ARE GOING TO GIVE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR THE PUBLIC TO ASK QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT RELATED TO THAT PROPOSAL.
AND I WANT TO BE CLEAR THAT IT'S RELATED TO THIS PROPOSAL THIS EVENING RELATED TO THE ZONING AMENDMENT AND, AND THE CONCEPT PLANS THAT THAT MAY PRODUCE.
THIS IS NOT AN OPPORTUNITY TO, UH, NECESSARILY QUESTION THE APPLICANT ON ANY OTHER PROPOSAL, INCLUDING THE CONDITIONAL USE THAT NEEDS TO BE CONDUCTED WITHIN THE CONFINES OF THE CONDITIONAL USE HEARING, NOT WITHIN THE PRESENTATION THIS EVENING.
SO, ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE FOR THE APPLICANT, PLEASE TAILOR THEM TO THE PRESENTATION GIVEN TONIGHT AND THE PROPOSAL, UH, THAT IS BEING PRESENTED TO THE BOARD AND TO ALL OF YOU.
UM, ONCE WE HAVE CONCLUDED, UM, QUESTION AND YOU WILL BE LIMITED, UH, WE WILL FOLLOW THE PUBLIC COMMENT POLICY FOR THAT.
UH, SO THE QUESTIONS WILL BE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES A PIECE.
UH, UH, ONCE EVERYBODY HAS, UH, HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO ASK ANY QUESTIONS IN THEIR THREE MINUTE ALLOTTED TIME PERIOD, WE WILL, IF YOU STILL HAVE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS, WE WILL GIVE YOU ONE SECOND OPPORTUNITY TO COME UP FOR A THREE MINUTE PERIOD TO ASK ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS.
UH, AFTER THAT, THE BOARD, AS YOU MAY HAVE SEEN ON THE AGENDA, HAS TWO MOTIONS, UM, THAT THEY MAY CONSIDER THIS EVENING.
THE FIRST IS TO AUTHORIZE THE AMENDMENT, UH, TO PROCEED INTO THE PROCESS, UH, THAT WOULD BE REVIEWED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSIONS OF THE TOWNSHIP AND THE COUNTY.
AGAIN, THAT IS JUST A PROCESS.
IT IS PART OF THE REVIEW PROCESS.
THOSE BOARDS OFFER ADVISORY COMMENTS TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, SO THEY, THAT INFORMS THEIR DECISION, UH, DOWN THE LINE IF THEY CHOOSE TO, UH, REVIEW THIS AT A HEARING.
THE SECOND IS A MOTION TO AUTHORIZE ADVERTISEMENT FOR A PUBLIC HEARING.
AGAIN, THAT'S A PROCEDURAL MECHANISM THAT WOULD ALLOW ME AS A SPECIAL COUNSEL TO CREATE AND PUBLISH ADVERTISEMENT OF A HEARING ON THIS AMENDMENT.
UM, SOMETIME AFTER THE PLANNING COMMISSIONS HAVE RENDERED THEIR ADVISORY OPINIONS ON THE AMENDMENT.
UM, AT, AT, AGAIN, AT THAT OPPORTUNITY, IT'S A HEARING, THERE WILL BE ANOTHER PRESENTATION TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS.
AND AT THAT HEARING, IF SCHEDULED, UH, THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS WOULD CONSIDER, UH, EITHER ADOPTING OR NOT ADOPTING THE, UH, ZONING AMENDMENT.
AS FOR ALL OF THESE PROCEEDINGS, BOTH THE, THE, IF IT COULD, IF THIS, UH, AMENDMENT MOVES FORWARD, THE MEETING OF THE TOWNSHIP PLANNING COMMISSION IS PUBLIC AND YOU WOULD HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO PARTICIPATE AGAIN AT THAT TIME DURING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S PROCESS.
AND THEN IF THE HEARING IS SCHEDULED ON THIS AMENDMENT, IT WOULD BE A FULL HEARING WITH THE OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.
AGAIN, IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE THE BOARD WOULD LIKE ME TO ADDRESS? NO, I THINK WE'RE GOOD.
JUST IF IT STARTS TO GET REPETITIVE, LISTEN TO COMMENTS AND DON'T REPEAT THE SAME COMMENT.
AND, AND, UH, I WILL, UH, BE REMINDING PEOPLE IF WE ARE GETTING REPETITIVE.
SO, UH, AS THE CHAIR DID SAY, UH, PLEASE PAY ATTENTION TO, UH, YOUR FELLOW, UH, INTERESTED PARTIES IN THE COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS THAT THEY ASK SO THAT WE CAN MOVE, UH, SO THAT THE BOARD IS, UH, UH, ABLE TO, UM, HEAR EVERYTHING YOU'RE TRYING TO ASK AND COMMENT ON, ON THIS PROPOSAL.
UM, WITH THAT, UH, THE CHAIR, I WOULD, I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THE APPLICANT RECOMMENDATIONS.
OH, OR DO WE DO PUBLIC COMMENT? I'M SORRY.
[PUBLIC COMMENT ]
COMMENT IS NEXT COMMENT.YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES, NO BACK AND FORTH.
YOU'RE JUST GONNA MAKE COMMENTS AND THEN WE'RE GONNA MOVE INTO THE PRESENTATION.
AFTER THAT, IT GETS TO COME BACK UP AND ASK QUESTIONS.
SO IF YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS, NOW'S THE TIME.
SO, UM, IS THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? YOU CAN ALSO WAIT UNTIL THE PRESENTATION'S OVER.
GOOD EVENING, VICTORIA BOEING, 3 6 4 VISTA DRIVE.
UH, MY ISSUE ALL ALONG HAS BEEN ABOUT COMMUNICATION TRANSPARENCY.
ONCE AGAIN, WE'RE BACK WITHIN THREE MONTHS TO HEAR ABOUT THE PROPOSAL TO AMEND THE TOWNSHIP ZONING SOLELY TO SATISFY THE DEVELOPER'S INTERESTS.
LAWYERS FOR HOLDINGS WHO ORIGINALLY PURCHASED
[00:10:01]
THIS PARKHOUSE HOME AND SURROUNDING OPEN SPACE ACREAGE SEEMED TO CONTINUE TO DISREGARD THE CONCEPT OF ZONING RESTRICTIONS AND BYPASSING, CONTINUE TO WEAR DOWN THE CITIZENS AND ELECTED OFFICIALS AND ADMINISTRATION, UH, THAT WE AS CITIZENS HAVE VOTED UN TOWARDS.TO DATE, WE'VE HEARD NOTHING ABOUT THE SCHEDULING OF THE CONDITIONAL USE HEARING.
IN MARCH, WE WERE TOLD THAT WE WILL BE GIVEN SUFFICIENT NOTICE.
WE RECOGNIZED THE DEVELOPER'S ATTORNEY REACHED OUT AND ASKED TO MEET WITH US IN FEBRUARY.
WE HOPE TONIGHT'S MEETING WILL SHED LIGHT ON THE PROCESS AND THE INTENTIONS OF THE PROPOSAL.
ANY PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AROUND PARK HOUSE'S, BIG NEWS.
IT'S BEEN IN THE NEWSPAPERS, IT'S BEEN IN THE RADIO.
WE'VE GOT LOCAL, STATE, AND NATIONAL ENTITIES PAYING ATTENTION TO THIS.
YET WE WERE GIVEN FOUR DAYS NOTICE OF TONIGHT'S SPECIAL MEETING.
SPECIAL MEETINGS ARE REQUIRED UNDER THE TOWNSHIP'S CODE TO REQUIRE ANY PUBLIC NOTICE.
MUST BE GIVEN TWO WEEKS NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC.
YOU'VE GIVEN THREE DAYS WHEN YOU PUT IT ON THE NOTICE.
ON MONDAY, I RECOGNIZED MR. HELLAC HAD ALSO SENT OUT A NOTICE, BUT THAT NOTIFICATION DIDN'T GET SENT TO ANY OF THE CITIZENS.
THE PARK HOUSE, THE 800 PLUS, THE 2000 PLUS SIGNATORIES ON THE PETITION.
I REALLY DO FOLLOW PRETTY CLOSELY TO THIS, SO SHAME ON YOU THAT WE GOT NO NOTICE THREE DAYS TO LISTEN TO WHAT WE REALLY, TRULY DO WANT TO HAVE AN OPEN MIND ABOUT THE COMMUNITY IS DESIRING INFORMATION ABOUT THE INTENTIONS WE WOULD LIKE TO WORK TOGETHER, WHICH IT GAVE US THREE DAYS NOTICE I CANCELED A PROFESSIONAL REQUIREMENT, OBLIG OBLIGATION TONIGHT IN ORDER TO BE HERE.
NOBODY TAKES CARE OF THAT FOR ME.
FINALLY, THOSE WHO ARE PRESENT TONIGHT AND WHO ARE WATCHING ARE EXPECTED TO BE OPEN-MINDED ABOUT THE DEVELOPER'S PRESENTATION.
BUT ONCE AGAIN, THIS WAS NOT IN THE FULL SPIRIT OF TRANSPARENCY.
THAT'S ALL WE HAVE BEEN ASKING FOR.
WE HAVE SERIOUS CONCERNS, REALLY WHY THERE IS LITTLE TO NO TRANSPARENCY AROUND THIS PROPOSAL.
THIS IS DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WAS SUBMITTED TWO MONTHS AGO.
FINALLY, WE CONTINUE TO SUPPORT THE DECISION ABOUT THE UPPER PROVIDENCE COUNTY BOARD SUPERVISORS.
WE OPPOSE ANY ZONING CHANGES ON BEHALF OF PARKHOUSE FRIENDS, AND WE BELIEVE THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO PROCEED WITH THE CONDITIONAL HEARING USE, CONDITIONAL USE HEARING PROCESS, AND THE APPLICATION FROM TO HOLDINGS FOR CONDITIONAL USE.
HI, MARK CONNOLLY, 2 0 9 MONTGOMERY AVENUE OAKS.
JUST A PROCEDURAL QUESTION, UH, FOR THE SOLICITOR.
I KNOW YOU SAID THIS, BUT IF YOU COULD JUST CLARIFY IT FOR ME.
WITH THE SCHEDULING OF A HEARING AFTER THAT PRESENTATION, YOU INDICATED THAT THERE WOULD BE TWO POTENTIAL ACTIONS, MAYBE MORE.
COULD YOU JUST REPEAT THOSE SO IT'S CLEAR? SURE.
THE, THE, THE TWO, UH, AUTHORIZATIONS THAT THE BOARD IS GOING TO, UH, POTENTIALLY CONSIDER TONIGHT.
ONE IS TO SEND THE, UH, ZONING AMENDMENT TO THE TOWNSHIP AND COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FOR THEIR REVIEW, UH, AND, AND START THE PUBLIC PROCESS OF THE REVIEW OF THE AMENDMENT.
AND THE OTHER IS TO AUTHORIZE THE SPECIAL COUNSEL TO ADVERTISE A HEARING ON A DATE TO BE SET.
AND THEN AT THE HEARING, YOU ALSO MENTIONED THAT THERE WERE TWO POSSIBLE ACTIONS.
SO PUBLIC HEARING IS VOTED ON.
PUBLIC HEARING, UH, IS COMPLETE.
AND THEN WHAT ARE THE POSSIBLE VOTES AT THAT POINT, OR POSSIBLE MOTIONS AND AT, AT.
SO THE BOARD IS REQUIRED TO HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING, UH, ONCE THEY AUTHORIZE IT, IF THEY WANT, IF THE AMENDMENT IS MOVING FORWARD, UH, AT THE, AFTER A PUBLIC HEARING IS HELD, THE BOARD CAN DETERMINE THAT THEY'RE GOING TO ENACT THE ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT.
THEY CAN DETERMINE THAT THEY'RE NOT GOING TO ENACT THE ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT, OR THEY CAN, UH, DETERMINE THAT THEY'RE GOING TO CONSIDER IT AT A LATER DATE.
AND DOES THAT PRECLUDE GOING TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THE NORMAL FASHION OF THESE THINGS? NOT AT ALL.
SO THAT IT, BEFORE A HEARING IS HELD, UH, UH, THE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT MUST BE PROVIDED TO BOTH THE TOWNSHIP AND COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSIONS FOR THEIR REVIEW FOR A PERIOD OF AT LEAST 30 DAYS PRIOR TO THE HEARING.
SO THEIR COMMENTS OR INPUT WILL BE BROUGHT INTO THAT HEARING.
[00:15:01]
THE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION PLANNING COMMISSIONS PROVIDE ADVISORY OPINIONS ON THE REVIEW OF THE ORDINANCE.SO THAT WILL BE PART OF THAT SPECIAL PUBLIC HEARING.
UM, A LITTLE FRUSTRATED IN THAT.
I'LL BE HONEST, I DIDN'T HAVE A GOOD DAY AND WE SPENT A LOT OF TIME LAST NIGHT TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT WE WERE GONNA TRY TO DO TODAY.
AND WHEN I COME TO THESE MEETINGS, I THINK ANYBODY KNOWS ME.
MY, MY FIRST TRY TO IS TO MAKE A GOOD MESSAGE.
UM, BUT TONIGHT I GET ASKED, I JUST DON'T HAVE A GOOD MESSAGE.
I'M FRUSTRATED PRIMARILY ON THREE THINGS.
I'M GONNA JUST TALK ABOUT, TORI HAS ALREADY MENTIONED SOMETHING I'D REALLY LIKE TO KNOW.
DID WE MEET THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE TIMING ON SPECIAL HEARING? THE ADMINISTRATIVE CODE OF THE TOWNSHIP, AS WELL AS THE SUNSHINE ACT REQUIRES A 24 HOURS ADVANCE NOTICE OF A SPECIAL MEETING.
I KNOW A COUPLE MONTHS AGO WE HAD A PROBLEM WITH THAT AND WE ACQUIESCED AND SAID, OKAY, WE APPRECIATED THE FACT THAT WE DIDN'T HAVE TIME.
BUT MAN, GUYS, IT'S, IT'S TOUGH ON US.
I MEAN, I APPLAUD EVERYBODY WHO CAME OUT.
BUT THANK YOU ALL FOR COMING OUT ON SUCH SHORT NOTICE.
I CAN'T BELIEVE WE'RE STILL DEBATING HIGH DENSITY HOUSING.
AND THEN I WANNA KNOW HOW MANY PLANS ARE WE GOING TO SEE WITH NO MEANING CHANGE, MEANINGFUL CHANGE ON DENSITY? I WANT TO READ SOMETHING THAT CAME BACK ON THE HIGH DENSITY HOUSING 'CAUSE IT REALLY INFURIATED ME A LITTLE BIT THE OTHER NIGHT, FRUSTRATED ME.
ONE OF OUR MEMBERS, BILL HAD WRITTEN, THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ASKED ME SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT THE EXISTING ZONING THAT WAS COMING UP.
AND THE RESPONSE BACK FROM, UM, GREGORY, I'M SORRY GREGORY, I DON'T HAVE YOUR RIGHT NAME.
LASTLY, I DON'T WANT TO BUTCHER IT SO I APOLOGIZE, BUT EFFECTIVELY, VERBATIM AS YOU.
THE RESPONSE BACK WAS, AS YOU ARE AWARE, THE CURRENT ZONING ORDINANCE PERMITS THE PROPERTY OWNER TO PURSUE HIGH, DEVELOP HIGH DENSITY DEVELOPMENT THROUGH THE CONDITIONAL USE PROCESS.
WHILE THE TERMINOLOGY MAY BE POTENTIALLY MISLEADING, A CONDITIONAL USE IS THAT A USE IS PERMITTED, PROVIDED THE DEVELOPER MEETS THIS CRITERIA SET FORTH IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE.
THE PURPOSE OF THIS HEARING IS TO DETERMINE WHETHER THE DEVELOPER HAS MET THAT OR NOT.
AS A GROUP OF PARKHOUSE FRIENDS WE'RE UNAWARE OF ANY CURRENT ZONING ORDINANCE PERMITTING HIGH DENSITY DEVELOPMENT ON PROPERTY ZONE AS OPEN SPACE CONSERVATION DISTRICT.
WE ARE AWARE OF THE INSTITUTIONAL OVERLAY THAT THE OSC DISTRICT THAT PERMITS ONLY CERTAIN TYPES OF FACILITIES THROUGH THE CONDITIONAL USE PROCESS, BUT HIGH DENSITY DEVELOPMENT IS NOT AMONG THEM.
I WOULD APPRECIATE IT IF SOMEBODY COULD POINT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE THAT SAYS, THAT REFERS TO THE, THAT PERMITS HIGH DENSITY DEVELOPMENT IN THE TOWNSHIP.
BECAUSE WHY DO WE KEEP TELLING PEOPLE THAT THEY CAN DO IT? I GET THE CONDITIONAL USE, BUT IT'S VERY MISLEADING.
FINALLY, I'M RUNNING OUT OF TIME, BUT HOW MANY PLANS ARE WE GONNA SEE? THIS HAS TO BE THE SIXTH OR SEVENTH PLAN AND THERE'S BEEN NO MEANINGFUL DEVIATION FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE ON HOUSING DENSITY.
WE DO NOT WANT 1200 OR 600 HOUSES ON THAT LAND.
IT DOESN'T FIT THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES.
I WOULD LIKE TO APPLY SOME KEY POINTS TONIGHT FOR THE REVISED PROPOSED OPEN SPACE RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY TO ZONING TAX AMENDMENT IS ON TODAY'S AGENDA IN JANUARY.
AS WE KNOW, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY VOTED NOT TO SEND A SIMILAR ZONING AMENDMENT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
THAT AMENDMENT WAS VERY BAD, SO WE ARE GRATEFUL FOR THAT DECISION.
BUT THIS REVISED VERSION IS EVEN WORSE FOR THE CITIZENS OF THIS TOWNSHIP.
[00:20:01]
INCONSISTENT WITH THE HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE OF THE CITIZENS OF THE TOWNSHIP.PLEASE DON'T SEND THIS AMENDMENT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
THE ZONING AMENDMENT ALLOWS 880 UNITS TO BE BUILT ON THE PARKHOUSE PROPERTY.
THE SKETCH PLAN OR ILLUSTRATION PLAN, AS IT'S TERMED OVER THERE, MAY SHOW SOMETHING DIFFERENT, BUT THE AMENDMENT NOT THE PLAN IS WHAT MATTERS.
HOW ARE THE NARROW ROADS AROUND THAT PROPERTY GONNA HANDLE UPWARDS OF 2000 MORE CARS? IT'LL BE UNSAFE.
THE AMENDMENT REDUCES THE PRIMARY OPEN SPACE TO ONLY 25% OF THE TRACKED AREA, BOTH THE PREVIOUS AMENDMENT AND THE CURRENT ZONING SET OPEN SPACE AT 50%.
SO THIS NEW VERSION ALLOWS FOR HALF AS MUCH OPEN SPACE, AND THAT'S UNDER THE GUISE OF OPEN SPACE R TWO ZONING.
THAT'S NOT WHAT THE TOWNSHIP CITIZENS WANT.
AGAIN, INSIDIOUS THE NEW VERSION ALLOWS FIVE DWELLING UNITS PER GROSS ACRE.
THE LAST VERSION WE HEARD ABOUT SET THAT FIGURE AT FOUR UNITS PER ACRE.
REGARDLESS, IT IS FIVE TIMES THE DENSITY OF THE CURRENT OSR TWO ZONING ORDINANCE.
IT ELIMINATES THE NEED FOR TRAFFIC IMPACT OR COMMUNITY IMPACT STUDIES.
IT INCREASES THE MAX DWELLING HEIGHT FROM 35 TO 50 FEET.
I'LL NOTE THAT THE LEG, THE AMENDMENT'S LEGISLATIVE INTENT, SECTION B READS TO PROVIDE FOR SUCH DEVELOPMENT IN AREAS CONSISTENT WITH THE GOALS OF THE TOWNSHIP'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, WHICH WOULD BE COMPATIBLE WITH AND PROTECT THE EXISTING COMMUNITY CHARACTER.
NOW, IT ALLOWS HIGH DENSITY DEVELOPMENT, NOT COMPATIBLE AT ALL WITH THE SURROUNDING R ONE COMMUNITIES AND AGRICULTURAL USES.
THESE ARE THE HIGH POINTS, BUT LET ME REMIND YOU, 880 UNITS, HALF AS MUCH OPEN SPACE AS THE CURRENT ZONING.
HIGH DENSITY, 50 FOOT HALL STACKED TOWNHOUSES.
WHAT WAS THAT WORD AGAIN? INSIDIOUS.
JUST SAY NO, DON'T SEND THIS TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
UM, OAKS, I'M NOT GONNA SAY UP IN PROVIDENCE 'CAUSE I LIVE IN OAKS.
THE, UM, I LIVE ON OFF OF GUMS AND LAUREL GUMS IS A SHORTCUT FROM BLACKROCK TO UPGRADE TO LOWE'S AND TO BOB EVANS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
SO WE GET THIS NEW DEVELOPMENT AND HOW MUCH MORE TRAFFIC IS GONNA COME DOWN MY LITTLE SPEED HUMP ROAD ALL THE TIME.
SO I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE NON, THE NO PARKING SIGNS TAKEN OFF MY PROPERTY OR I WANT TO COME DOWN.
'CAUSE WHENEVER YOU GUYS DID, WAY BACK WHEN, I DON'T KNOW WHO WAS HERE WHEN THEY PUT 'EM UP, DON PEARSON WAS HERE.
I I DIDN'T KNOW WHY THEY WENT UP.
UM, ONE SUNDAY WE'RE DOING WORK, AND UM, NEXT DAY I COME HOME.
THERE'S NO PARKING SIGNS IN MY YARD.
SO WHO GAVE YOU THE RIGHT TO DO THAT WITH THIS TRAFFIC THAT'S GONNA BE COMING THROUGH? A FRIEND OF MINE WAS JUST UP ON, UM, BLACKROCK ROAD, AROUND THE BRIDGE BY THE OLD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, AND SHE SWIPED OUT HER WHOLE CAR ON THE RIGHT SIDE BECAUSE PEOPLE DON'T WANT TO STOP ON THAT BRIDGE.
AND I KNOW THE STATE'S GONNA WIDEN IT AND EVERYTHING, BUT HOW MUCH MORE TRAFFIC'S GONNA BE COMING DOWN? PEOPLE WERE HIT AT THE TOP OF THE HILL.
AND, AND WHO GAVE YOU GUYS THE RIGHT FROM MARYLAND TO COME UP INTO PENNSYLVANIA TO DO SOMETHING HERE? GO TO MARYLAND, TAKE A RO HOLY GROUP AND GO BACK TO MARYLAND.
I'M NOT GONNA BE FRIENDLY EITHER.
I JUST NAME JOHN WESLER 180 COUNTRY RIDGE DRIVE.
UM, APOLOGIZE IF I SAY SOMETHING THAT SOMEBODY HAD ALREADY SAID ALREADY ONCE.
UM, MY COMMENTS WERE VERY SIMPLE TODAY.
I THINK, UM, YOU GUYS DID AN AMAZING JOB BEFORE.
I'VE ALREADY VOTED ON THIS AND I'M KIND OF GETTING CONFUSED TO THE POINT
[00:25:01]
OF HOW MANY TIMES DO WE HAVE TO COME IN? AND I'M VERY BUSY.I I'M ASSUMING YOU GET COMPENSATED FOR BEING IN YOUR POSITIONS, AND I APPRECIATE THAT.
WE DON'T, AND I THINK THE COMMUNITY'S ALREADY KIND OF MADE THAT POINT MULTIPLE TIMES OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN THAT THE ONE THING THAT WE'RE ASKING FOR IS NO ZONING CHANGE.
AND I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY BEEN SAID MAYBE ALREADY.
I'M NOT GONNA GET INTO THE THE DETAILS OF IT, BUT IT GETS TO A POINT WHERE HOW MANY TIMES HAVE WE HAD TO SAY YOU'VE ALREADY VOTED ON IT.
I KNOW THERE'S BEEN AN ADJUSTMENT, BUT IT GETS TO BE, IT GETS IT'D BE OVERWHELMING OR REDUNDANT AND TRYING TO WEAR US OUT.
I THINK WHAT THEY'VE WANTED ALL ALONG IS TO DO EXACTLY WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO DO IS TO WEAR THIS COMMUNITY OUT AND BEAT US DOWN UNTIL WE CRY UNCLE AND SAY, FINE, WE'LL DO WHAT YOU WANT US TO DO.
BUT THE POINT IS, IS IT ZONED? AS IT'S ZONED? IT'S ALREADY BEEN VOTED AGAINST.
YOU'VE HAD PEOPLE COME OUT AND SPEAK MULTIPLE TIMES.
I I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH MORE WE CAN DO TO SAY EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE ASKING YOU TO DO.
THE SIGNS ARE AROUND THE COMMUNITY.
WE'VE ASKED THE SAME THINGS OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN.
AND YOU PROBABLY ARE SICK OF HEARING IT, THAT THE QUESTION IS, WHAT ELSE CAN WE DO? AND CAN WE DO THIS IN A DIFFERENT MANNER WHERE I'M NOT WASTING MY TIME EVERY SINGLE TIME THERE'S A MEETING AND GET SOME TYPE OF COMMITMENT SOMEWHERE WE CAN WRITE SOMETHING IN OR I, I DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE TO DO WITH THIS BECAUSE IT, IT IS GETTING OVERWHELMING.
UM, I MEAN AT, AT AT WORST CASE SCENARIO, THE OTHER GENTLEMAN SAID EVERYTHING SURROUNDED BY R ONE.
I MEAN, IF THEY WANT TO COME IN AND PUT MCMANSIONS IN R ONE AND ONE ACRE LOTS, I MEAN MAYBE, BUT AT THIS POINT THEY PUT IT AT INSTITUTIONAL.
BEFORE THAT, MY UNDERSTANDING IT WAS, I THINK IT WAS R ONE FROM MY UNDERSTANDING BEFORE THAT R ONE OPEN SPACE GOT CHANGED FROM R ONE OPEN SPACE R ONE, UH, OR EXCUSE ME, INSTITUTIONAL OPEN SPACE.
I MEAN, A WORST CASE SCENARIO, SOMETHING LIKE THAT MIGHT BE PALATABLE WHERE YOU HAVE THE NUMBER OF HOMES WOULD BE DWINDLED DOWN TO, YOU KNOW, THE NUMBER OF ACRES, ONE ACRE HOMES.
AND I GUESS MY STATEMENT IS, YOU KNOW, LET'S STOP THIS AND, AND THEY CAN BUILD WHAT IS ZONED TO BE BUILT OR BUILD WHAT IS, UH, ZONED FOR CURRENTLY AND GO TO THE CONDITIONAL HEARING.
WE RARELY SPOKE ABOUT HOW MANY TIMES DO WE HAVE TO COME IN HERE AND SPEAK TO SEE YOU GUYS.
THANK YOU FOR MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.
UH, BILL FELTON OLD STATE ROAD, UH, THANK YOU FOR CALLING THIS MEETING, UH, TO ADDRESS THIS APPLICATION THIS EVENING.
AND THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK.
UH, ON TUESDAY MORNING, I HAD A CONVERSATION WITH A FRIEND OF MINE, A WOMAN WHO WAS BORN IN 1943 AND GREW UP IN A FARMHOUSE THAT WAS LOCATED NEAR THE CORNER OF OLD STATE ROAD IN YEAGER ROAD.
HER CHILDHOOD HOME, THE HOME THAT WAS IN HER FAMILY FOR THREE GENERATIONS WAS TAKEN AND DEMOLISHED TO MAKE WAY FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF 4 22.
AND SO WITH THE OPENING OF THE 4 22 HIGHWAY, BEGAN THE DEVELOPMENT OF UPPER PROVIDENCE TOWNSHIP FROM A RURAL FARMING COMMUNITY TO A SUBURBAN COMMUNITY.
FORTUNATELY, WE HAD LEADERS IN THIS COMMUNITY WHO HAD A VISION AND SET TO THE TASK OF PLANNING FOR THE FUTURE AND HOW THIS TOWNSHIP WOULD BE DEVELOPED.
IT WAS NOT DEVELOPED BY THE WHIMS AND WISHES OF DEVELOPERS, BUT RATHER BY THE PLANNERS AND ENGINEERS WHO WORKED WITH OUR TOWNSHIP LEADERS TO ENSURE AN ORDERLY AND COMPREHENSIVE OUTCOME FOR THE FUTURE OF UPPER PROVIDENCE TOWNSHIP.
THESE FOLKS HAD INTEGRITY AS A RESULT OF THEIR STRATEGIC PLANNING.
WE HAVE COMPANIES SUCH AS GLAXO, PFIZER, SEI AND OTHERS.
WE HAVE A RE A ROBUST ECONOMY AND HAVE DEVELOPED A COMMUNITY WHICH WE ALL CALL HOME.
I BELIEVE ALL OF YOU ARE SERVING US NOT FOR PERSONAL FAME OR FORTUNE, BUT BECAUSE YOU LOVE AND ARE COMMITTED TO THE CONTINUED IMPROVEMENT AND SUCCESS OF THIS COMMUNITY.
AND WE APPRECIATE THE WORK THAT YOU DO.
ON JANUARY 16TH, WE ARE BROUGHT TOGETHER AND LISTENED TO A POWERPOINT PRESENTATION FROM OUR SOLICITOR REGARDING A PROPOSED CHANGE TO OUR ZONING.
WE THANK YOU FOR YOUR UNANIMOUS VOTE TO DENY THAT PROPOSED CHANGE TO OUR ZONING ORDINANCE.
YOU DEMONSTRATED THAT YOU HAVE INTEGRITY.
WE ARE BROUGHT TOGETHER TONIGHT TO LISTEN TO A PRESENTATION FROM A DEVELOPER WHO WANTS TO CHANGE THE ZONING ON THIS PARKHOUSE PROPERTY.
THIS PROPOSED CHANGE TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE WOULD ALLOW FOR AN OUTCOME ON THIS PARKHOUSE PROPERTY THAT WOULD HAVE MORE NEGATIVE IMPACT TO THIS COMMUNITY THAN THE PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE THAT YOU VOTED TO DENY ON JANUARY 16TH.
I REQUEST THAT YOU NOT RECOMMEND THIS ORDINANCE FOR REVIEW OR DISCUSSION BY THE MONTGOMERY COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION OR THE UPPER PROFIT AND TOWN PLANNING COMMISSION.
I ASK THAT YOU DENY THIS APPLICATION.
[00:30:01]
NOTHING TO GAIN FROM THIS PROPOSED ZONING AMENDMENT.THE ONLY PERSON TO BENEFIT FROM THIS PROPOSED ZONING CHANGE IS THE DEVELOPER.
WE CANNOT ALLOW DEVELOPERS TO CHANGE, AMEND, OR DISMANTLE OUR ZONING ORDINANCES.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONTINUED
UH, THANK YOU SUPERVISORS FOR, UH, ALLOWING THE OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT.
UM, I'D LIKE TO REMIND YOU ALL THAT, UH, WE, THE COMMUNITY VOTED FOR YOU.
WE ARE YOUR NEIGHBORS, YOUR KIDS GO TO SCHOOL WITH OUR KIDS.
WE VOTED FOR YOU BECAUSE WE BELIEVE THAT YOU, UH, YOUR INTENTION WAS TO NOT CHANGE ZONING CLEARLY.
WE HAVE A CONTINGENT OF FOLKS HERE TONIGHT THAT ARE READY TO PRESENT IT.
IT SEEMS TO ME THAT IT WOULD BE PRETTY TOUGH TO GET, UH, A CONTINGENT OF FOLKS HERE IN FRONT OF US, A PRESENTATION, UH, TO BE HEARD IN THREE DAYS OR FOUR DAYS TIME.
CLEARLY THESE FOLKS HAD MORE NOTICE THAN WE DID.
THE CURRENT ZONING WAS CLEARLY STATED WHEN THE DEVELOPER BOUGHT THE PROPERTY.
SO WHY ARE WE EVEN EVEN DISCUSSING IT AT THIS POINT, ESPECIALLY AFTER OUR MEETING IN JANUARY, I INVITE THE DEVELOPER, UH, TO COME BACK WHEN WE HAVE SEVERAL WEEKS NOTICE AND PRESENT TO THE COMMUNITY AS A WHOLE.
IN FACT, YOU MAY WANT TO SPEAK TO THE 2,500 PEOPLE THAT HAVE SIGNED OUR PETITION VOTING AGAINST CHANGING THE ZONING.
WE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THAT CLEAR.
WE UNDERSTAND, UH, WHAT IS IS THE DEVELOPER IS AND COULD HAVE, UH, BUILT THERE.
BUT WE ARE ANTI CHANGING DISOWNING.
[PUBLIC HEARING ]
WE MOVE ON TO NEW BUSINESS AND WE ARE GOING TO DO THE PRESENTATION FOR THANK YOU.I'M ED MULAN FROM HAMBURG, RUBEN.
AND WITH ME TONIGHT IS GARY BERMAN FROM MOYERS FORD HOLDINGS.
RENNY SATANI AND ROB MCCRACKEN FROM MVR INC.
RON KLOS, A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER FROM BOULDERER ENGINEERING.
MATT HAMMOND, A PROFESSIONAL TRAFFIC ENGINEER FROM TRAFFIC PLANNING DESIGN.
AND I PETZEL FROM EH, CREATIVE SERVICES AND A ICP UH, PLANNING CONSULTANT AS YOU'RE AWARE.
NBR HIM IS YOUR MICROPHONE ON? YOU CAN'T HEAR HIM.
YOU NEED TO KEEP IT A LITTLE CLOSER TO YOU.
UH, AS YOU'RE AWARE AROUND THE, IS THE EQUITABLE OWNER OF THE PARK HOUSE PROPERTY AND IF THEY FILED A TEXT AMENDMENT AND REQUEST THAT WE HAVE A HEARING TO CONSIDER THAT TEXT AMENDMENT, UH, TO BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH AN AMENDED OR EXCUSE.
I DON'T MR. MUL, WE CAN'T HEAR YOU COMING.
SO WE CAN CAN I TO FACE THIS? CAN'T GET YOU DON'T WANNA FACE UP.
THIS IS NOT A SHOUT OUT TYPE OF THING.
IF YOU CAN'T HEAR, WE'LL FIGURE OUT THE ISSUE.
ED, DO YOU THINK YOU CAN COME TO THE OTHER SIDE OF THE TABLE? SO YOU'RE ALSO PROJECTING IN THAT DIRECTION? I DUNNO, THAT'S, I THINK THE MICROPHONE HAS TO BE DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF YOUR MOUTH.
MICRO, WE DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER MICROPHONE RIGHT? OTHER THAN THE PODIUM MIC.
WE COULD SCOOT THE TABLE OVER AND SLIDE THIS MIC.
MAYBE THAT HAS A BETTER PICKUP FIELD TABLE.
WE GONNA GRAB, WE'RE GONNA MOVE THE TABLE OVER TWO
[00:35:01]
IN THE, ALRIGHT.HOW'S THAT? IS THAT BETTER? YES.
I WILL GO BACK AND START OVER.
I'M ED MULLEN FROM HAMBURG, RUBEN MULLEN, MAXWELL AND LUIN.
AND WITH ME TONIGHT IS GARY BERMAN FROM LAWYERS SW HOLDINGS, RANDY SATANI AND BOB MCCRACKEN FROM NBR INC.
LAU'S PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER FROM BOER ENGINEERING.
MATT HAMMOND, A PROFESSIONAL TRAFFIC ENGINEER, TRAFFIC PLANNING AND DESIGN, AND ERIC KEEL FROM EH CREATIVE SERVICES AND A ICP PLANNING CONSULTANT.
AS YOU'RE AWARE, NBR IS NOW THE EQUITABLE OWNER OF THE PARKHOUSE PROPERTY.
THEY HAVE SIGNED AN AGREEMENT OF SALE TO PROCEED WITH THE 1,203 UNITS, BUT THEY DECIDED THAT THEY WANTED TO FILE THIS REQUEST FOR TEXT AMENDMENT TO GIVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO OPEN DISCUSSIONS WITH EVERYONE AS TO BUILDING OF JOB, WHICH WOULD BE MIGHT FEWER UNITS DROPPING FROM 1,203 TO 600.
AND REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE ORDINANCE SAYS, THAT WE CAN WORK THIS OUT WITH THE TOWNSHIP SOLICITOR.
WE ARE PROPOSING TO BUILD NO MORE THAN 600 UNITS, SO THE FIVE UNITS PER ACRE DOESN'T MATTER 'CAUSE WE WOULD NOT PROPOSE TO BUILD THEM.
THE UH, WHAT I WILL DO NOW IS ASK MR. SAT, IF YOU WILL COME UP WITH, EXPLAIN TO YOU WHY MVR WOULD PROCEED WITH A 600 UNIT PLAN WHEN THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO GO TO 1,203 YEAR PLAN.
BRING YOUR OWN CHAIR, EITHER BRING YOUR OWN CHAIR OR WE CAN PUT THE LEG BACK ON THE PODIUM.
UH, I APPRECIATE EVERYONE'S TIME TONIGHT, BOTH THE BOARD STAFF AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY.
UM, I WANNA START OFF BY ANSWERING A QUESTION I THINK A LOT OF PEOPLE HAVE, WHICH IS, WHY ARE WE HERE TONIGHT? UH, AND THE ANSWER IS SIMPLE.
WE WERE ASKED TO PROPOSE AN ALTERNATIVE TO THE 1,203 UNIT PLAN THAT WAS BEFORE THE TOWNSHIP AS A CONDITIONAL USE.
AFTER THAT PLAN WAS PROPOSED, WE WERE ASKED THAT THERE WERE ALTERNATIVES THAT WE COULD ENTERTAIN THAT WOULD REDUCE THE DENSITY, REDUCE THE SCOPE OF DEVELOPMENT, AND ULTIMATELY ADDRESS SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT WE HEAR VERY CLEARLY TONIGHT FROM THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY.
UM, WHEN WE BECAME INVOLVED WITH THE PROJECT, THE OWNER MADE ONE THING VERY CLEAR TO US, WHICH WAS IF WE WERE GONNA PROPOSE THAT ALTERNATIVE, UH, THAT HE WANTED TO ENSURE THAT WHATEVER WE PROPOSED WOULD INCLUDE A SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF OPEN SPACE THAT WOULD ULTIMATELY BE DEDICATED TO THE TOWNSHIP FOR THE TOWNSHIP'S USE.
AND THAT WOULD BE OPEN SPACE TO BE PRESERVED IN THE TOWNSHIP'S DISCRETION, WHICH WE CAN OUTLINE ON THE PLAN THAT WE SHOW YOU UP THERE.
SO IN THAT SPIRIT, WE WORKED WITH THE OWNER TO CREATE A PLAN THAT WE THOUGHT WOULD AT LEAST ADDRESS SOME OF THE COMMUNITY'S CONCERNS AND CLUSTER THE HOUSING ON THE PROPERTY TO PRESERVE NEARLY HALF OF THE PROPERTY AS PERMANENT OPEN SPACE.
SO IT'S VERY CLEAR THERE'S A LOT OF PASSION AROUND THIS, THIS COMMUNITY, AROUND THIS, THIS PROPERTY.
JUST TO BE CLEAR FOR EVERYBODY, UH, I LIVE 10 MINUTES AWAY FROM HERE.
WE'RE 15 MINUTES AWAY FROM THE 10 MINUTES FROM THE PROPERTY, 15 MINUTES AWAY FROM HERE.
UM, I UNDERSTAND THE PASSION AROUND THIS, BUT I ALSO THINK THERE'S A LOT OF INFORMA MISINFORMATION ABOUT WHAT IT IS WE'RE PROPOSING AND HOW WE ENDED UP HERE.
AND I DON'T THINK THAT'S ANYBODY'S FAULT.
THE REALITY IS WE HAVEN'T HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE THIS CONVERSATION YET.
THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT THE PROCESS THAT WE'RE PROPOSING IS FOR, TO BE ABLE TO GO TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, ANSWER THE QUESTIONS THAT THE PUBLIC HAS, AND ULTIMATELY ALLOW THE TOWNSHIP TO MAKE A DETERMINATION WHETHER THE ALTERNATIVE, WHAT WE ARE PRESENTING IS IN FACT A BETTER ALTERNATIVE.
IF IT'S NOT, WE ACCEPT THAT AND WE ARE PREPARED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE 1203 CONDITIONAL USE PLAN.
IT'S, IT'S NOT BECAUSE WE ARE TRYING TO DO SOMETHING THAT WE'RE NOT ALLOWED TO UNDER THE ZONING OR WE WANT SOMETHING DIFFERENT THAN THE ZONING.
IT'S BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN ASKED TO PROVIDE AND PRESENT SOMETHING THAT AT LEAST WOULD ADDRESS SOME OF THE CONCERNS AND ULTIMATELY PROVIDE FOR A LOWER INTENSITY USE OF THE PROJECT.
SO I WANNA MAKE A COUPLE THINGS CLEAR.
WE CAN'T CHANGE WHAT'S HAPPENED IN THE PAST.
THE PROPERTY WAS SOLD BY THE COUNTY OVER 10 YEARS AGO.
IT'S OWNED BY A PRIVATE OWNER NOW.
AND THAT OWNER AND NVR HAVE THE RIGHT TO DEVELOP THE PROPERTY UNDER THE CURRENT ZONING.
THE 1203 PLAN THAT WAS SUBMITTED AS THE CONDITIONAL USE PLAN IS WHAT IS ALLOWED UNDER THAT ZONING.
[00:40:01]
ANY ZONING CHANGE.THOSE 1,203 UNITS ARE WHAT'S PROPOSED.
THE CONDITIONAL USE PROCESS, OBVIOUSLY WE HAVE THERE HAS TO MEET CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS AND CRITERIA, BUT THAT IS WHAT THAT PROCESS IS FOR.
AND THAT'S JUST NOT OUR DETERMINATION.
THAT'S BEEN THE DETERMINATION OF SEVERAL INDEPENDENT EXPERTS WHO HAVE LOOKED AT THE ZONING AND COME TO THE SAME CONCLUSION.
BUT AS I SAID, IF ULTIMATELY THE TOWNSHIP AND THE COMMUNITY DETERMINES THAT THE 1203 PLAN IS PREFERABLE AND THEY'D RATHER PROCEED WITH THAT, WE ARE OKAY WITH THAT AND, AND WE WILL PROCEED DOWN THAT ROAD.
THIS IS, AND I I I KNOW PEOPLE ARE DOUBTFUL AND THERE'S A LOT OF, OF QUESTIONING OF OUR INTENT HERE, BUT THIS, OUR INTENT WAS TO COME IN HERE AND TO HAVE A CONVERSATION AND PROVIDE AN ALTERNATIVE THAT AT LEAST PEOPLE COULD LOOK AT AND MAKE THE DECISION ULTIMATELY WHETHER IT'S IN THE TOWNSHIP'S BEST INTEREST AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO THE 1203 PLAN.
SO ONE THING THAT IS CONSISTENT BETWEEN THE PLAN THAT WAS PROPOSED IN JANUARY AND THE PLAN THAT WE'RE SHOWING HERE TODAY IS THE OVER 86 ACRES OF OPEN SPACE THAT YOU SEE ON THAT PLAN THERE.
DO WE HAVE THE OTHER PLAN THAT SHOWS THE OUTLINE OF THE, THE, UM, PROPERTY IT WAS PROPOSED TO BE DEDICATED TO THE TOWNSHIP? OH, IT IS.
SO THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE PLAN THAT WAS SHOWN IN JANUARY.
ONE OF THE QUESTIONS WAS, WHY ARE WE COMING BACK WITH A DIFFERENT PLAN? BECAUSE WE HEARD THAT THERE WERE STILL CONCERNS WITH THE PLAN THAT WAS PROPOSED IN JANUARY, AND OBVIOUSLY THE BOARD DID NOT TAKE IT UP TO SEND IT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
SO AS YOU LOOK AT THIS PLAN, WHAT ARE THE CHANGES? THERE'S LESS OVERALL DENSITY.
WE'VE TRIED TO PLACE SINGLE FAMILY HOUSING IN THE AREAS WHERE THERE'S SINGLE FAMILY HOUSING ALREADY EXISTING TO BE MORE CONGRUENT WITH THE EXISTING USES IN THE COMMUNITY.
PRESERVE THE VIEW SHEDS ON OLD STATE ROAD AND ULTIMATELY LESSEN THE IMPACT ALL AROUND.
AND WHY DO WE DO THIS? WE ARE GENUINELY TRYING TO ADDRESS THE CONCERNS THAT WE'VE HEARD AND THE FEEDBACK THAT WE'VE HEARD WITH THE PREVIOUS PLANS THAT WERE PROPOSED.
SO WHILE WE HEAR THOSE CONCERNS, WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS HERE IF YOU WANT TO BE ABLE TO ITERATE AND ULTIMATELY COLLABORATE ON AN ALTERNATIVE PLAN TO THE CONDITIONAL USE.
AS I SAID, IF THERE ISN'T A DESIRE TO DO THAT, WE UNDERSTAND AND WE CAN PROCEED WITH THE CONDITIONAL USE PROCESS.
BUT WHAT THERE IS IN HERE IS A SCENARIO IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS NOT DEVELOPED.
AS WE SAID, WE CAN'T CHANGE THE PAST, WE CAN ONLY WORK WITH THE FACTS THAT ARE ON THE TABLE IN FRONT OF US SO QUICKLY, WHY WE THINK THIS IS A BETTER PLAN THAN BOTH WHAT WAS PROPOSED IN JANUARY AND THE 1,203 UNIT PLAN.
I HEARD A COMMENT EARLIER THAT THERE HASN'T BEEN ANY MEANINGFUL CONCESSION AND DENSITY.
I DISAGREE WITH THAT RESPECTFULLY.
I THINK HALF OF THE UNITS THAT ARE OTHERWISE PERMITTED ON THE PLAN AGREEING TO REDUCE THAT BY 50% IS A VERY MEANINGFUL CONCESSION HERE.
IT PROVIDES 86 ACRES OF OPEN SPACE THAT WOULD BE DEDICATED TO TOWNSHIP TO PRESERVE AS THEY SEE FIT USED FOR ACTIVE RECREATION.
AND AGAIN, WE'RE OPEN TO THE DISCUSSION ABOUT HOW THAT THAT SPACE COULD BE USED BY THE TOWNSHIP.
BUT THAT DISCUSSION HAPPENS THROUGH THE PLANNING COMMISSION PROCESS AND THROUGH THE TAX AMENDMENT PROCESS.
OVER 25% OF THE UNITS WE'RE PROPOSING ARE AGE RESTRICTED.
SO AS WE TALK ABOUT WHAT THE IMPACTS TO THE COMMUNITIES, TO THE SCHOOLS, TO THE ECONOMICS OF THE TOWNSHIP ARE, WE'RE ACTUALLY PROPOSING THAT OVER 25% OF THESE WOULD STILL BE AGE RESTRICTED.
AND AGAIN, PART OF THAT IS TRYING TO PROVIDE A DIVERSITY OF HOUSING FOR THE COMMUNITY.
AND THEN I THINK, YOU KNOW, THE LAST QUESTION THAT WE WANT TO ANSWER HERE IS WHY WOULD WE CONSIDER THIS PLAN INSTEAD OF THE 1203? I THINK I HEARD THE QUESTIONS BEFORE OF THIS HAS ALWAYS BEEN THE PLAN TO MOVE FORWARD WITH WHY WOULD WE DO THIS? THE FIRST IS WE GENUINELY WANT TO HAVE AN OPEN CONVERSATION WITH THE COMMUNITY AND THE RESIDENTS.
WE UNDERSTAND NONE OF THIS MAY BE POPULAR, BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, IF WE CAN PRESENT SOMETHING THAT IS BETTER THAN WHAT THE CURRENT ZONING ALLOWS FOR AND THAT THE COMMUNITY MAY NOT BE IN LOVE WITH, BUT FEELS AS A BETTER ALTERNATIVE TO WHAT'S THERE, WE'RE HAPPY TO DO THAT PROVIDED IT MAKES ECONOMIC SENSE.
AND AGAIN, THE OWNER OF THIS PROPERTY PURCHASED THE PROPERTY 10 YEARS AGO AND IS ENTITLED TO DEVELOP IT UNDER THAT CURRENT ZONING.
SO FOR US, IT ALLOWS US TO WORK WITH THE COMMUNITY.
IT'S OBVIOUSLY A SMALLER, LESS CAPITAL INTENSIVE PROJECT AND IT OPENS UP THE HOUSING TO A DIVERSITY OF BUYER PROFILES SO THAT WE ARE NOT SERVING A SINGLE BUYER IN AN AGE RESTRICTED COMMUNITY, BUT WE CAN ACTUALLY CREATE A COMMUNITY THAT REFLECTS THE EXISTING COMMUNITY WITH YOUNG PROFESSIONALS, YOUNG FAMILIES, AND MOVE DOWN BUYERS IN THE AGE RESTRICTED SECTION.
SO WE CAN RUN THROUGH THE PLAN AS A WHOLE.
I WILL JUST TELL YOU KIND OF GENERALLY WHAT WE'RE SHOWING ON THERE.
WE HAVE 44 SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED LOTS, WHICH YOU SEE, UH, ON THE UPPER PORTION OF THE PLAN.
AND ALONG ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE PLAN, WE HAVE 151, UH, TOWN HOMES THAT ARE ACCESSED FROM THE FRONT 176 TOWN HOMES THAT HAVE REAR ACCESS TOWN HOMES AND THEN 76 STACK TOWN HOMES, WHICH AGAIN, WE'VE TRIED TO HEAR SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT THERE ARE ABOUT VIEW SHEDS AND EXISTING CORRIDORS.
[00:45:01]
SO WE'VE MASSED THOSE UNITS TOWARDS THE CENTER OF THE PROPERTY WHERE THERE'S LESS OF AN IMPACT.THEY'RE NOT VISIBLE FROM THE ROADS AND FROM THE EXISTING RESIDENTS SURROUNDING IT.
SO THE BOTTOM LINE IS IF WE CAN FIND COMMON GROUND AND COOPERATE, WE'RE HAPPY TO DO THAT.
AND THAT WAS THE INTENT OF COMING HERE TONIGHT.
UM, WE'RE NOT ASKING ANYBODY TO APPROVE THIS PROJECT TONIGHT, AS I THINK YOU'VE HEARD FROM COUNCIL.
UH, WE'RE NOT ASKING ANYBODY TO TELL US THAT THEY LIKE THIS PROJECT TONIGHT.
EVEN WHAT WE ARE SAYING IS WE'RE OFFERING AN OPPORTUNITY FOR A DISCUSSION.
AND SO ALLOW AN ALTERNATIVE TO THE CONDITIONAL USE PLAN THAT'S IN FRONT OF YOU.
THAT DECISION IS ENTIRELY UP TO THE TOWNSHIP, WHETHER THEY WANT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH IT.
BUT WE ARE COMING HERE IN GOOD FAITH TONIGHT TO AT LEAST OFFER THAT ALTERNATIVE AND THE OPPORTUNITY FOR A DISCUSSION.
SO PACKET TO ANSWER QUESTIONS AFTERWARDS, BUT WE'LL LET YOU GET INTO THE DETAILS OF THE COMMUNITY ITSELF.
UH, AND AS MR.
RON KLAU, WOULD YOU COME UP PLEASE? WE ARE GONNA HAVE TO SHARE THIS.
CAN YOU, UH, STATE YOUR FULL NAME AND ADDRESS PLEASE? UH, GOOD EVENING.
RON KLOSS, LAST NAME SPELLED KLOS WITH ER ENGINEERING.
I'M WITH, UH, AT, UH, 1600 MANOR DRIVE.
AND HOW MANY YEARS OF ENGINEERING EXPERIENCE DO YOU HAVE? UH, I'VE BEEN WITH BOER FOR OVER 25 YEARS NOW, AND I HAVE, UH, ALMOST 35 YEARS EXPERIENCE IN THE BUSINESS.
AND WHAT IS YOUR EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND? UH, I AM A CIVIL ENGINEER, UH, ANOVA UNIVERSITY.
I'VE RECEIVED BOTH A BACHELOR AND A MASTER'S DEGREE IN IN CIVIL ENGINEERING.
DO YOU HAVE EXPERIENCE IN WORKING ON TOWNHOUSE PROJECTS AND MIXED USE PROJECTS? UH, YES.
AND IN, IN MY 25, UH, YEARS OF EXPERIENCE, UH, WITH BOWLER, I'VE WORKED ON SEVERAL PROJECTS OF THIS NATURE AND SCOPE THAT FROM BOTH SINGLE FAMILY, A TOWNHOUSE AND AGE RESTRICTED DEVELOPMENTS.
HAVE YOU QUALIFIED AS AN EXPERT WITNESS IN CIVIL ENGINEERING BEFORE A MUNICIPAL BODY OR COURT? UH, YES, I HAVE.
AND I'VE ACTUALLY BEEN BEFORE THIS BOARD ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS FOR DIFFERENT RESIDENTIAL APPLICATIONS.
NOW I UNDERSTAND WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE 1,203 UNIT, UH, PROJECT AT ALL TONIGHT, BUT IN FACT YOU HAVE PREPARED A DETAILED PLAN FOR THAT PROJECT, WHICH WE'RE GOING TO EXTRAPOLATE FROM FOR YOUR TESTIMONY TONIGHT.
IS THAT CORRECT? YES, THAT'S CORRECT.
AND WHY DON'T YOU, UH, DESCRIBE THE PROPERTY.
WHERE IS IT LOCATED, LOCATED? UM, AS, AS WAS DISCUSSED EARLIER, THIS IS A, A ROUGHLY 188 ACRE PROJECT NET OUT THE RIGHT OF WAY.
IT'S ABOUT 177 ACRES THAT HAS FRONTAGE ON BLACKROCK ROAD, UH, YEAGER ROAD, UH, SECOND AND UH, ALSO OLD STATE ROAD.
UM, I'VE SHOWN THE PLAN THAT IT'S BEFORE YOU ON THE SCREEN.
AND IS IT SUBJECT TO THE INSTITUTIONAL OVERLAY? YES, IT'S WHAT'S THE TRACK SIZE? UH, 188 ACRES IS THE, THE OVERALL, UH, GROSS ACREAGE.
WHEN YOU NET OUT RIGHT AWAY, IT'S ABOUT 177 ACRES.
MR. WHAT DEVELOPMENT IS PROPOSED IN A SITE? SORRY, I I CAN, RON, IF YOU CAN GRAB THE HANDHELD MICROPHONE ON THE CORNER THERE AND YOU STOLE IT THOUGH.
IT IS, AS LONG AS YOU HOLD IT UP TO YOUR MOUTH, YOU KNOW, FULFILL THE FANTASY OF BEING
WILL, UH, WILL BE, UH, THE PUBLIC WILL CURE YOU BETTER.
CAN YOU HEAR ME IN THIS? GOOD.
SO I WAS ASKING WHAT DEVELOPMENT IS PROPOSED ON THIS SITE? UM, AS RANDY INDICATED, THIS WILL BE A MIX OF SINGLE FAMILY UNITS, UH, AND TOWNHOUSE UNITS ON IN ADDITION TO AGE RESTRICTED, UH, AREA OF THE, OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND THE BOTTOM.
NOW WILL IT HAVE INTERNAL PEDESTRIAN INFO, HIP CIRCULATION? UH, YES.
THERE'LL BE OBVIOUSLY ACCESS FROM THE ROADWAYS, THE SURROUNDING ROADWAYS INTO THE DEVELOPMENT, UM, FOR VEHICULAR UH, ACCESS THROUGHOUT THE AREA.
THERE WOULD ALSO BE PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION PROVIDED ALONGSIDE OF THOSE ROADWAYS, UM, VIA SIDEWALK.
AND THEN PROBABLY SOME PEDESTRIAN AMENITIES WHICH HAVEN'T YET FULLY BEEN DESIGNED.
BUT USUALLY THESE TYPE OF COMMUNITIES HAVE, UH, PEDESTRIAN CONNECTION, UH, AROUND, IN AND AROUND THE DEVELOPMENT FOR WALKING TRAILS AND WHATNOT.
AND WHAT WOULD THE PARKING BE, UH, PROVIDED? UH, WE WOULD PROVIDE, UH, TWO SPACES PER DWELLING UNIT, UH, IN ADDITION TO THAT TO PROVIDED AT LEAST 0.25 SPACES OR DWELLING UNIT OVERFLOW.
AND THAT WOULD BE VIA ON STREET PARKING OR SOME SMALL PARKING AREAS.
WOULD WE BE ABLE TO MEET THE SETBACKS, THE MAXIMUM OUS COVERAGE, THE MAXIMUM BUILDING COVERAGE REQUIREMENTS AND THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE? YES, I REVIEWED THAT ORDINANCE AND, AND THIS PROPOSAL WOULD MEET ALL OF THOSE.
AND WHAT IS THE MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT? I BELIEVE SOMEONE INDICATED
[00:50:01]
WAS 50 FEET? UH, YES, THERE'S THE, THE MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT, UH, IS 50 FEET FOR A STAFF TOWNHOUSE.UM, OUR SINGLE FAMILY DEVELOPMENTS WOULD BE TWO AND A HALF STORIES, SO THEY WOULD BE SMALLER, 35 FEET TOWNHOUSES WOULD GENERALLY BE THREE AND A HALF STORIES AT 45, ROUGHLY 40 TO 45 FEET.
WOULD WE BE ABLE TO MEET ALL THE BUFFER REQUIREMENTS IN SECTION 180 2 0.6, 3.31 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE? YES, THAT'S SECTION OUTLINED VARIOUS, UM, BUFFERING REQUIREMENTS FOR PERIMETER BUFFERS, INTERIOR BUFFERS, BUILDING THE PARKING BUFFERS, AND WE CAN MEET THAT, THOSE REQUIREMENTS.
UH, WHAT LANDSCAPING IS PROPOSED IN THE PARKING AREA AND NON BUFFER AREAS.
SO ANY, ANY AREA THAT'S OUTSIDE OF THE PERIMETER BUFFERS, UM, WOULD OBVIOUSLY BE LANDSCAPE.
UM, WE WOULD PROVIDE, UH, THE, THE LANDSCAPING IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ORDINANCE.
THERE'D BE SHADE TREES, MIX OF EVERGREEN TREES, UM, SHRUBS AND WHATNOT, WHICH COULD BE PLACED IN AND AROUND THE PARKING AREAS AND IN AROUND THE BUILDINGS THEMSELVES.
AND WOULD THIS SKETCH PLAN THAT YOU'RE SHOWING HAVE ANY ADVERSE EFFECT AT ALL ON FLOODPLAINS STEEP SLOPES, WOODLANDS OR OTHER NATURAL FEATURES? UH, NO.
THAT LARGE 88 ACRE PORTION THAT, THAT RANDY REFERENCED EARLIER, THAT RUNS UP THROUGH THE MIDDLE OF THE PROPERTY.
UM, THAT'S WHERE OBVIOUSLY AS YOU CAN SEE ON, ON, ON THE OVERHEAD THERE, UH, THE STREAM RUNS THROUGH THE SITE IS LOCATED IN THAT CENTRAL PORTION OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH WE ARE NOT DEVELOPING.
THERE'S A LARGE WOODLAND AREA THROUGH THERE.
UM, YOUR FLOODPLAIN WITH THAT STREAM RUNS THROUGH THAT AREA.
THERE'S SOME WETLANDS DOWN THERE ALL, AND IN ADDITION TO THAT, THERE'S STEEP SLOPES, UH, ALONG THE EDGE OF THOSE BANKS.
SO THOSE AREAS WOULD ALL REMAIN UNDEVELOPED AND UNTOUCHED.
AND ONE OF THE BIG CONCERNS FROM THE NEIGHBORS IS THAT THERE ARE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PROBLEMS. CAN YOU DESCRIBE WHAT WE WILL DO TO SOLVE THOSE PROBLEMS, WHAT THE ORDINANCE REQUIRES US TO DO? SURE.
UM, TOWNSHIP HAS A VERY RESTRICTIVE STORMWATER ORDINANCE HERE IN UPPER PROVIDENCE TOWNSHIP.
AND THEN YOU NEED TO REDUCE YOUR POST-DEVELOPMENT STORMS FROM THE 50 YEAR CALCULATED STORM DOWN TO THE TWO YEAR STORM.
SO THERE WOULD BE PROPOSED STORM WATER MANAGEMENT BASINS IN AND AROUND THE DEVELOPMENT, UM, BOTH ABOVE GROUND AND PROBABLY SOME BELOW GROUND AREAS AND PARKING AREAS, UM, SO THAT WE CAN REDUCE THOSE RUNOFF RATES TO MEET THAT TOWNSHIP REQUIREMENT.
SO IN, IN FACT, BECAUSE OF THE TOWNSHIP REQUIREMENTS STILL BE LESS RUNOFF AND LESS STORMWATER ISSUES WHEN IT'S FULLY BUILT OUT THAN THERE IS TODAY? YES, CORRECT.
UM, WILL WE PROVIDE A SUITABLE AREA FOR STORAGE OF SNOW REMOVAL? UH, YES, THERE'S GONNA BE SOME COMMUNITY, UH, CENTER AREAS AND GENERALLY IN THESE TYPES OF COMMUNITIES, ANY TYPES OF MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT OR STUFF LIKE THAT IS JUST STORED IN THOSE TYPES OF AREAS.
AND THERE WOULD BE WEEKLY TRASH PICKUP? YES, THAT WOULD BE SCHEDULED, UH, THROUGH THE DEVELOP THROUGH THE DEVELOPER FOR WEEKLY TRASH PICKUP TO THE RESIDENTIAL UNITS.
AND WILL THE PROJECT BE SERVED BY BOTH PUBLIC SEWER AND PUBLIC ORDER? YES, IT WILL.
SO BOTTOM LINE IS, DO YOU BELIEVE THAT THIS SITE IS SUITABLE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AS SHOWN ON THE SKETCH PLAN? YES, I DID.
MATT, NAME AND ADDRESS PLEASE.
MATTHEW HAMMOND, H-A-M-M-O-N-D, UH, 10 25 ANDREW DRIVE STREET, ONE 10, WESTCHESTER, PENNSYLVANIA WITH TRAFFIC PLANNING AND DESIGN.
AND HOW MANY YEARS HAVE YOU BEEN IN TRAFFIC? UH, OVER 29 YEARS.
AND WHAT'S YOUR EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND? I HAVE A BACHELOR IN SCIENCE FROM DREXEL UNIVERSITY, UH, SPECIALIZING IN CIVIL ENGINEERING.
HAVE YOU BEEN INVOLVED IN TOWNHOUSE AND MIXED USE PROJECTS? I HAVE.
HAVE YOU BEEN INVOLVED IN TRAFFIC CONDITIONS RELATED TO LAND DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS SUCH AS OURS? ABSOLUTELY, YES.
AND ALSO, HAVE YOU PREPARED A TRAFFIC IMPACT STATEMENT FOR THE 1,203 UNIT PLAN THAT YOU'RE USING TO EXTRAPOLATE FOR THE INFORMATION TONIGHT? WE HAVE, WE PREPARED A TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY THAT CONTAINED A NUMBER OF ANALYSES DATA, UM, THAT WAS PREPARED BASED ON THE 1,203 UH, UNIT PLAN.
AND HAVE YOU, ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH THE REZONING APPLICATION, WHICH IS FILED BY MDRI AM.
AND THE SKETCH PLAN? DO YOU NEED TO SPEAK UP? OKAY.
HAVE YOU DONE AN ANALYSIS ON THE IMPACT OF TRAFFIC CONDITIONS THAT MIGHT OCCUR THROUGH PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OR DEVELOP IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SKETCH PLAN? UH, AS I MENTIONED, WE HAD COMPLETED A TRAFFIC ANALYSIS BASED
[00:55:01]
ON THE 1,203 UNIT PLAN.UH, SO YES, WE HAVE COMPLETED THAT ANALYSIS.
SO CAN YOU TELL US BASICALLY WHAT WOULD THE IMPACT ON TRAFFIC BE WITH 600 HOUSES HERE, CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT THE NEIGHBORS ARE CONCERNED THAT THERE'S PRESENTLY TRAFFIC ISSUES? CAN YOU DESCRIBE WHAT YOU STUDIED, WHAT IMPROVEMENTS WE WERE PROPOSED, AND WHAT THE LEVEL OF SERVICE OF THE VARIOUS INTERSECTIONS WOULD BE? SURE.
UH, SO I WILL TRY NOT TO BORE EVERYONE WITH THE DETAILS AS FAR AS THE TRAFFIC STUDY IS CONCERNED.
UH, BUT WHEN WE PREPARE THE TRAFFIC STUDY, WE LOOK AT A NUMBER OF, UH, VARIOUS, UH, ITEMS. UH, THEY INCLUDE, UH, THE EXISTING ROADWAY NETWORK, NOT ONLY SURROUNDING THE PROPERTY ITSELF, BUT ALSO WHERE WE ANTICIPATE TRAFFIC COMING FROM AND GOING TO, UH, WE LOOK AT PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES OR BACK THEREOF.
WE LOOK AT, UH, VARIOUS INTERSECTIONS AND THE CRASH HISTORIES.
UM, THERE'S BEEN A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF CRASHES THAT HAVE OCCURRED AND WHY THOSE CRASHES HAVE OCCURRED.
UM, WE LOOK AT EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS, WE GO OUT, WE CONDUCT TRAFFIC COUNTS.
AND FOR PURPOSES OF THE TRAFFIC STUDY THAT WAS COMPLETED FOR THE 1,203 UNIT PLAN, WE LOOKED AT 15 INTERSECTIONS TWO TIME PERIODS, AND THOSE COUNTS WERE CONDUCTED IN JANUARY AND MARCH, 2023.
WE ALSO COMPLETED SPEED STUDIES, UH, SPECIFICALLY ALONG BLACKROCK ROAD AS THERE WAS CONCERNS EXPRESSED, UH, FROM STAFF AND FROM PENDOT WITH RESPECT TO, UH, THE SPEED TO THOSE ROADS AND, UH, THE PROPOSED ACCESS ASSOCIATED WITH DEVELOPMENT.
WE ALSO FORECAST TRAFFIC GROWTH IN THE AREA, NOT ONLY FROM THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT, BUT MORE SO FROM OTHER DEVELOPMENTS IN THE AREA AND JUST GENERAL GROWTH IN TRAFFIC.
FOR PURPOSES OF THE TRAFFIC ANALYSIS, WE LOOKED AT, UH, TWO YEARS THAT WE ANTICIPATE, UH, THE PROJECT TO BE BUILT OUT.
THAT WAS THE YEAR 2028 AND THE YEAR 2033.
SO WE INCLUDED GROWTH IN TRAFFIC FOR APPROXIMATELY FOUR YEARS AFTER THE COUNTS ARE DONE AND THEN NINE YEARS AFTER THE COUNTS ARE DONE.
UM, WE ALSO LOOK AT WHAT OTHER IMPROVEMENTS ARE PROPOSED IN THE AREA.
UM, IS ANYTHING BEING DONE BY PENN DOT ANYTHING BEING DONE BY THE COUNTY? IS THERE ANYTHING BEING DONE, UH, PROPOSED BY THE TOWNSHIP? AND AS SOME OF YOU MAY BE FAMILIAR, THE TOWNSHIP HAS RECEIVED GRANTS AND HIS PREPARED PRELIMINARY DESIGN PLANS FOR A ROUNDABOUT AT BLACKROCK AND SECOND AVENUE.
UM, WE ALSO LOOK AT SITE DISTANCE, UM, IN PARTICULAR WHERE THE ACCESS POINTS ARE PROPOSED.
AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE PLAN, UH, ON THE SCREEN, THERE WERE APPROXIMATELY SIX ACCESS POINTS PROPOSED TO SERVICE THIS PROPERTY, UH, SCATTERED THROUGHOUT VARIOUS ROADWAYS.
UH, WE LOOK AT HOW MUCH TRAFFIC WE ANTICIPATE THE DEVELOPMENT TO GENERATE, UH, BASED ON THE 600 UNITS.
UM, WE ALSO LOOK AT HOW THAT TRAFFIC'S GONNA BE DISTRIBUTED, WHERE IS IT GONNA GO, HOW'S IT GONNA GET THERE? UM, WE LOOK AT THE TRAFFIC VOLUMES OF THE INTERSECTIONS IN THE FUTURE IN THE 2028 CONDITIONS AND THE 2033 CONDITIONS, HOW THOSE INTERSECTIONS ARE GONNA OPERATE, THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC IT'S GONNA BE, UH, ANTICIPATED, THOSE INTERSECTIONS.
UH, WE PROVIDE AN ANALYSIS OF HOW THOSE INTERSECTIONS OPERATE NOT ONLY TODAY IN THE FUTURE, BUT IN THE FUTURE WITH THE FULL BUILD OUT OF DEVELOPMENT.
AND THAT'S REFERRED TO AS LEVEL OF SERVICE.
IT'S A WAY FOR US AS TRAFFIC ENGINEERS TO GRADE HOW INTERSECTIONS ARE OPERATING.
UH, THE GRADES ARE ESSENTIALLY JUST LIKE THE GRADES IN SCHOOL LEVEL OF SERVICE, A TO LEVEL OF SERVICE FA BEING THE BEST, F BEING FAILING AND THE WORST.
UM, WE ALSO LOOK AT QS VEHICLES QUEUING AT INTERSECTIONS, UM, AND THEN IF THERE ARE ANY SORT OF TURN LANES NECESSARY AT DRIVEWAYS OR INTERSECTIONS AND THEY COME UP WITH WHAT WE ANTICIPATE THERE TO BE AS FAR AS ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS.
UM, NOW OBVIOUSLY PREPARING THE TRAFFIC STUDY, WE'RE MAKING CERTAIN RECOMMENDATIONS.
WE'RE ANALYZING, UH, THE TRAFFIC VOLUMES.
UH, WE'RE LOOKING AT LEVELS OF SERVICE, UM, WHICH IS ONE THING, HOWEVER, THAT TRAFFIC STUDY IS ULTIMATELY SUBMITTED TO THE GOVERNING BODIES.
AND IN THIS CASE IT WOULD BE THE TOWNSHIP AND PENDO, UH, THE TOWNSHIP BEING THAT OUR TOWNSHIP GROWS OBVIOUSLY SURROUNDING THIS DEVELOPMENT AND, AND WILL BE, UH, SERVING AS ACCESS, UH, TO THE DEVELOPMENT.
BUT ALSO THERE ARE ROADS, UH, FOR INSTANCE, BLACKROCK ROAD.
UM, IT'S A PENDOT OWNED AND CONTROLLED ROADWAY.
SO NOT ONLY WILL WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT PROCESS WITH THE TOWNSHIP, WE'RE FORTUNATE ENOUGH, BUT WE'LL ALSO HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE PENDOT PROCESS IN ORDER TO GAIN THEIR APPROVAL FOR WHAT'S REFERRED TO AS A HIGHWAY OCCUPANCY PERMIT.
SO THERE ARE MANY DIFFERENT LEVELS, MANY DIFFERENT APPROVALS THAT WE NEED.
WE NEED TO SATISFY THOSE GROUPS IN ORDER FOR US TO BE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD, AT LEAST FROM A TRAFFIC PERSPECTIVE.
UM, IN TERMS OF IMPROVEMENTS, UM, WE HAVE LOOKED AT A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT IMPROVEMENTS, UM, PRELIMINARILY BASED ON THESE ANALYSIS.
[01:00:01]
INCLUDE, UH, REGRADING ALONG, UH, SOME OF THE ROADWAYS ALONG YAGER ALONG, UH, BLACKROCK ROAD ALONG THE STATE.UH, WE'VE LOOKED AT, UH, OPTIMIZATION AND MODERNIZATION OF SOME OF THIS TRAFFIC SIGNALS IN THE STUDY AREA.
UH, WE'VE LOOKED AT, UM, REVISING TRAFFIC CONTROL AT BLACKROCK IN THE SECOND AVENUE WAS AN INTERIM PHASE UNTIL SUCH TIME AS THE ROUNDABOUT IS COMPLETED.
UH, WE'VE LOOKED AT, UH, THE POSSIBILITY OF BEING ABLE TO REDUCE SOME SPEEDS ALONG CERTAIN ROADWAYS.
WE LOOKED AT PROVIDING WIDENING FOR A NORTHBOUND LEFT TURN LANE ON V AT SOUTH LOUIS ROAD AND WE'RE ALSO BE SUBJECT TO ALMOST A $900,000 TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE.
AND THAT'S AN IMPACT FEE THAT THE TOWNSHIP IS ABLE TO UM, UH, COLLECT IN ORDER TO PROVIDE FOR ADDITIONAL ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN THE AREA.
UM, SO THAT'S PRELIMINARILY FROM A ROADWAY IMPROVE PERSPECTIVE, WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT DOING RIGHT NOW.
I WOULD ALSO SAY THAT AS I MENTIONED, WE HAD DONE A TRAFFIC STUDY, UH, FOR THIS 1200 UNIT PLAN, 1,203 UNITS.
BUT WHEN COMPARING THE 1,203 UNITS TO THE 600 UNITS AND BEING THE FACT THAT SOME OF THESE UNITS ARE DIFFERENT, UM, WHAT I MEAN BY THAT IS THE 1,203 UNITS WERE ALL AGE RESTRICTED.
NOW SOME OF THESE UNITS ARE MARKET RATE.
UM, IF YOU LOOK AT TO COMPARE THOSE, UH, THE 600 UNIT PLAN ACTUALLY GENERATES 350 LESS TRIPS APPROXIMATELY, UM, LESS TRIPS THERE ARE OVER THE COURSE OF THE DAY THAN DOZEN 1,203, UH, UNIT PLANS, EVERYTHING, ALL THE ANALYSIS WAS BASED ON THE 1,203 UNIT PLAN.
BUT WE'RE ACTUALLY, UM, IF WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THE 600 UNIT PLAN, WE'RE ABLE TO REDUCE, UH, THE TRAFFIC BY ANOTHER 350 TRIPS OVER THE COURSE OF THE DAY.
SO DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION AS TO WHETHER IF THIS PLAN WERE BUILT, FULLY BILLED OUT AND THE IMPROVEMENTS THAT YOU'RE PROPOSING MADE, WHAT THE NET EFFECT WOULD BE ON TRAFFIC? UH, YES.
AND AGAIN, THAT'S, THAT'S PART OF THE ANALYSIS THAT'S COMPLETED.
OBVIOUSLY IT WOULD STILL NEED TO BE REVIEWED BY THE TOWNSHIP AND PENDOT IN FURTHER DETAIL.
UH, BUT I WOULD SAY IS THAT, UM, WE WOULD BE ABLE TO IMPROVE THE OPERATION OF SOME OF THE INTERSECTIONS AND MORE SO THE SAFETY AND EFFICIENCY OF SOME OF THESE STUDY AREA INTERSECTIONS BEYOND HOW THEY OPERATE TODAY.
AND THAT IS INCLUDING NOT ONLY THE GROWTH IN TRAFFIC JUST EXPECTED, UH, BUT ALSO UM, THE TRAFFIC ASSOCIATED WITH THE SUBJECT.
AND WHAT IS YOUR ADDRESS? 16 MANOR ROAD, PAOLI, PENNSYLVANIA.
AND BY WHOM WERE YOU EMPLOYED? EH CREATIVE SERVICES.
AND HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN A PROFESSIONAL LAND PLANNER? UH, ALMOST 30 YEARS.
UM, DO YOU HAVE EXPERIENCE AS A LAND PLANNER IN DRAFT DRAFTING AND REVIEWING ZONING ORDINANCES RELATING TO LAND DEVELOPMENT? YES.
AND WHAT TYPES OF DEVELOPMENTS HAVE YOU BEEN INVOLVED WITH? UH, VARIOUS TYPES OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS, SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED, MIXED USE DEVELOPMENTS, UH, TOWNHOUSE DEVELOPMENTS, MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENTS, UH, IN ADDITION TO, UH, NON-RESIDENTIAL AND MIXED USE DEVELOPMENTS THAT INCORPORATE RESIDENTIAL ELEMENTS INTO, UH, COMMERCIAL TYPES OF DEVELOPMENT.
I'LL ASK YOU THE SAME QUESTION I ASKED OTHERS.
HAVE YOU PREPARED A COMMUNITY IMPACT STATEMENT FOR THE 1,203 UNIT PLAN THAT YOU CAN EXTRAPOLATE FROM TO TALK ABOUT THE PLAN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TONIGHT? YES.
HAVE YOU PREPARED A CHART SHOWING THE FISCAL IMPACT ON BOTH THE SCHOOL DISTRICT AND THE TOWNSHIP AS A RESULT OF THIS DEVELOPMENT? UH, A NUMBER OF PEOPLE ARE CONCERNED THAT, UH, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT IS GOING TO TAKE A HIT BECAUSE OF THE ADDITIONAL CHILDREN, ET CETERA.
AND CAN YOU PUT THAT ONE UP? THERE WE GO.
I REALIZE THAT'S TOUGH TO READ, BUT PERHAPS YOU CAN GO THROUGH AND EXPLAIN WHAT YOU DID AND WHAT THAT CHART SHOWS.
UH, THIS TRUCK DOWN PRETTY SIMPLY, THIS IS, UH, A FAIRLY DETAILED ANALYSIS THAT HAS, UH, AN IMPACTFUL BOTTOM LINE.
UH, MR. BRACE, IF YOU COULD JUST GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE THAT THE NUMBERS THAT YOU REALLY NEED TO BE LOOKING AT ARE THE ONES THAT ARE CIRCLED THAT OUTLINE THE NET FISCAL IMPACTS UNDER THE EXISTING CONDITION AND THE NET PHYSICAL IMPACTS UNDER THE PROPOSED CONDITION.
UH, THE METHODOLOGY I USED HERE WAS, UH, ONE THAT WAS DEVELOPED BY THE RUTGERS UNIVERSITY CENTER FOR URBAN POLICY RESEARCH.
UH, IT'S A PER CAPITA COST MODEL.
UM, THE REVENUES ARE CALCULATED
[01:05:01]
ON THE BASIS OF, UH, THE WAY THAT THE TOWNSHIP FOR THE SCHOOL DISTRICT RAISE MONEY TODAY ACCORDING TO THEIR BUDGETS AND TAX RATES.UM, WE TOOK ESTIMATED MARKET VALUES TO DERIVE ASSESSED VALUES FOR THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TO ARRIVE AT THE, THE, UH, TAX REVENUES.
UH, WE ALSO LOOKED AT AFFORDABILITY FACTORS THAT WOULD DRIVE THE EARNED INCOME TAX REVENUES THAT WOULD BE PAID TO BOTH THE TOWNSHIP AND THE SCHOOL DISTRICT.
UM, AND SUMMED UP THE VARIOUS REVENUE SOURCES FOR EACH TAXING AUTHORITY, UH, AGAINST THE COSTS THAT WERE MODELED ON A PER CAPITA BASIS.
UH, BASED ON THE SPECIFICS OF HOW THE TOWNSHIP PROVIDES SERVICES TO ITS RESIDENTS TODAY.
UM, SO UNDER THE CURRENT CONDITION, UH, THE VACANT CONDITION, THE, THE PROPERTY IS GENERATING ROUGHLY, UH, $10,698 IN TAX REVENUE TO THE TOWNSHIP, UH, WITH NO COST, UH, 'CAUSE THERE'S NOBODY LIVING THERE.
UM, ON THE, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT SIDE, IT'S GENERATING ABOUT $126,000, UM, $127,000 TO THE SCHOOL DISTRICT IN TERMS OF, OF, UH, REAL ESTATE TAXES FOR A TOTAL NET COMMUNITY FISCAL IMPACT OF 137,665.
CONTRAST THAT TO THE POST-DEVELOPMENT CONDITION.
UM, THE TOWNSHIP WOULD BE, WOULD REALIZE, UH, ROUGHLY ALMOST $400,000 IN REAL ESTATE TAXES ON AN ANNUAL BASIS.
UH, NEARLY $30,000 IN EARNED INCOME TAXES.
UM, I'M SORRY, THAT WOULD BE, UM, $543,000 IN ORDER TO INCOME TAXES.
UM, THERE WOULD ALSO BE VARIOUS THINGS LIKE TRANSFER TAXES AS THE UNITS ARE SOLD, TURNOVER YEAR BY YEAR.
UM, OTHER SMALLER TAX, UH, SOURCES SUCH AS THE LOCAL SERVICES TAX, BASICALLY ADDING UP TO, UH, FOR THE TOWNSHIP REVENUES ON AN ANNUAL BASIS AT CLOSE TO $1.2 MILLION, THAT WOULD BE THEN OFFSET BY COSTS TOTALING ABOUT $572,000 RESULTING IN THAT $623,415 ANNUALLY.
UH, NET POSITIVE FISCAL BENEFIT TO THE TOWNSHIP ALONE.
UH, SIMILARLY FOR THE SCHOOL DISTRICT, UM, THE PROJECT WOULD GENERATE ABOUT $4.68 MILLION ANNUALLY IN REAL ESTATE TAXES BASED ON THE MILLAGE RATE APPLIED TO THE PROJECTED ASSESSMENT.
UM, ABOUT $465,000 IN, I'M SORRY, THE SAME AMOUNT AS THE TOWNSHIP $543,000 IN EARNED INCOME TAX REVENUE, UH, AND VARIOUS OTHER REVENUES THAT ARE RAISED BY THE SCHOOL DISTRICT BASED ON PUBLIC FUNDING ON A PER CAPITA BASIS FOR STUDENTS THAT WOULD BE ATTENDING THE SCHOOLS, UM, THAT WOULD ADD UP TO A NET POSITIVE FISCAL IMPACT TO THE SCHOOL DISTRICT.
UH, WE'RE PROJECTING THAT THERE WOULD BE ABOUT 126 SCHOOL AGED CHILDREN ACROSS ALL 12 GRADES LIVING IN THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.
THAT'S HOW WE ARRIVED AT THE COST NUMBER THERE.
THAT'S BASED ON MULTIPLIERS THAT ARE PUBLISHED BY MONTGOMERY COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION, UH, ON THE BASIS OF SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED HOMES AND ON THE BASIS OF SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED HOMES, WHICH THE TOWNHOUSE TOWNHOUSES ARE CHARACTERIZED AS.
SO THAT'S, UH, THOSE ARE, THOSE ARE PROJECTION MULTIPLIERS THAT COME, COME FROM THE MONTGOMERY COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION DIRECTLY, UH, FOR THE POPULATION ESTIMATES.
WHICH ONE? THE BASIS FOR OUR COST.
SO IN OTHER WORDS, NET OF COST.
THE SCHOOL DISTRICT, UH, THE TOWNSHIP WOULD NET $623,000 A YEAR AND THE SCHOOL DISTRICT WOULD NET $3,856,000 A YEAR.
AND THOSE NUMBERS DON'T ACCOUNT FOR ONE TIME, UH, REVENUES THAT WOULD ACCRUE FROM, FOR INSTANCE, THE FIRST SALE OF THESE UNITS TO THEIR FIRST OWNERS.
UM, IF YOU APPLY THAT MARKET VALUE THAT WE'RE ESTIMATING FOR THE TOTAL DEVELOPMENT OF ABOUT 444 MILLION, UM, THAT EQUATES TO $2.22 MILLION IN INITIAL TRANSFER TAXES TO EACH TAXING AUTHORITY, THE TOWNSHIP AND THE SCHOOL DISTRICT.
I'M GONNA RUN THROUGH QUICKLY, UH, CERTAIN THINGS THAT ARE IN THE TOWNSHIP ORDINANCE THAT'S SUPPOSED TO BE IN AN IMPACT STATEMENT.
UH, SO I DON'T WANT TO DWELL ON THIS, BUT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU HAVE ADDRESSED
[01:10:01]
IT IN, IN YOUR STUDY.UM, HAVE YOU DONE AN ANALYSIS WHETHER THIS DEVELOPMENT'S COMPATIBLE WITH LAND USES ADJACENT TO THE SITE? I'VE DONE SOME OF THAT ANALYSIS, YES.
HAVE YOU ANALYZED THE IMPACT OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ON THE CHARACTER SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD? UH, DUE TO NOISE, ODOR, SMOKER VIBRATION? YES.
THIS WOULD NOT CONTRIBUTE ANY OF THOSE SORT OF, YOU HEARD THE TESTIMONY CONCERNING FLOODPLAINS, WOOD, WOODED AREAS, STEEP SLOPES AND OTHER NATURAL FEATURES.
I'VE HEARD THE TESTIMONY AND I, I AGREE WITH THE ENGINEER'S ASSESSMENT.
UM, AND YOU HEARD FROM MATT HAMMOND REGARDING THE IMPACT ON THE TOWNSHIP AND REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM AND THE ABILITY OF ADJACENT STREETS TO EFFICIENTLY AND SAFELY HANDLE TRAFFIC.
AND WE JUST TALKED ABOUT THE FISCAL IMPACT.
UM, HAVE YOU DONE ANY STUDY ON THE PROPOSED IMPACT THAT PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT COMMERCIAL FACILITIES WITHIN THE TOWNSHIP? I'VE NOT DONE DETAILED ANALYSIS, BUT IN MY ESTIMATION, THE ADDED POPULATION HERE WOULD BE BENEFICIAL TO THE COMMERCIAL FACILITIES IN THE TOWNSHIP BY PROVIDING ADDITIONAL CUSTOMER BASE.
AND, AND WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT THE IMPACT OF DEVELOPMENT OR OPEN SPACE AND RECREATIONAL FACILITIES? I THINK THE PROPOSED PLAN PROVIDES FOR SIGNIFICANT OPEN SPACE, UH, RETENTION AND PRESERVATION AS COMPARED TO THE CONDITIONAL USE PLAN.
SO IN YOUR OPINION, AS A PROFESSIONAL LAND PLANNER WITH OVER 25 YEARS EXPERIENCE, DO YOU, IS IT YOUR OPINION THAT THE ADOPTION OF PROPOSED ORDINANCE MAKES SENSE FROM A TOWNSHIP POINT OF VIEW? IT DOES.
UM, I WOULD JUST OBVIOUSLY LIKE TO RESERVE SOME TIME TO SUM UP AFTER ANY QUESTIONS.
SO AT THIS POINT, UM, SO AT THIS POINT, WE'RE GOING TO ALLOW THE PUBLIC TO ASK QUESTIONS.
UM, AND I, I BELIEVE, UH, ALL FOR, UH, EXPERTS, IF NOT, UH, ANYBODY ELSE WHO'S HERE FROM THE TEAM THAT MR. MULLEN, UH, DESIGNATES, UH, THE ANSWER.
UH, WILL, UM, WELL, AGAIN, WE HAVE A, WE HAVE THREE MINUTES ON YOUR QUESTIONS.
UM, AND IF YOU, UH, NEED ADDITIONAL TIME, ONCE EVERYBODY HAS HAD A CHANCE TO ASK A FIRST ROUND OF QUESTIONS, WE WILL GIVE EVERYBODY A SECOND ROUND IF NECESSARY.
ARE YOU STILL ASKING NAME AND ADDRESS IF YOU WOULD? YES.
SO I, OR AT THE VERY LEAST, PLEASE LET US KNOW IF YOU'RE RESIDENT OR NOT.
JOHN MCGUIGAN, 1 0 3 BENNINGTON ROAD.
WHEN YOU GENTLEMEN GAVE YOUR ADDRESSES, WERE THOSE BUSINESS ADDRESSES OR YOUR PERSONAL ADDRESSES? RAISE YOUR HAND IF IT WAS A BUSINESS ADDRESS.
AND HOW MANY OF YOU, GENTLEMEN, ARE PAID BY EITHER THE DEVELOPER OR THE LANDOWNER TO GIVE YOUR PROFESSIONAL OPINION TONIGHT? CAN YOU RAISE YOUR HAND FOR THAT? YES.
SO YOU WERE ALL PAID BY THE PERSON WHO HAS A VESTED INTEREST TO GIVE THE ANSWERS THAT YOU GAVE US.
MY QUESTION FOR THE VILLANOVA CIVIL ENGINEER, I LOOK AT THAT AND I SEE A VERY HARD TO UNDERSTAND HOW THAT MEETS A PERMEABLE SURFACE REQUIREMENT.
IF I TAKE AWAY THE LAND THAT IS GOING TO BE GIVEN TO THE TOWNSHIP, YOU'RE TELLING ME THAT THERE'S PERME, THERE'S ENOUGH IMPERMEABLE SURFACE TO TO QUALIFY.
IF I TAKE THAT OPEN SPACE IS INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATION OF WHAT WE'RE ALLOWED.
THE OPEN, IF I TAKE THE OPEN SPACE AWAY, 'CAUSE THEY'RE NOT GONNA OWN IT ANYMORE.
IT'S GONNA BE DEED TO THE TOWNSHIP.
IT'S GONNA BE OFFERED TO THE TOWNSHIP.
SO IF I TAKE IT AWAY, IT DOESN'T MAKE THE REQUIREMENT.
IS THAT TRUE? IT'S GONNA BE OFFERED TO THE TOWNSHIP.
YOU CALCULATE COVERAGE OF AN OVERALL PROPERTY, INCLUDING ANY OPEN SPACE.
IF I TAKE THAT OPEN SPACE AWAY FROM THE PROPERTY, 'CAUSE I'M GIVING IT TO SOMEBODY ELSE, DOES IT MEET THE PERMEABLE SURFACE REQUIRE? UH, I HAVEN'T CALCULATED THAT.
OH, YOU HAVEN'T CALCULATED THAT.
WHY AREN'T WE BUILDING A DEVELOPMENT LIKE WHAT'S NORTH OF OLD TOWNSHIP LINE ROAD OR ABOVE THAT OLD STATE ROAD? WHY AREN'T ALL THE HOMES LOOKING LIKE THAT? 'CAUSE THAT'S NOT WHAT WE PROPOSED.
WHY ISN'T IT THAT WHAT YOU PROPOSED? BECAUSE WE'VE COME TO YOU WITH AN ALTERNATIVE TO WHAT'S ALLOWED UNDER THE CURRENT ZONING.
THE PEOPLE IN THE BACK HERE HAS ANSWERED, IT'S JUST 'CAUSE YOU HAVEN'T PROPOSED IT, RIGHT? 'CAUSE YOU WON'T MAKE THAT MONEY.
[01:15:01]
TRADED COMPANY.I SUGGEST ANYBODY WHO KNOWS OUR NEIGHBORS THAT WORK AT SCI OR VANGUARD CALL THEM AND TELL THEM TO DIVEST ANY AND ALL INVESTMENTS IN NVR HOMES.
DUMP THE STOCK, TANK THE STOCK.
IF THEY WANT TO BUILD THIS, MAKE THEM PAY FINANCIALLY.
'CAUSE THEY'RE ONLY BUILDING THIS TO MAKE MONEY, NOT BECAUSE THEY CARE ABOUT OUR COMMUNITY.
OTHER QUESTIONS? YEAH, I'LL GET HI, MY NAME'S CAROL AND JENNY BECKER.
THE LITTLE STOVE TOP IS MY PROPERTY RIGHT NEXT TO IT.
UH, ACCORDING TO THAT MAP AND ACCORDING TO WHAT YOU HAD THERE ALREADY FOR THE SURVEYORS, YOU'RE GONNA BE LIKE SITTING RIGHT ON TOP OF MY HOUSE YEAH.
AND CUTTING OFF HALF OF MY RING FOR MY HORSES.
UM, HAVE YOU LOOKED AT THAT AT ALL? WHOEVER'S THE DEVELOPER, WHO DID THE, THE WHO DID THAT STOVE TOP? MA'AM, CAN YOU POINT TO YOUR HOUSE? THERE'S A POINTER RIGHT HERE.
UM, THERE'S A COME HERE, PICK THAT UP.
OH, YOU PUSH THE BUTTON AND IT'LL THROW A SPOT UP THERE.
AND THIS IS WHERE YOU'RE GONNA PUT THESE TOWN HOMES.
HOW MANY, HOW MANY ARE THERE? IT'S SEVEN ACRES.
OR HOW MANY ARE THERE? EXCUSE ME.
THEY HAVE 88 HOMES ACROSS THE ROAD THERE.
AND THEY'VE GOT ALMOST AN ACRE.
WHAT ARE YOU DOING? LIKE ATTACH THEM? NO, THEY'RE DETACHED.
CAN YOU REACH OUT AND TOUCH THEIR NEIGHBORS? HELLO.
SO WHERE, WHERE DO YOU PROPOSE TO DO A ALONG MY PROPERTY LINE.
HOW FAR OFF THERE ARE YOU GONNA BUILD? I HAVE HORSES, I HAVE DOGS.
AND YOU'RE TELLING ME YOU GOING I MOVE ALL THAT STUFF.
WELL, ACCORDING TO YOUR SURVEYOR, HE SURVEYED RIGHT THROUGH MY POOL.
SO I'D LIKE TO KNOW WHAT, WHAT IS GONNA BE PROPOSED RIGHT THERE.
I'VE BEEN TAKING CARE OF THIS FIELD FOR 40 YEARS WITHOUT BEING PAID FOR IT JUST TO KEEP THE TOWNSHIP NICE AND CLEAN AND I'VE NEVER ASKED FOR ANYTHING.
I THINK I SHOULD GET SOMETHING FROM THIS WITH THAT.
LIKE HOW FAR OFF THE PROPERTY LINE YOU HAVE TO BUILD ALL THE DEVELOPMENT THAT'S BEING PROPOSED IS WITHIN THE PROPERTY.
SO IF THERE'S ANY DISCREPANCY THERE, THAT WOULD OBVIOUSLY PICK UP.
SO IF YOU HAVE A HOUSE, HOW FAR OFF MY PROPERTY ARE YOU ALLOWED TO BUILD? HAPPENS 20 FEET, 30 FEET.
SO THERE WAS GONNA BE A YARD LOOKING AT MY HOUSE.
SO I KEEP MY ANIMALS AWAY FROM THEIR ANIMALS.
WE'LL HAVE TO DISCUSS THIS LATER.
THAT'S WHAT THAT TONIGHT CAN PLAY RIGHT THERE.
AND THIS IS A VERY SMALL ROAD, WHICH I'M SURE TO BE AWARE OF.
AND UM, THIS IS THE SECTION I'M REALLY P****D OFF AT.
THANK HEY MARK CONNOLLY AGAIN.
UM, SO, YOU KNOW, I'M ALWAYS SUSPICIOUS OF RETENTION BASINS.
IS THAT GOOD? SO I JUST WANT TO ASK THIS CIVIL GUY, BECAUSE I REMEMBER WHEN IN PHOENIXVILLE THEY PROPOSED RIVERWORKS AND THEY HAD DOGS AND FRISBEES WHERE THERE'S RETENTION BASINS ALL OVER THAT PROPERTY.
UM, AND I, AND I BELIEVE I SEE WHERE THEY ARE HERE.
SO JUST A QUESTION TO THE CIVIL ENGINEER.
IS ANY WATER IS ANY RETENTION BASIN FACILITY OR STRUCTURE? UM, IN THE OPEN SPACE? THEY HAVEN'T BEEN FULLY DESIGNED AT THIS POINT.
THEY'RE GONNA BE ALONG THE PERIMETER OF THE OPEN SPACE AREA.
THEY MAY STRADDLE IT, BUT THEY HAVEN'T BEEN FULLY
[01:20:01]
DESIGNED YET.SO THIS IS WHAT I HAVE SEEN TIME AND TIME AND TIME AGAIN DURING THE PRESENTATION.
THEY HAVEN'T BEEN DESIGNED, THEY'RE NOT PART OF THE RENDERING.
I'M AN ENGINEER, PUT MY HAND UP AND THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN RETENTION BASIN IS BIGGER AND OTHER THINGS SUFFER.
I KNOW THAT YOU CAN PUT A LOT OF THIS UNDERGROUND.
I THINK IN THE END THE UNDERGROUND STORAGE IS GONNA BE PROVEN TO BE NONSENSE BECAUSE IT'S GONNA FILL UP.
AND I JUST WANT THE SUPERVISORS AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THE ENGINEER TO LOOK AT THE RETENTION BASIN, LOOK AT WHERE WE'RE GOING AS FAR AS CLIMATE CHANGE AND DRIVE A VERY, VERY HARD CONVERSATION ABOUT HOW MUCH RETENTION BASIN IS SHOWN ON THIS DRAWING AND WHAT THE POTENTIAL IS FOR IT TO GROW OR BE SUBMERGED UNDER A PARKING LOT AND COMPLETELY FILLED IN THE NEXT 10 YEARS.
HEY, CAN YOU HEAR ME? YEAH, NO, VERY CLOSE.
UH, BRAD QUI 1 38 BENNINGTON ROAD.
YOUR NAME AGAIN? UH, BRAD BERKOWITZ AT 1 38 PENNS ROAD.
I'M JUST GONNA GET 'EM ALL OUT.
YOU CAN ANSWER WHATEVER ORDER.
I'M SORRY, I FORGOT YOUR NAMES.
UM, WHEN YOU DID YOUR STUDY, I MISSED THE CONCLUSION, UM, IF YOU DID STATE IT, BUT DID YOU, WHEN YOU SAID YOU LOOKED AT THE TWO POINTS, WAS THAT DURING RUSH HOUR? 'CAUSE BLACKROCK ROAD ESPECIALLY WHERE THAT LITTLE NARROW BRIDGE IS TOTALLY BACKS UP.
SO I'M JUST CURIOUS WHAT THE SOLUTION IS FOR THAT AND THEN DO YOU WANNA ANSWER THAT BEFORE I SURE.
UH, SO AS I MENTIONED, WHEN WE, I LOOKED AT TWO TIME PERIODS.
WE DID TRAFFIC COUNTS IN JANUARY AND MARCH OF 2023.
UH, THE TIME PERIODS THAT WE LOOKED AT ARE THE PEAK TIME PERIODS.
UH, TYPICALLY WE LOOK AT, UH, SOME TAKE TRAFFIC COUNT BETWEEN 6:00 AM AND 9:00 AM AND BETWEEN, UH, THREE AND 6:00 PM ON A TYPICAL WEEKDAY, THAT'S A MONDAY THROUGH THURSDAY.
NORMALLY, UH, DON'T NORMALLY DO TRAFFIC COUNTS ON A FRIDAY FOR THIS TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT 'CAUSE OF THE TRAFFIC FLUCTUATIONS.
UH, BUT YES, WE DID, UM, COUNT TRAFFIC DURING THOSE PEAK PERIODS AT 15 STUDY AREA INTERSECTIONS.
UM, THE CONCLUSIONS ARE THAT BASED ON, UM, THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF SOME OF THE IMPROVEMENTS THAT I DISCUSSED, THAT WE WOULD MEET THE CRITERIA, EXCUSE ME, THAT SET FORTH BY THE, NOT ONLY THE TOWNSHIP, BUT BY PENDOT WITH RESPECT TO TRAFFIC IMPACT AND THE MITIGATION OF THE IMPACT.
UM, NOW OBVIOUSLY, AND, AND I THINK THIS WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS JUST MENTIONED, THIS IS A LONG PROCESS.
THERE ARE A NUMBER OF VARIOUS STEPS THAT WE CAN CONTINUE TO GO THROUGH OVER TIME.
UM, SO THIS IS A TRAFFIC STUDY THAT WE PUT TOGETHER AND YES, I WAS PAID BY THE DEVELOPER JUST AS THIS, THE, THE TOWNSHIP ENGINEER IS PAID BY THE TOWNSHIP, UH, TO PREPARE THE ANALYSIS.
THAT ANALYSIS GOING TO BE SUBMITTED TO THE TOWNSHIP.
IT'S GONNA BE SUBMITTED AT PENDO.
IT'S GONNA GO THROUGH MULTIPLE REVIEWS.
THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE COMMENTS, THEY'RE GOING TO TELL ME I NEED TO CHANGE THIS.
THEY AGREE WITH THIS, THEY DISAGREE WITH THIS.
WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS AND CONTINUE TO REFINE THAT STUDY UNTIL WE GET TO A POINT WHERE EVERYONE'S AGREEABLE ON THE BREADTH OF THE ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS NECESSARY.
AND SOME OF THOSE MAY NOT BE NECESSARY TO MITIGATE THE IMPACT.
IT MAY BE A SAFETY IMPROVEMENT, IT MAY BE A DESIRE BY THE TOWNSHIP, BE A DESIRE BY PENNDOT AND THAT WILL BE SOMETHING THAT WE'LL WORK THROUGH.
AND ONCE WE GET TO THE POINT WHERE EVERYONE'S SATISFIED WITH THE IMPROVEMENTS THAT WILL GO THROUGH THE DESIGN PROCESS, DESIGN THEM AND TAKE IT NOT ONLY THROUGH THE TOWNSHIP APPROVAL PROCESS, BUT ALSO THE PENNDOT APPROVAL PROCESS, WHICH IS VERY LENGTHY, LENGTHY AND ONEROUS.
SO THE CONCLUSIONS ARE BASED ON WHAT WE'VE DONE SO FAR, WE CAN MEET ALL THE CRITERIA WE'RE REQUIRED TO MEET AND WE'LL BE ABLE TO MITIGATE THE IMPACT OF THE DEVELOPMENT.
SO THAT LITTLE NARROW, NARROW BRIDGE WON'T BECOME WORSE WITH THIS DEVELOPMENT.
SO THE NARROW BRIDGE IS PART OF THE ROUNDABOUT PROJECT THAT IS CURRENTLY BEING PROPOSED BY THE TOWNSHIP.
UM, MY OTHER TWO QUESTIONS WERE FOR THE NVR GUY.
SORRY, FRENCH I HEAR, IS THAT BETTER? YES.
UM, SO THE FIRST QUESTION I'M FIGURE OUT WHAT ALREADY ASKED THIS.
THE NICE QUESTION IS, IS THERE ANY WAY YOU CAN JUST POINT OUT ON THAT MAP EXACTLY WHAT'S WHERE, BECAUSE I KEEP HEARING ABOUT SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AND LIKE STACK ALL THAT, THAT OUT.
AND MY SECOND QUESTION, THAT'S GONNA BE THE MEAN QUESTION.
SO THE THING I'M STRUGGLING WITH, THAT'S LESS THAN 10% OF WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING, RIGHT? CORRECT.
AND THE OTHER PART IS YOU KEEP SAYING YOU'RE TRYING TO MATCH THE WHAT, THE CHARACTER OF THE ADJACENT AREAS.
I DON'T SEE ANY OTHER STACKED HOMES OR TOWNHOUSES ADJACENT TO THIS PROPERTY.
NO, BUT WHAT WE'VE TRIED TO DO IS, SO FIRST OF ALL, LET ME ANSWER YOUR, YOUR FIRST QUESTION FIRST, SIMPLE FAMILY HOMES LOCATED UP HERE.
DOWN HERE, WHAT WE'VE LOCATED ALONG OLD STATE ROAD, OUR
[01:25:01]
TOWN HOMES.HOWEVER, WHAT WE'RE DOING IN THE DESIGN HERE IS ACTUALLY PROPOSING TO DO A LANDSCAPE BERM AND THEN BASICALLY DO A RECESSED ALLEYWAY ENTRY ENTRYWAY ONTO THOSE.
SO WHAT YOU END UP WITH IS ACTUALLY FROM OLD STATE ROAD, FIRST OF ALL, BERM, A LANDSCAPE BERM THAT OBVIOUSLY PROVIDES SCREENING, BUT YOU ALSO END UP WITH WHAT'S A TWO STORY CONDITION FROM THERE.
SO RATHER THAN LOOKING AT WHAT I KNOW PEOPLE WOULD BE CONCERNED WITH A THREE STORY TOWN HOME THAT'S FROM A HEIGHT PERSPECTIVE DOESN'T MATCH WITH THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, YOU END UP WITH A TWO STORY CONDITION THAT LOOKS MUCH MORE SIMILAR TO A SINGLE FAMILY HOME.
SO WHILE THEY ARE NOT SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED HOMES, WE'RE TRYING TO MATCH IN TERMS OF HEIGHT AND ARCHITECTURE, WHAT YOU WOULD OTHERWISE SEE IN A SINGLE FAMILY HOME.
SO THAT'S WHAT YOU SEE UP ALONG HERE AS YOU GO TO THE KIND OF OUTER SECTIONS OF IT, THOSE ARE THE 28 FOOT WIDE CARRIAGE HOMES, WHAT WE CALL.
AND THEN OBVIOUSLY DOWN HERE IN THIS CORNER, THIS IS PROPOSED ENTIRELY AS THE ACTIVE ADULT SECTION OF CARRIAGE HOMES AND VILLAS DOWN THERE.
SO THIS ENTIRE SECTION IS PROPOSED AS ACTIVE ADULT.
UM, YOU SEE A CLUBHOUSE AMENITY FACILITY UP THERE.
AND THEN LASTLY, THE STACK TOWN HOMES, WHICH YOU MENTIONED, WHICH ARE OBVIOUSLY A, A, A MORE INTENSIVE USE.
WE'VE CLUSTERED THOSE IN THE CENTER OF THE PROPERTY HERE WITH THE IDEA BEING THAT AS WE GET OUT OF THE CENTER, WE GET TO THE LESS AND LESS INTENSIVE USES.
WAKE WELLING ONE WAKE WELLING, 1 35 BENNINGTON ROAD.
MR. SATANIC, UH, I'D LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT IN THE SOUTHEASTERN PORTION OF THAT, UM, PLAN, YOU HAVE TOWNHOUSES AND STACK TOWNHOUSES.
THEY ARE ADJACENT TO R ONE PROPERTIES.
WHILE YOU'RE DOING THAT, I CAN YOU DOUBLE CHECK THAT THAT'S ON.
I DON'T THINK IT'S PICKING YOU UP AT ALL.
SO I'D LIKE TO POINT OUT ALL OF THOSE TOWNHOUSES THERE THAT IS GONNA RUIN THE VIEW SHED FOR ALL THE FOLKS IN THESE TWO LARGE DEVELOPMENTS.
I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU CAN REASONABLY SAY THAT THIS IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES AND HOW YOU ARE PRESERVING ANY VIEW SHEDS OR VIEWS FOR, FOR THESE PEOPLE.
I'D LIKE TO POINT OUT RIGHT HERE, THOSE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES ARE NOT ADJACENT TO ANY OTHER SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.
SO, UH, I JUST, UH, I REALLY CAN'T FOLLOW THE, THE WHOLE RATIONALE WITH, WITH, UH, THE APPROACH YOU'RE TAKING.
I DON'T UNDERSTAND, BASED ON THE LA NATURAL LANDS TRUST REPORT, WHY THIS DEVELOPMENT IS NOT OVER HERE.
WE READ IN THE NATURAL LANDS TRUST REPORT THAT THIS AREA CONTAINS CS AND THIS AREA IS CONNECTED TO THE HIGH VALUE AREAS IN THIS AREA.
SO I, I'D LIKE TO POINT THAT OUT FOR THE TRAFFIC STUDY.
I'D LIKE TO POINT OUT I HAVE 40 YEARS OF ENGINEERING EXPERIENCE AND I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW YOU CAN REASONABLY EXTRAPOLATE A VERY DIFFERENT 1200 UNIT PROPERTY DOWN TO A 600 UNIT PROPERTY.
THERE ARE TOO MANY VARIABLES INVOLVED.
I'LL ALSO POINT OUT THAT I OBSERVED WHEN THOSE TRAFFIC MEASURING DEVICES WERE IN PLACE, AND I SPECIFICALLY NOTED THAT THOSE WERE IN PLACE DURING LOW TRAFFIC TIMES OVER WEEKENDS, NOT DURING HIGH TRAFFIC TIMES.
I CAN SPECIFICALLY REMEMBER THAT THERE ARE MANY OTHER QUESTIONS I HAVE.
UM, I THINK PART OF MY TIME WAS TAKEN UP AS I WAS WORKING WITH THE, UH, THE MICROPHONE HERE.
SO, UM, WITH THE, UH, THE, THE PLAN I UNDERSTAND IS CURRENTLY AT 600 UNITS, BUT I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THE ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT IS ASKING WHAT IS SPECIFYING, I SHOULD SAY,
[01:30:02]
FIVE DWELLING UNITS PER GROSS ACRE INCOMPATIBLE IT.AND LEGALLY MY BELIEF IS THAT THE ZONING AMENDMENT, ZONING TAX AMENDMENT WOULD PREVAIL IN THIS CASE.
WE CAN ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, MR. BERMAN.
GOOD EVENING IS AT THIS POINT IT IS, BUT YOU GOTTA SPEAK.
THE REASON THAT THE DENSITY IS HIGHER IN THE, UM, ORDINANCE, THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE IS IN THE OPEN SPACE.
OKAY, WELL FIRST OF ALL, WE'RE GONNA PUT A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT ON THE ENTIRE PARCEL LIMITED DATE TO NO MORE THAN 600 UNITS, PERIOD.
SECOND, IN ORDER TO OFFSET THE REDUCTION OF DENSITY THAT WE'RE GIVING TO THE COMMUNITY AND TRYING TO TAKE IT FROM 1203 DOWN TO 600, WE'RE GOING TO ACTUALLY TAKE THE 30 USEFUL ACRES IN THE OPEN SPACE AND WE'RE GOING TO LAY THAT OUT FOR LOTS SO THAT WHEN WE GO TO DONATE IT, THIS IS ACTUALLY A, UM, THIS WAS ACTUALLY OFFERED BY ONE OF THE, UH, CITIZENS HERE.
WHY DON'T I DONATE THE LAND? AND THAT WAS ONE OF MY, UH, CONDITIONS TO NDR IS THAT I WANTED TO DONATE LAND TO THIS COMMUNITY.
AND IN ORDER TO MAXIMIZE VALUE, I'M GOING TO LAY THEM OUT FOR LOTS.
AND THEN WHEN I DONATE IT, I WILL GET THE MAXIMUM VALUE, WHICH WILL OFFSET THE REDUCTION IN DENSITY THAT I'M OFFERING, UH, TO THE TOWNSHIP AND THE COMMUNITY.
SO THE REASON IT'S IN THE ORDINANCE, EVEN THOUGH YOU CAN'T BUILD MORE THAN 600, IS TO ALLOW ME TO TAKE THAT EXCESS ORDINANCE DENSITY AND PUT IT INTO THE OPEN SPACE, VALUE IT, APPRAISE IT, AND DONATE IT.
I'D LIKE TO RAISE ONE OTHER POINT.
WE'VE DONE A LOT OF COMPARISONS TO A 1,203 UNIT PLAN.
THAT 1,203 UNIT PLAN NEVER DEMONSTRATED THAT THE 50% REQUIRED OPEN SPACE AND THE 30% CONTIGUOUS OPEN SPACE WAS MET.
WE'RE, WE'RE GOING TO MAKE THAT PRESENTATION.
IF WE GET TO THE CONDITION USE HEARING, WE'LL BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO SHOW HOW IT SATISFIES THAT CONDITION.
MA MAYBE GRAB, GRAB A MICROPHONE.
JUST HOLD IT REAL CLOSE TO YOUR, OKAY.
UH, FIRST OF ALL, I HAVE TO ATTEST TO THE FACT THAT THE TRAFFIC ON YEAGER ROAD IN THE SEVEN YEARS THAT I HAVE BEEN THERE HAS BECOME PROBABLY DOUBLE.
NOBODY FOLLOWS THE 35 MILE PER HOUR SPEED.
AND I HAVE GOTTEN ALMOST PREED TRYING TO TURN INTO MY DRIVEWAY GOING SOUTH ON YAGA BECAUSE PEOPLE DON'T PAY ATTENTION.
MY QUESTION IS, IS THERE ANY PLAN TO CONNECT JAGA ROAD TO SOUTH TRACK ROAD? NO.
AND COULD YOU CONFIRM AGAIN WHAT THE SET PACK IS? THOSE, THOSE UNITS ARE, UH, I BELIEVE IT'S 60 FOOT FROM THE RIGHT OF WAY LINE HERE.
THEY'RE 60, THE BACK 60, THE REAR IS 60 REARS ARE 60 FOOT SET BACK TO THE RIGHT OF WAY LINES? YES.
AND THE ONLY EXIT OVER HERE IS OUT ONTO SOUTH FRANK ROAD.
THERE'S ANOTHER, THERE'S ANOTHER EXIT A LITTLE BIT TO THE LEFT ON ROCK.
THAT'S ALL I, HI, UM, HELENE CANNING, UM, I LIVE IN ROYERS FORD, BUT MY QUESTION IS ABOUT, UM, THE TRAFFIC STUDY.
DID THAT INCLUDE 4 22 AT ALL AND HOW IT'S GOING TO IMPACT 4 22? SO IS YOUR QUESTION WHETHER OR NOT WE INCLUDED, LIKE IT COUNTED THE 4 22? YES, WE DID NOT.
[01:35:02]
AND THAT'S A HUGE PROBLEM.I ACTUALLY LIVE IN SPRING CITY, SO I'M JUST OVER THE RIVER.
UM, MY QUESTION IS, IS WAS THE 1200 UNIT PLAN EVER APPROVED? NO.
HAS IT GONE THROUGH CONDITIONAL USE? NO, IT'S PENDING MA'AM, THAT'S A CONDITIONAL USE HEARING THAT WILL BE HELD BEFORE, WAS IT BEFORE MAY 30TH IF THIS DOES NOT PROCEED.
SO IT HASN'T GONE THROUGH CONDITIONAL USE? NO.
IS THIS PARCEL IN THE ACT 5 37 PLAN? THE SILVER PLAN? NOT YET, BUT IT WILL BE.
YOU HAVE TO REALIZE THIS IS JUST SKETCH PLAN.
THIS IS NO ENGINEERING, THERE'S NO STORMWATER DESIGN YET.
I UNDERSTAND THAT ALL THAT'S REQUIRED BY THE ORDINANCE TO BE DONE BEFORE IT GETS FINISHED.
BUT THAT MEANS YOU HAVEN'T GOTTEN THE BOARD.
IT'S UP TO THE SUPERVISORS TO APPROVE ADDING A PARCEL INTO THE ACT 5 37 PLAN.
SO RIGHT NOW YOU'RE SAYING IT'S NOT IN THE PLAN AND THERE'S NO CAPACITY THAT'S BEEN DESIGNATED TO THIS.
SO THERE'S THAT WHOLE QUESTION OF WHO'S PAYING FOR THAT.
SO I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WAS IN ANY OF THE NUMBERS OF WHAT THIS PAYING FOR.
WE DO, YOU'RE GONNA DO THE SEWER EXIT EXPANSION PLAN.
WELL, 5 37 PLAN, WHICH IT MAY BE, I DON'T KNOW.
BUT IF WE NEED TO GET SUR CAPACITY, WE HAVE TO PAY THE JOINT AUTHORITY.
AND THE TOWNSHIP FOR EDS, IT'S A TOTAL OF 1286 TO OZ AND I DON'T KNOW, SEVEN TIMES THE NUMBER UNITS.
I KNOW IT'S, BUT THAT DECISION IS UP TO THE SUPERVISORS TO MAKE, SO MY OTHER QUESTION IS ABOUT THE COST OF THE SCHOOL DISTRICT.
SO IF I'M UNDERSTANDING THIS, THE CURRENT ZONING DOESN'T ALLOW, I MEAN IT'S 62 PLUS, CORRECT? CORRECT.
SO THERE WOULD BE NEGLIGIBLE, IF ANY IMPACT SCHOOL DISTRICT WISE IN TERMS OF EXPENSES.
SO I THINK YOU SAID THAT YOU GOT THE, UM, STATISTIC FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON HOW MANY STUDENTS? OKAY, SO MY, I'M IN THE OJR SCHOOL DISTRICT AND WE HAVE A, THEY HAVE A PROPRIETARY FORMULA, ACTUALLY THEY USE A THIRD PARTY TO COME UP WITH OUR ESTIMATES.
SO WHEN I THINK ABOUT WHAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION CAME UP, I'M THINKING THEY'RE LOOKING AT EVERY TYPE OF HOUSING ACROSS, NO, THE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTUALLY DIVIDES AN EXISTING HOUSING STOCK VERSUS NEW HOUSING STOCK.
AND THE NEW HOUSING STOCK IS SLIGHTLY LOWER THAN EXISTING OLDER HOUSING STOCK.
THERE TENDS TO BE FEWER SCHOOL AGE KIDS IN NEWER HOUSING STOCK THAN THERE IS IN THE OLDER STOCK.
SO ON 450 HOUSES, YOU'RE SAYING THERE'S ONLY GONNA BE 125 STUDENTS? I THINK THAT'S WHAT I HEARD YOU SAY.
WELL, OUT OF THAT, WELL, OUT OF THAT 25% YOU MIGHT THINK MIGHT NOT HAVE KIDS 'CAUSE THEY'RE 55 AND OVER.
ME BEING ME, I HAVE AN 11-YEAR-OLD, I'M 58.
I ALSO LIVED IN RIVERS BEND FOR SIX YEARS.
SO, UM, SO I THINK THOSE NUMBERS, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THOSE NUMBERS, THAT SEEMS REALLY LOW IN TERMS OF THE, THE IMPACT OF THE SCHOOL DISTRICT.
I MEAN, THAT'S LESS THAN A HALF A CHILD PER, PER HOME.
SO I, I WOULD JUST SAY TO THE BOARD, I WOULD LIKE TO GET MORE, YOU COULD ASK FOR MORE ACCURATE DATA AROUND THAT.
I THINK THAT SORT OF SEEMS ODD.
I KNOW OUR PROJECTIONS ARE VERY ACCURATE FOR OUR SCHOOL DISTRICT, AND I THINK IT WOULD BEHOOVE BEHOOVE YOU TO GO DIRECTLY TO THE SCHOOL DISTRICT TO GET THOSE IMPACTS.
I HAVE A QUESTION FOR ERIC, AND I'M NOT SURE, BUT IS THE, DOES YOUR NUMBER CONSIDER THE FACT THAT A NUMBER OF CHILDREN WILL GO TO PRIVATE, PUBLIC, PRIVATE CATHOLIC? OR WOULD SOME OF THOSE THAT WEIGHS CHILDREN, IT DOESN'T ACCOUNT FOR ALTERNATIVE SCHOOL SITUATIONS.
SO THERE COULD BE MORE THAN IT COULD BE ONE CHILD PERHAPS? CORRECT.
USUALLY THAT FORMULA INCLUDES, IT FACTORS IN THE PRIVATE, PUBLIC OR, AND PAROCHIAL SCHOOL THING.
I, I WOULD JUST SAY THAT I WOULD LIKE YOU SHOULD ALL ASK FOR THEM TO GO DIRECTLY TO THE SCHOOL DISTRICT TO GIVE YOU THOSE NUMBERS.
AND MY LAST POINT IS THE COST OF COMMUNITY SERVICES.
UM, I KNOW THAT MONTGOMERY COUNTY HAS ONE, CHESTER COUNTY HAS ONE.
WE ALL KNOW THAT IT COSTS MORE FOR COUNTIES, MUNICIPALITIES, MUNICIPALITIES WHEN THERE ARE HOMES BUILT
[01:40:01]
VERSUS OPEN LAND.SO YOU KNOW, WHAT REALLY IS THAT COST? UM, AND, AND LET'S FACTOR THAT IN.
THE MORE DENSITY YOU HAVE, THE MORE IT COSTS EMERGENCY SERVICES, POLLUTION, ROAD MAINTENANCE, ALL THOSE THINGS.
SO I REALLY THINK YOU HAVE TO LOOK VERY CLOSELY AT THOSE FINANCIAL NUMBERS.
AND I WOULD ADD THAT O OPEN SPACE DOES NOT ADD REVENUE, WHEREAS DEVELOPMENT WOULD ADD TAX REVENUE IN FORM OF REAL ESTATE TAXES.
AND IN TERMS OF CERTAIN DEVELOPMENTS IN CERTAIN TOWNSHIPS EARNED INCOME TAXES.
SO THE VALUE OF THE DEVELOPMENT ALSO MATTERS IN TERMS OF AFFORDABILITY ON THE EARNED INCOME TAX BASIS AS WELL.
AND MY, MY REBUTTAL TO THAT IS THAT THE AVERAGE COST, I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S ANY SCHOOL DISTRICT PEOPLE HERE, BUT IT'S ON AVERAGE IT'S $20,000 PER STUDENT AND ONE HOUSEHOLD'S TAX DOESN'T EVEN COVER THAT.
I'VE BEEN THROUGH THIS WITH JOHN BENSON FOR THREE YEARS.
I'M ON THE BOARD OF EASTMANS AND ADVOCACY AND I'VE BEEN WORKING WITH SOME OF YOUR COMMUNITY MEMBERS.
YOU GUYS ARE DOING A GREAT JOB.
WE'RE RIGHT NEXT DOOR IN SPRING CITY, BUT, YOU KNOW, KEEP BRINGING THE GREAT QUESTIONS AND DOING YOUR HOMEWORK.
I THINK YOU'VE DONE AN EXCELLENT JOB, BUT I REALLY HOPE THE SUPERVISOR THANK YOU FOR LETTING ME SPEAK.
WE'LL REALLY LOOK CLOSELY AT THOSE FINANCIAL PROJECTIONS.
IS THERE A SECOND CHANCE TO TALK? IS THERE, IS THERE ANOTHER, LIKE A ONE MINUTE THING? THERE WILL BE A SECOND CHANCE ONCE EVERYBODY GOES.
SINCE WE'RE DOWN TO RESIDENCE, WHO DON'T LIVE IN THE TOWNSHIP TALKING, I JUST CAME UP NOW.
FIRST OF ALL, UH, ALBERT VAGNOZZI, YOUR NAME SIR ALBERT ZI.
I SERVED ON THE BOARD SUPERVISORS FROM 2016 TO 2021.
UH, FIRST OF ALL, MVR SHOULD HAVE BEEN HERE A LONG TIME AGO.
THEY PROVIDED A LOT OF INFORMATION THAT I'M SURE A LOT OF PEOPLE APPRECIATED HEARING, UH, BECAUSE THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF RUMOR AND INNUENDO OUT THERE.
FIRST I, THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TO SEND THIS SECOND PLAN TO THE, UH, PLANNING COMMISSION.
LET THE, LET THE PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW IT.
UM, I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF A PLAN TO DEVELOP THE PARKHOUSE PROPERTY.
HOWEVER, RECENT DEVELOPMENTS AND INFORMATION RECEIVED ABOUT THE CURRENT ZONING COURT DECISIONS, I CHANGED MY MIND.
AND I'M IN FAVOR OF A NEGOTIATED AGREEMENT WITH THE BUILDER AND OR THE PROPERTY OWNER AS A SUPERVISOR.
AND TO THIS DAY, I'M PRAGMATIC AND WHAT THAT MEANS, I'M CONCERNED MORE WITH THE MATTERS OF FACT THEN WITH WHAT COULD OR SHOULD BE.
I URGE EACH SUPERVISOR TO BE PRAGMATIC, EVEN IF IT'S NOT POPULAR.
THIS DUE PLAN IS A RELIEF VALVE FOR THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TO CONTINUE, UH, TO CONSIDER TO WORK WITH THE PROPOSED HOME COUNT IS MORE THAN HALF THE CURRENT PLAN.
THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO WORK TOWARDS A MUTUALLY AGREEABLE PLAN.
THE ISSUES OF TRAFFIC WATER RUNOFF AND SOME OF THE OTHER ISSUES THAT BROUGHT UP WILL BE CURED IN THE PLANNING PROCESS.
THERE'S NO DRAINAGE CONTROL ON THAT PROPERTY.
WHEN THAT'S WHEN THAT'S COMPLETED, IT'LL BE CONTROLLED.
AND BY THE WAY, ALL THE THINGS THAT TRAFFIC AND THE, UM, WATER OFF RUN OFF WERE THE SAME ISSUES THAT YOU LIVE IN, IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT YOU LIVE IN NOW, SAME ISSUES WERE THERE AND THEY WERE CURED BEFORE YOUR HOUSE WAS BUILT.
NOW I'M GONNA REPEAT MYSELF, UM, BECAUSE A LOT OF TIMES HERE, UM, KING OF PRUSSIA COMES UP, NOBODY WANTS KING OF PRUSSIA, BUT THE WAY WE'RE GOING WITH THE JUST SAY NO MANTRA, WE'RE GONNA END UP LIKE KING OF PRUSSIA.
IF WE DON'T HAVE A NEGOTIATED AGREEMENT, THEY'RE GONNA SUE THE TOWNSHIP.
THEY'RE GONNA SUE THE BOARD MEMBERS.
IT'S GONNA COST US HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS BECAUSE SOMETHING'S GETTING BUILT THERE.
KING OF PRUSSIA HAPPENED BECAUSE THEY JUST SAID NO FOR 40 YEARS.
THEY PAID MILLIONS IN FINES AND THAT'S WHY YOU HAVE WHAT YOU HAVE NO CONTROL BECAUSE THE COURT TOLD THEM, THE BUILDER OR THE OWNER CAN BUILD ANYTHING THEY WANT.
SO IF YOU WANT THIS AS OPPOSED TO 1200 HOMES, IT'S TIME TO HAVE A CONVERSATION.
THIS IS WHAT THEY'RE, THEY WANT TO GO THROUGH THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
IT'S TIME TO HAVE A DISCUSSION AND COME UP WITH A MUTUALLY AGREEABLE CLAIM, IF NOT 1200.
[01:45:13]
SO, UM, WHY CAN'T WE JUST HAVE THAT? ALL RIGHT, TONY PATRICK.UM, SO YOU GUYS PROJECTED LIKE THE TECH SCHOOL TAXES AND STUFF AND WE'RE ALREADY GOING THROUGH LIKE A BUDGET.
I'VE LIVED HERE MY WHOLE LIFE.
WE DON'T HAVE A NAME AND AN ADDRESS YET.
UM, SO IS THIS SOMEONE, Y'ALL CAN HEAR ME, RIGHT? SO RIGHT NOW THE SCHOOL BUDGET, THEY CAN'T EVEN GET THE BUDGET GOING FOR OUR OWN SCHOOL.
AND MR. CLINTON WAS HERE, BUT HE LEFT.
UM, I CAN'T AFFORD ANY MORE TAXES.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU THINK THAT THESE PEOPLE ARE GONNA BE PAYING THEIR TAXES TO DO THIS.
I HAVE 44 HOMES AND 35 ACRES WHERE I LIVE.
WHEN THEY BUILT THE HOMES ACROSS THE STREET AND UP THE HILL FROM ME.
AND 1992 IS WHEN THEY, UH, 94, THEY BUILT THE HOMES WITH THE, UH, PERMEABLE WITH A BASE AT THE TOP OF THE HILL.
I HAVE THREE CELL PUMPS IN MY BASEMENT NOW.
ONE OF THE SUPERVISORS CAME OUT TO MY YARD, TOLD ME THAT I LIVE OVER TRIBUTARIES, THE PERKY AND THE SCHULL COME TOGETHER WHERE I LIVE RIGHT HERE.
YOU GOT THE SCHULL ALL ALONG DOWN THERE IN MONTCLAIR, ALL FLOODED LAST YEAR.
THE BIG ZIP BIG, UM, STORM THAT IS GOING TO FLOOD.
I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY AL WOULD SAY THAT THAT'S BEST FOR OUR, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE GONNA CURE THAT AREA.
NONE OF THESE PEOPLE, I, I DON'T EVEN KNOW HOW MANY PEOPLE HAVE LIVED HERE THEIR WHOLE LIVES TO SEE.
NO FLOODING, NOW WE HAVE TONS OF FLOODING, ALL THOSE HOMES.
YOU, YOU SUBTRACT OUT THAT LAND THAT'S POISON THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE CO2 AND YOU WANNA SAVE THE EARTH.
WHERE'S THE EV LITTLE, UH, STATIONS IN THERE? YOU GOT THE ELECTRICAL CARS GONNA BE COMING IN.
WE HAD A FIRE THAT A CAR BLEW UP IN THE HOUSE OFF OF BLACKROCK ROAD.
WE HAD A FIRE WITH AN ACCIDENT WITH AN EV CAR UP BY TARGET.
I LITERALLY WAS SITTING AT MY WINDOW AND LOOKING AND I'D SEE A CAR BLOWING UP.
SO WITH ALL OF THESE HOMES AND I GOT THE 44 HOMES IN MY AREA, THE, UH, THE OLDER PEOPLE ARE MOVING OUT AND THE YOUNGER PEOPLE ARE MOVING IN.
THEY'RE COMING IN WITH, UH, THE TWO CARS, THE TWO BABIES, THE BABY AND PREGNANT WOMEN AND STUFF.
WE HAVE 10 FAMILIES RIGHT NOW THAT'S EXPECTED, 20 CHILDREN THAT, AND THEY'RE ALL UNDER FIVE RIGHT NOW.
SO COMING INTO OUR SCHOOL DISTRICT, WE'RE GONNA NEED ANOTHER SCHOOL.
WE'RE GOING AND THE BUILDING SPRING CITY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, REBUILDING THAT OR SOMETHING, DOING WHATEVER WITH THAT.
BUT YOU'RE SAYING 126 HOMES OUT OF, UH, CHILDREN OUTTA THAT AREA? I DOUBT IT VERY MUCH.
SO I, I'M NOT HAPPY WITH ONE'S GOING ON.
I WISH, YOU KNOW, GO BACK TO MARYLAND, IS MY OPINION.
UH, BILL FELTON, OLD STATE ROAD.
UH, ON THE APPLICATION THAT YOU SUBMITTED, UM, IT SHOWS IN THESE TOP RIGHT HAND CORNER AND TO THE RIGHT ALONG YAGER ROAD, THERE'S A DELINEATION AND A NOTE THAT SAYS LIMIT OF TOWNSHIP OPEN SPACE.
YET ON THIS PLAN, THEY'RE SHOWING IN A RED OUTLINE THAT THAT'S ALL TO BE OPEN SPACE.
AND I YOU, YOU, YOU ELABORATED ABOUT THAT A LITTLE BIT.
DO YOU WANT TO EXPLAIN THAT AGAIN? I DON'T KNOW THAT I UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION.
WELL, ON YOUR APPLICATION, THERE'S A NOTE HERE.
AND THE, THE TWO PIECES OF LAND ALONG OLD STATE ROAD IN THE TOP RIGHT THERE AND ALONG YEAGER ROAD ON THE RIGHT SIDE ARE NOT SHOWN AS OPEN SPACE ON THIS PLANT.
THERE'S A, A LINE THAT SAYS LIMIT OF OPEN SPACE.
AND YOU JUST STARTED TO EXPLAIN SOMETHING ABOUT YOU ARE GONNA SHOW THAT AS BUILDING LOTS.
YOU WANT TO FINISH THAT? NO, I'M, I'M GOING TO WAIT TILL YOU FINISH.
I, I WANT TO HEAR WHAT YOU SAID SO I UNDERSTAND.
SO I DON'T KNOW THAT I CAN ANSWER THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT AND WHAT'S THERE WITHOUT SPENDING MORE TIME TO LOOK AT IT RIGHT AWAY.
UM, BUT THERE'S ABOUT 30 ACRES OF BUILDABLE LAND THAT WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO DO, BECAUSE WE KEEP REDUCING THE DENSITY, IS TO GET THAT, THAT LOSS OF DENSITY VALUE
[01:50:01]
BACK IS TO TAKE THE 30 ACRES AND TO LAY OUT LOTS THERE, UM, WITH NO INTENTION TO EVER BUILD THEM.AND IT IS, AND IT'LL BE RESTRICTED BY A COVENANT THAT WILL CAP IT AT 600 ANYWAY.
SO THAT WHEN WE DONATE THE LAND, WHEN I DONATE THE LAND TO THIS TOWNSHIP FOR THEIR USE, THAT I WILL GET THE BEST VALUE FOR THAT, UH, APPRAISED THAT APPRAISAL THAT I'M DONATING THE LAMB FOR.
I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION.
WELL, IT, BUT THAT WAS THE CONCEPT.
YEAH, I MEAN THE, THE THING IS, HAD THIS BEEN CONVEYED TO THE SUPERVISORS BEFORE THIS MEETING ABOUT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE APPLICATION AND THE LIMITS OF THE OPEN SPACE AND WHAT'S BEEN PRESENTED, I UNDERSTAND WHAT'S BEEN PRESENTED ON THE SCREEN, RIGHT? I I UNDERSTAND IT'S TWO DIFFERENT PLANS.
LOOK AT IT'S TWO DIFFERENT PLANS.
THE PLAN, MR. DOMAN, THE PLAN HAS, HAS CHANGED SINCE IT WAS SUBMITTED WITH THE APPLICATION.
BUT THE SUPERVISORS ULTIMATELY DON'T CONSIDER THE PLAN THE PLAN UNTIL IT GOES INTO SUBDIVISION OF LAND DEVELOPMENT.
THEY'RE CONSIDERING THE ORDINANCE.
SO THE PLAN HERE IS DEMONSTRATIVE TO GIVE THIS THE SUPERVISORS AND THE PUBLIC AN UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT COULD OR MAY BE DEVELOPED UNDER THE ORDINANCE.
AND THE OFFER, UH, OR THE POTENTIAL OFFER OF THE DONATION OF, OF THE LAND HAS, WAS CONVEYED, UH, TO THE SUPERVISORS THROUGH MYSELF.
WELL, YOU KNOW, WE, WE, WE NEED TO KNOW.
SO THERE WAS A REVISION IS WHAT HE SAID.
BETWEEN THE TIME THE APPLICATION AND THIS, UH, I THINK THE, I THINK THE UNIT COUNT ON WHAT YOU HAD IS ACTUALLY GREATER THAN 600 ON THE APPLICATION.
WE CONTINUED TO REDUCE IT 614 ON THAT SIX AS WE CONTINUE, IT'S A LITTLE MISLEADING AS TO WHAT WASN'T, IT WASN'T INTENDED TO BE MISLEADING.
WELL, IN, IN WRITING IT APPEARS TO NO, I UNDERSTAND.
BUT IT WASN'T INTENDED TO BE THAT CONSIDERED.
I THINK TONIGHT IS THE, THE ORDINANCE, UH, REGARDING THE, THE SCHOOL, UH, DISTRICT COSTS AND SO FORTH.
UM, DO THOSE NUMBERS INCLUDE A CALCULATION FOR THE COST TO BUILD IN NEW SCHOOLS IF NECESSARY? THAT WASN'T ASSESSED YET.
IT WILL HAVE TO BE ASSESSED AS PART OF THE PROCESS, PROBABLY WITH THE SCHOOL CAPACITY.
SO THAT WAS STRICTLY JUST TO EDUCATE.
THAT'S THE CHILDREN EDUCATIONAL PROCESS.
AND, UH, YOU KNOW, FINALLY THE LAST ONE OF THE QUESTIONS ASKED EARLIER WAS, CONSIDERING THAT EVERYTHING THAT'S BEEN DEVELOPED AROUND THE PERIMETER OF THIS PROPERTY, ALL THE OTHER FARMS WERE DEVELOPED AT AN R ONE DENSITY.
WHAT, WHAT'S YOUR EXPLANATION THAT YOU THINK YOU SHOULD HAVE THE RIGHT TO DEVELOP THIS AT THIS HIGHER DENSITY? BECAUSE THE, THE PROPERTY IS NOT ZONED FOR R ONE.
IT'S ZONED FOR THE INSTITUTIONAL OVERLAY THAT ALLOWS FOR 1200 TO THREE UNITS.
BUT YOU WANT TO DO RESIDENTIAL.
AND IT, IT PERMITS RESIDENTIAL UNDER THE CURRENT ZONE.
I HAVE OTHER ADVICE THAT IT DOESN'T.
AND THE DENSITY UNDER THE INSTITUTIONAL WOULD ALLOW FOR 65% OPEN SPACE.
SO, YOU KNOW, I THINK WE NEED TO GO WITH THE CONDITIONAL USE HEARINGS.
ONCE WE OPEN THIS PANDORA'S BOX, WE'RE ALREADY NOT GETTING INFORMATION THAT'S CONSISTENT FROM THE TIME OF THE APPLICATION TO THE PRESENTATION.
SO, YOU KNOW, MOVING FORWARD, IT'S ALL ALREADY BEEN, UH, SAID THAT THE, UH, ON OFF FACILITIES MIGHT GO ONTO THE OPEN SPACE.
I MEAN, THERE'S SO MANY INCONSISTENCIES HERE.
UM, I HOPE THIS GETS DENIED AND WE JUST MOVE FORWARD WITH THE INITIAL USE HEARING.
UM, JUDY CONLEY, 72 ROUNDWOOD CIRCLE.
MY QUESTION IS 125 STUDENTS FOR 450 HOMES IS JUST NOT REALISTIC.
I'VE LIVED HERE FOR ALMOST 30 YEARS.
I'VE SEEN THE IMPACT ON THE SCHOOLS.
WHAT ELEMENTARY SCHOOL WOULD THESE CHILDREN GO TO? FOUR YEARS? I HAVEN'T ASSESSED THAT YET.
THAT, OKAY, WELL WE NEED AN ANSWER FOR THAT.
AND WE NEED THE CURRENT, UM, THE AMOUNT OF STUDENTS IN THAT ELEMENTARY SCHOOL NOW, WHAT CAPACITY IT, WHAT CAPACITY IT IS, WHAT CAPACITY ARE IN THE MIDDLE SCHOOLS AND WHAT CAPACITY ARE IN THE HIGH SCHOOLS.
ARE WE GONNA NEED A NEW HIGH SCHOOL? I, THERE IS NO WAY THAT THERE'S GONNA BE 125 STUDENTS.
I'M THINKING MORE BETWEEN 800 TO
[01:55:01]
1200.CAN I ASK YOU, UH, YOUR NUMBERS ARE, YOUR NUMBERS ARE LOOKING AT PEOPLE THAT ARE RETIRED, NOT NEW HOMES AND THE YOU CAN SHAKE YOUR HEAD.
I'VE LIVED HERE, I'VE GONE THROUGH THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS.
I LIVE IN A DEVELOPMENT RIGHT NOW WITH TONS OF LITTLE KIDS.
THE, THE DEVELOPMENTS ARE TURNING OVER.
THIS IS A VERY DESIRABLE SCHOOL DISTRICT FOR PEOPLE TO MOVE INTO.
MA'AM, I CAN TELL YOU THAT IF WE GO FORWARD TO GO TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, WE WILL BRING WITH US THE MONTGOMERY COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY THAT TELLS YOU HOW MANY CHILDREN TO EXPECT FROM A TOWNHOUSE FROM A SINGLE FAMILY HOME.
I WANNA KNOW FOR THIS TOWNSHIP, I DON'T WANNA, I DON'T CARE ABOUT WHAT HAPPENS IN SHELTON HAM.
I WANNA KNOW WHAT HAPPENS IN UPPER, UPPER PROVIDENCE TOWNSHIP.
MAYBE THAT
SO YOU GET YOUR NUMBERS STRAIGHT AND YOU PRESENTED TO THE BOARD.
AND, UM, SO I'M TRYING, I REALLY AM TRYING TO STAY OPEN-MINDED.
UM, AND I'M, I'M VERY APPRECIATIVE WE'VE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TONIGHT TO LISTEN.
I THINK THE COMMUNITY HAS BEEN LONG WAITING.
THIS, WE SHOULD HAVE PROBABLY DONE THIS A YEAR AGO.
UM, AND I THINK THAT THE CHALLENGE THAT I'M HAVING WITH THIS IS THAT I MOVED TO THIS COMMUNITY 24 YEARS AGO AND I LIVE ON THAT LITTLE CORNER SPOT WHERE I'M ON A KIND OF DEAD END.
SO OUR TRAFFIC ISSUE HAS BEEN TRULY A NIGHTMARE.
AND I BELIEVE THERE'S A TRAFFIC STUDY.
I'D LOVE TO SEE THE PUBLIC DOCUMENT.
IF IT'S IN THE TOWNSHIP NOW, I THINK IT SHOULD BE RELEASED ON THE TOWNSHIP WEBSITE SO EVERY CITIZEN CAN SEE IT.
WE'RE NOT GONNA PUT ANYTHING THAT DEALS WITH THE 1,203 UNITS ANYWHERE UNTIL WE HAVE THE CONDITIONAL USE HERE.
I, I'M JUST, IF THERE'S A TOWN, IF THERE'S A DOCUMENT, MR. TIPMAN OR TOWNSHIP, IF THERE'S A TRAFFIC STUDY THAT HAS BEEN CONDUCTED, WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO SEE IT.
IT'S A HEALTH SAFETY WELFARE OF THIS COMMUNITY.
THAT'S THE FIRST THING WHEN YOU LEAVE MY HOME, I LITERALLY HAD TO HONK FOUR TIMES AT A PERSON WHO TRIED TO HIT ME TODAY AS I WAS COMING OUT OF DR.
AND I THINK MANY OF OUR RESIDENTS HERE HAVE THAT SAME CHALLENGE.
PERSONAL PROBLEM WHERE I WOUND UP BUYING A HOUSE.
YOU UNDERSTAND THAT THE ORDINANCE THAT WE'RE PROPOSING REQUIRES A TRAFFIC STUDY.
SO IT WILL BE DONE IF THE ORDINANCE IS ADOPTED.
WE'D LIKE TO SEE IT ANY BE DONE IF THE ORDINANCE IS ADOPTED, WHY WOULD WE DO A TRAFFIC STUDY FOR 600 HOMES IF THE ORDINANCE IS NOT GONNA BE ADOPTED AND WE'RE GONNA BUILD 1,203 HOMES GONNA SHOW A TRAFFIC STUDY HAD TO BE DONE.
ME FOR THIS PART BECAUSE WE'RE NOT, THIS IS NOT A, A DISCOVERY MEETING.
IT CERTAINLY SOUNDS LIKE IT'S A HEARING.
MY SECOND QUESTION IS, IS, AND I THINK THIS HAS BEEN REFERENCED BEFORE, R ONE IS ALL SURROUNDING THIS COMMUNITY.
WE'RE NOT OPPOSED TO DEVELOPMENT, WE ARE OPPOSED TO DENSITY.
THE HIGH DENSITY, THE 1203 WAS JUST, IT IS WHAT IT IS, RIGHT? WE RECOGNIZE THAT, THAT'S WHY WE'VE BEEN DEALING WITH THIS FOR A YEAR.
BUT WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WHY AREN'T WE TRYING TO CONSIDER AN R ONE LOWER DENSITY OR RR ONE WITH SOME TYPE OF A TERM OF AGREEMENT ABOUT WHAT IS, IS DENSITY ON AN ACRE, OKAY? I DON'T NECESSARILY SEE THAT 600 UNITS WILL DO ANYTHING DIFFERENT THAN 1,203 UNITS BECAUSE IT'S STILL THE NUMBER, THE POPULATION, THE HEALTH OF WELFARE, THE EMS, THE TRAFFIC, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT, ALL THE THINGS WE'VE TALKED ABOUT.
AND I GUESS MY PLEA TO YOU IS WHY NOT CONSIDER R ONE AND DO SOMETHING DIFFERENTLY ON THAT PROPERTY WITH R ONE SINCE THAT'S KIND OF THE UNDERLYING ZONING.
I MEAN, IT'S ZONED INSTITUTIONAL.
AND SO I HAVE THE RIGHT TO BUILD IT AS INSTITUTIONAL.
WHY WOULD I, WHY WOULD I CONSIDER ANY OTHER ZONE THAN WHAT I PURCHASED IT FOR? OKAY.
[02:00:01]
I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT I'VE BEEN ASKED TO, TO GIVE AN ALTERNATIVE AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE DOING.THIS, IT WAS, I IT WAS NEVER ME THAT ASKED TO STRAY AWAY FROM THE 1203.
I'VE BEEN ASKED BY SOME COMMUNITY PEOPLE TO WHAT ELSE CAN I OFFER.
I'VE BEEN ASKED, UM, BY THE SOLICITOR, WHAT ELSE CAN I DO? LOOKING OUT FOR THE INTEREST OF THE 24,000 PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN THIS TOWNSHIP.
I'M TRYING TO WORK WITH EVERYONE.
NOT EVERYONE'S GONNA GET WHAT THEY WANT, BUT THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO.
WE'D LIKE TO WORK WITH YOU TO GIVE YOU THE FULL TIME.
MR. BERMAN, I APPRECIATE THAT.
I MEAN, I'M LISTENING TO, I'VE GOT A LOT OF DIFFERENT PEOPLE THAT I'M TRYING TO MAKE HAPPY AND WE ALL, WE ALL ARE.
AND THAT'S WHY I TRY TO REACH OUT TO YOU.
BUT I WAS SORT OF STONEWALLED FROM DOING THAT.
AND I'D LIKE TO GIVE MY PHONE NUMBER AND MY EMAIL TO ANYONE IN THIS ROOM WHO WANTS THIS? WHO WANTS TO CALL ME? WE WERE NOT STONEWALLED.
YOU WENT TO 10 PEOPLE TO THE SOLICITOR.
WHEN HE ASKED FOR IT, HE SAID, CAN I MEET WITH 10 PEOPLE? I JUST MIRRORED THE CONDITION FOR WHICH YOU MET WITH HIM.
AND ALL WE ASKED FOR WAS A COMMUNITY PRESENTED EVERYTHING IN THE COMMUNITY.
NO PRESENT, PRESENT THIS TO THE COMMUNITY.
MR. I I, I DON'T THINK IT SERVES ANYBODY TO LITIGATE A CONVERSATION ABOUT A, A COMMUNITY MEETING.
HOLD ON MR. HERMAN MY EMAIL ADDRESS.
BUT SO YOU, YOU CAN HAVE THAT CONVERSATION IF YOU WANT TO.
I, I KNOW WE'RE THE, THE TIME IS UP FOR MS. BRIGHT.
IF YOU WANTED TO FINALIZE THE, I CAN'T RECALL NOW WHAT YOUR LAST QUESTION WAS.
WE WILL HAVE A SECOND OPPORTUNITY.
I JUST DON'T WANNA LITIGATE A CONVERSATION THAT IS UNRELATED TO THE ORDINANCE.
WHY NOT MAKE IT COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES? BECAUSE IT'S AN INSTITUTIONAL USE.
AND SO THAT'S WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR AND THAT'S WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO BUILD.
EXCEPT I'VE BEEN ASKED BY MULTIPLE PEOPLE FOR ALTERNATIVES.
AND SO I'M TRYING TO ADDRESS THOSE PEOPLE'S REQUESTS.
MY SUGGESTION WOULD BE WHAT, WHAT WE'VE PROPOSED IS TRYING TO BE COMPATIBLE WITH WHAT CAN BE BUILT UNDER THE EXISTING ZONING AND WHAT YOU'VE ASKED.
AND, AND AGAIN, I APPRECIATE THE THREE DAYS NOTICE BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY THERE WAS SIGNIFICANT PREPARATION TIME GIVEN TO ROYERS FOR HOLDINGS IN PREPARING FOR THIS EVENING'S MEETING.
MY NAME IS KENT WEGER LIVE ON NINE 62ND AVENUE.
AND MY SON WOULD LIKE TO ASK A QUESTION.
HI, I AM HERE BECAUSE HONESTLY, FORGIVE ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT I DIDN'T HEAR ANYTHING MENTIONING PHOENIXVILLE AND GROWING AREAS IN THAT AREA.
I HEARD A LOT ABOUT BLACKROCK.
BUT WITH THIS, I MEAN, AS IT IS, LIKE WHAT, WHAT IS IT GONNA BE LIKE IN 20 YEARS WHEN WE HAVE THIS INFRASTRUCTURE THAT YOU ARE SUGGESTING WHEN WE'RE ALREADY LIKE, IT'S IMPOSSIBLE TO GET FOUR, FIVE SCHOOL BUSES INTO PHOENIXVILLE, INTO THE CHARTER SCHOOL, WHICH IS GROWING AND EXPANDING.
AND I'M JUST WONDERING, WHAT ARE YOU GONNA DO ABOUT 20 YEARS FROM NOW WHEN THIS MIGHT NOT BE THE SOLUTION THAT WE ARE ALL LOOKING FOR? WHO'S THAT ADDRESS TO THAT TRAFFIC STATEMENT I GUESS? SORRY, I'LL JUST, I'LL JUST SPEAK UP FOR LOUD.
UM, I WILL TELL YOU THAT AS A TRAFFIC ENGINEER, WE LOOK AT, UM, AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, THE SURROUNDING AREA OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND IN CONCERT WITH THE TOWNSHIP IN CONCERT WITH PENDO, WE TRY TO DEFINE A STUDY AREA THAT WE THINK THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE AN IMPACT FROM THE DEVELOPMENT.
I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH PHOENIXVILLE.
THERE'S BEEN A SIGNIFICANT GROWTH IN DEVELOPMENT IN PHOENIXVILLE APARTMENTS, UM, RETAIL, THOSE TYPE OF THINGS.
UM, AND IT IS CHALLENGING BECAUSE THERE IS LIMITED SPACE WITHIN PHOENIXVILLE TO WORK IN.
UM, BUT I WOULD SAY THAT, AND THIS IS PROBABLY GONNA COME OUT WRONG, THAT'S PHOENIX BILL'S ISSUE TO DEAL WITH, NOT NECESSARILY OUR ISSUE TO DEAL WITH.
SO WE COULD LOOK AT THE, THE ISSUES THAT EXIST, UH, FURTHER DOWN, UM, IN KING OF PRUSSIA.
WE COULD GO AS FAR AS PHOENIXVILLE, WE COULD GO UP TO POTTSTOWN, BUT WE HAVE TO LOOK AT A FINITE AREA.
AND OUR RESPONSIBILITY IS TO MITIGATE THE IMPACT OF THE DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THAT FINITE AREA.
SIMILARLY, PEOPLE THAT ARE PROPOSING DEVELOPMENTS IN PHOENIXVILLE ARE SURROUNDING PHOENIXVILLE.
WE'RE ALSO RESPONSIBLE FOR MITIGATING THE IMPACT OF THEIR DEVELOPMENT AND THEIR FINITE AREA WITH THE HOPES THAT OVER TIME
[02:05:01]
EVERYONE MITIGATES THEIR IMPACTS AND YOU'LL HAVE, UH, OBVIOUSLY A MORE EFFICIENT AND MORE SAFE ROADWAY SYSTEM.I CAN'T CONTROL WHAT HAPPENS IN PHOENIXVILLE WITH RESPECT TO THIS PROJECT.
UM, AND AGAIN, NOR SHOULD THIS PROJECT HAVE ANY RESPONSIBILITY IN MITIGATING OR IMPROVING TRAFFIC OPERATIONS AND GETTING IN AND OUT OF PHOENIXVILLE.
I UNDERSTAND IT'S, IT'S DIFFICULT.
I'M ALSO ON THE CHESTER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION, SO I HEAR ABOUT THESE TYPES OF ISSUES ALL THE TIME.
UM, BUT TO TO, TO MAKE A A LONG STORY SHORT, IT'S, IT IS REALLY THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE BOROUGH AND THE SURROUNDING MUNICIPALITIES THERE TO FIX THOSE ISSUES RELATED TO THOSE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENTS THAT COME IN.
HAVE YOU TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT GROWTH IN BUSINESSES AND INDUSTRIES? BECAUSE I KNOW THAT WITH THE CURRENT PLAN, PROBABLY A LOT OF PEOPLE WOULD BE LOOKING TO MOVE HERE WITHIN, 'CAUSE IT'S NOT FAR AWAY FROM PHOENIXVILLE FOR JOBS.
SO THEY MIGHT LIVE IN PHOENIXVILLE, BUT LIKE, IT, IT'S STUPID TO JUST NOT CONSIDER THE FACT THAT WE ARE LIVING IN A HIGH, AN AREA THAT'S GONNA GROW A LOT WITHIN THE NEXT 50 YEARS.
AND WHAT'S JUST, WHAT'S GONNA HAPPEN WITH THIS AREA? WHAT'S GONNA KEEP IT FROM EXPANDING MORE? 'CAUSE MORE PEOPLE NEED TO GET JOBS IN PHOENIXVILLE AND MORE PEOPLE NEED TO GET JOBS IN KING OF PRUSSIA BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE THERE'S AREAS LIKE THIS, OTHER PARTS OF MONTGOMERY COUNTY, BUT SPECIFICALLY IN ROERS FOR THAT COULD ALSO BE SUBJECT TO DEVELOPMENT.
AND I'M JUST WONDERING WHAT IS THIS GONNA SET AN EXAMPLE TO? WHAT ARE, WHAT IS THE BOROUGH GOING TO ALLOW TO HAPPEN WITH IF THIS IS APPROVED? SO I CAN'T TELL YOU WHAT THE BOROUGH'S GONNA ALLOW TO HAPPEN.
BOROUGH HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WHAT'S HAPPENING HERE TONIGHT.
UH, THE BOROUGH'S RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT IN THE BOROUGH OF
THE TOWNSHIP, UH, LOOKS TOWARDS THE FUTURE.
THEY PROVIDE COMPREHENSIVE PLANS TO KIND OF LOOK AT WHAT THEY THINK IS GOING TO HAPPEN.
THE COUNTY HAS ITS OWN COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
UM, THEY HAVE WHAT'S CALLED A TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE, AND THAT IS LOOKING AT GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE MUNICIPAL BOUNDARIES AND WHAT INFRASTRUCTURE MAY BE NEEDED AS A RESULT OF THAT DEVELOPMENT.
AND THAT'S WHY, AS I MENTIONED, AS PART OF MY PRESENTATION, WE WOULD BE SUBJECT TO AN IMPACT FEE OF NEARLY $900,000.
AND THAT WOULD BE MONEY GOING TOWARDS THE TOWNSHIP THAT THE TOWNSHIP CAN USE TO PROVIDE FOR INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS FOR TRAFFIC THAT'S RELATED TO PHOENIXVILLE OR RELATED TO LIMERICK TOWNSHIP OR WHEREVER IT MAY BE THAT COMES THROUGH THIS TOWNSHIP THAT CAUSES CONGESTION AND OR DELAY AT CERTAIN INTERSECTION.
SO THERE'S ALWAYS PLANNING GOING ON COMPREHENSIVE PLANS, IMPACT FEES, UH, ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT PLANS, UH, TRAFFIC STUDIES.
IT'S A EVOLVING, UH, PROCESS DEPENDING ON DEVELOPMENT AND EVERYONE TRIES TO DO THEIR BEST TO LOOK ON THAT CRYSTAL BALL AND FIGURE OUT WHAT, WHAT WE NEED TO DO IN ORDER TO MITIGATE STORM WATER TO MITIGATE TRAFFIC IN THOSE TYPES OF SITUATIONS.
JUST LIKE, NOT NECESSARILY TO YOU OVERALL, BUT LIKE TO ALL
WHAT WOULD YOU THINK IF YOU WERE A KID HERE WATCHING THE DEVELOPMENT TAKE OVER OUR PRECIOUS OPEN LAND LIKE YOU HAVE TO THINK ABOUT? IT'S A VERY FAIR QUESTION AND, AND ALL OF YOUR QUESTIONS WERE INSIGHTFUL, BUT IT COMES BACK TO THE FACT THAT THIS IS NOT OPEN SPACE OWNED BY THE TOWNSHIP OR THE COUNTY.
IT IS PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNED BY A PROPER PROPERTY OWNER.
AND MUCH AS YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO DO ON YOUR PROPERTY, WHAT YOU'RE ALLOWED TO WITHIN THE CONSTRAINTS OF, OF THE TOWNSHIP ORDINANCES, WE HAVE THE SAME RIGHT TO DO THESE THINGS WITHIN THE PRIVATE PROPERTY WITH THE TOWNSHIP ORDINANCE.
THAT'S WHAT THE 1203 PLANT PROVIDES.
WE CAME IN TO PROPOSE SOMETHING, TO YOUR POINT, TO TRY AND MITIGATE THAT AND MAKE IT LESS INTENSIVE THAN IT ALREADY WAS.
SO WHAT WOULD YOU THINK IF YOU WERE A KID LIVING HERE? WOULD YOU SUPPORT IT? JUST ASKING? YES, I WOULD, YES.
I WOULD SUPPORT THE ALTERNATIVE OF DEVELOPING HALF THE PLANT, THE HALF OF THE UNITS THAT COULD OTHERWISE BE BUILT.
AND THAT'S WHY IT WAS VERY IMPORTANT TO ME AS THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY TO DONATE HALF OF MY PROPERTY TO THE TOWNSHIP SO THAT, SO THAT YOU, SO THAT
[02:10:01]
THE TOWNSHIP CAN ENJOY IT.IT MAY NOT BE THE WHOLE PARCEL, BUT IT'S HALF AND THAT'S A LOT.
IF I WERE TO ASK YOU TO DONATE HALF OF YOUR PROPERTY WHERE YOU LIVE TO THE TOWNSHIP, THAT'S A BIG ASK.
AND SO I'M DOING IT BECAUSE I THINK IT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO.
I'VE LISTENED FOR THREE YEARS WHAT EVERYONE HAS SAID IN THIS ROOM OVER AND OVER AGAIN AND, AND HAS HIT MY HEART AS TO WHAT I THINK IS RIGHT.
AND I BELIEVE THIS PLAN IS RIGHT.
IT'S GIVING BACK TO THE COMMUNITY.
AND THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO DO.
JUST REAL QUICK, UM, I THINK WHAT LEO'S REFERENCING IS LOOKING AND WATCHING THE, THE CAR STACK UP ACROSS BLACKROCK BRIDGE INTO THE BOROUGH.
WE'RE TRYING TO GET ACROSS THE BRIDGE.
IT'S, WHEN I'M COMING BACK FROM WEGMANS, IT IS A MESS.
THERE IS NO WAY, EVEN IF YOU EXPAND, PUT A CIRCLE IN WHATEVER, THAT YOU'RE EVER GONNA GET RID OF THAT CONGESTION, GIVEN THE DENSITY.
RIGHT? LIKE, I DON'T THINK YOU CAN GET RID OF IT BASED ON JUST NORMAL, UM, DENSITY LEVELS RIGHT NOW.
SO I RESPECT YOUR RIGHT TO DEVELOP YOUR LAND.
WHAT I'M ASKING IS, IS THIS REALLY FROM A LONG-TERM PERSPECTIVE, WHAT WE WANT? DO, WE WANNA HAVE THIS DENSE, THERE'S NOTHING ELSE LOCALLY THAT'S THAT DENSE.
I THINK WE HAVE A RIGHT TO HAVE QUARTER AC I'M SORRY, HALF ACRE, FULL ACRE LOTS, RIGHT? THAT'S NOT GONNA DESTROY, YOU KNOW, WHAT TRIPLING OR QUADRUPLING THAT DENSITY IS GONNA DO.
IT'S GONNA HAVE A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT IN THE BUSINESS OR IN THE, IN THE COMMUNITY.
THE SECOND POINT IS, UM, WE LIVE ON SECOND AVENUE.
THERE HAVE BEEN MANY THAT S TURN AT VON ROAD.
THERE'S HAD MANY ACCIDENTS THERE.
I CAN'T, I MEAN, I DON'T LET MY KIDS CROSS THE ROAD BECAUSE IT IS JUST TOO DANGEROUS.
I CANNOT IMAGINE THAT'S THE ONE OUTLET THAT GETS YOU INTO ROYERS FORD SPRING CITY TO, TO, TO 4 22.
THERE'S NO WAY THE VOLUME OF TRAFFIC ON SECOND AVENUE, UM, NO.
THAT SECOND AVENUE WILL BE ABLE TO HANDLE THE VOLUME OF TRAFFIC THAT PUTTING THE, THIS MANY HOUSES IN EI MEAN, UNLESS YOU'RE GONNA PUT A, I MEAN, YOU JUST CAN'T PUT THAT MUCH VOLUME INTO THAT PLACE.
THERE HAS TO BE ANOTHER OUTLET.
SO TO THE SUPERVISORS, DO WE REALLY WANT TO HAVE THIS DENSE OF A POP OF A DEVELOPMENT RIGHT, RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF THIS INTERSECTION BETWEEN ROYERS SWORD AND PHOENIXVILLE.
I THINK IT'S JUST GONNA MAKE THINGS SO MUCH WORSE THAN IT IS RIGHT NOW.
BUT AGAIN, YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO DEVELOP YOUR LAND.
I JUST WISH YOU WOULD TAKE ANOTHER STEP, RIGHT? TO THE GENTLEMAN'S POINT BEFORE, THIS IS AN ALTERNATIVE PLAN TO WHAT YOU ORIGINALLY PROPOSED.
I DON'T THINK IT GOES FAR ENOUGH FOR THIS COMMUNITY.
I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THIS CUT DOWN INTO NORMAL ACRE LOTS, LIKE MOST OF THE OTHER DEVELOPMENTS AROUND HERE.
AND I THINK THAT MAKES A LOT MORE SENSE.
WE'RE NOT GONNA GET CRUSHED BY THE DENSITY.
I'M AT THE, UH, PROVIDENCE HUNT NEIGHBORHOOD DOWN THE STREET.
UM, THANKS FOR COMING OUT TONIGHT AND, UH, PRESENTING YOUR FINDINGS AND ALL.
UH, YOU KNOW, SO I PERSONALLY DON'T FEEL THAT IT IS, THAT IT MEETS THE SPIRIT OF THE COMMUNITY AND THE, AND THE R ONE, YOU KNOW, KIND OF TRADITION.
BUT I KIND OF UNDERSTAND THAT, YOU KNOW, IT'S PRIVATE PROPERTY AND AS LONG AS YOU'RE, YOU KNOW, MEETING, YOU KNOW, ORDINANCES AND ALL THAT, IT'S, UM, YOU KNOW, AND IT, BUT THE THING IS, IS THAT WHAT I'M HEARING IS THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT, UM, THAT THE, THAT THERE'S A, UH, ATTEMPT TO KIND OF BYPASS CERTAIN STUDIES, LIKE THE, LIKE THE TRAFFIC STUDIES.
YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY, IT'S PART OF THE ORGANIZ.
SO I I THOUGHT THAT THAT WAS PART OF THE ZONING CHANGE WAS TO NO.
SO IS THAT, IS IT AN INDEPENDENT STUDY OR IS THAT LIKE, SO LET ME SEE IF I CAN ANSWER THE QUESTION.
THESE FOLKS HERE ARE PROFESSIONALS.
RIGHT? I WERE, I WAS REFERRED TO THEM 'CAUSE THEY WERE THE BEST IN THEIR FIELD.
THEY'RE NOT GONNA DO ANYTHING TO JEOPARDIZE THEIR INTEGRITY FOR ME FROM MARYLAND.
THEY ARE DOING THEIR STUDIES AS THEY WOULD DO IT FOR ANYONE THAT THEY, THEY WOULD, THEY WOULD DO THEIR STUDIES.
THE TOWNSHIP CLARIFY ABOUT THE, THE STUDIES.
UH, 'CAUSE AT ONE POINT I THOUGHT I WAS TOLD THAT THE, IT WAS
[02:15:02]
MAYBE NOT THE TOWNSHIP DOING THE STUDIES AND MAYBE DOING AN INDEPENDENT STUDY OR, SO IF TOWNSHIP WOULD REVIEW THE STUDY, WOULD THEY ACTUALLY HERE THAT WOULD REVIEW THEM? OKAY.I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY WHO'S DOING WHAT AND HOW IT'S BEING, HOW IT'S BEING DONE.
AND I WOULD BE INTERESTED IN SEEING THE, THE DATA, UH, OF, OF THE STUDIES AND THE, THE OUTCOMES.
UH, AND SO MY OTHER QUESTION IS, SO I I, I HEAR ABOUT THE INSTITUTIONAL OVERLAY ZONING AND I UNDERSTAND, YOU KNOW, THIS LAND WILL BE DEVELOPED AND IT'LL, IT'LL BE DEVELOPED IN THAT ZONING.
UH, BUT SO HOW DOES IT MEET THE QUALIFICATION OF THE INSTITUTIONAL OVERLAY? LIKE WHAT ARE THE NUANCES OF THAT? SO, I'M NOT GONNA SPEAK ABOUT THE INSTITUTIONAL OVERLAY BECAUSE IF WE GO TO A ADDITIONAL USE, YOU WILL HEAR ABOUT IT.
WE'VE BEEN ASKED FOR AN OPTION.
I DID NOT, THIS WAS NEVER DEPLOYED TO PUT 1,203 UNITS HERE.
AS MUCH AS EVERYONE WOULD LIKE TO BELIEVE THAT FROM THE FIRST TIME TO THE SECOND TIME I'VE BEEN APPROACHED AND SAID, CAN YOU DO ANYTHING ELSE? WHAT ELSE WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO DO? AND SO I'M JUST RESPONDING TO THOSE REQUESTS.
AND SO PLEASE BELIEVE ME WHEN, WHEN I FIRST CAME IN THREE YEARS AGO, AND WE HAD A FARM PLAN, OKAY? AND IT WAS SORT OF, IT WAS A WILLIAMSBURG TYPE OF PLAN.
OKAY? WE HEARD THE COMMUNITY LOUD AND CLEAR.
SO I INSTRUCTED MY EXPERTS DESIGN A BUY RIGHT PLAN.
I DON'T WANT TO ASK FOR ANY VARIANCE.
I WANT ONLY WHAT'S ENTITLED TO ME.
AND THEY CAME, WE CAME UP WITH TWO PLANS.
ONE FOR 2,400 UNITS, ONE FOR 1200 UNITS.
I DID NOT BELIEVE THAT 2,400 UNITS WAS VIABLE.
OKAY? SO I ELECTED ON THE 1,203 UNITS, AND I INSTRUCTED ALL OF THESE EXPERTS TO DESIGN A BUYRIGHT PLAN WHERE IT COMPLIES WITH THE ORDINANCE TO THE T RIGHT? AND THAT'S WHAT I PRESENTED USING THE ENTITLEMENT OF MY INSTITUTIONAL ZONE.
RIGHT? AND THEN ONCE THAT GOT PRESENTED, YEAH, BUT LET ME, I WAS ASKED BY SOME COMMUNITY MEMBERS AND BY SOME SUPERVISORS, RIGHT? LET ME SCRUTINIZE THAT REAL QUICK.
SO INSTITUTIONAL OVERLAY, DOES THAT ALL, DOES THAT, ALL THAT MEANS IS YOU HAVE TO HAVE, AND IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU HAVE A PORTION OF THIS AS A RETIREMENT COMMUNITY, IS THAT THIS IS NOT USING THE INSTITUTIONAL OVERLAY.
THIS IS AN OPTION THAT WOULD BE AN ALTERNATIVE AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO THE 1203 PLAN.
AND SO WE TRY TO INCORPORATE DIFFERENT TYPES OF HOUSING THERE.
SOME OF IT IS AGE RESTRICTED, SOME OF IT IS LIMITING TO BEING ABLE TO PUT CHILDREN IN, AND SOME OF THEM WILL CREATE CHILDREN.
AND SO WE'RE TRYING TO CREATE A PRODUCT AND A COMMUNITY THAT WILL FEED THE NEEDS OF THE TOWNSHIP.
BUT I, I STILL THINK YOU, YOU, YOU'VE GOTTA MEET THE, THE QUAL THE REQUIREMENT OF THE INSTITUTIONAL OVERLAY.
I'M STILL, I'M STILL NOT HEARING SOMETHING.
THE, THE TOWNSHIP SOLICITOR, NOT THE SOLICITOR SAID THAT THERE ARE PROPOSED USE UNDER THE INSTITUTION WAS A PERMITTED USE.
THE TOWNSHIP PLANNER SAID THAT OUR PROPOSED USE WAS A PERMITTED USE.
THE MONTGOMERY COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION SAID OUR PROPOSED USE WAS A PERMIT PERMITTED USE.
THE TOWNSHIP HIRED ADDITIONAL COUNSEL.
BOB GRANT UNFORTUNATELY PASSED AWAY.
HE SAID IT WAS A PERMITTED USE AND HE CITED SOMETHING THAT I HAD GIVEN HIM.
OR WE HAD HIRED TWO ATTORNEYS, MARK JONAS AND MIKE JANOFF, AND THEY HAD BOTH GIVEN OPINIONS AS PERMITTED USE.
SO THERE'S NOT MUCH QUESTION THAT IT IS PERMITTED USE.
NOW YOU CAN ARGUE AND BE, WE'RE SAYING MAYBE IT ISN'T.
WE THINK IT IS, AND WE'RE GONNA PROVE IT IS IF WE GO THE CONDITIONAL USE HERE, I'M JUST, I'M SORRY, BUT I'M JUST A LITTLE CONFUSED.
I I I'M NOT HERE IN THE INSTITUTIONAL OVERLAY.
MR. SCHWEIKER, JUST, JUST TO CLARIFY, THE, THE EVERYTHING INVOLVED WITH THE INSTITUTIONAL OVERLAY IS INVOLVED IN THE CONDITIONAL USE PROCESS, WHICH ISN'T PART OF THIS PROPOSAL.
SO THESE APPLICANTS ARE ONLY GOING TO GIVE YOU SO MUCH INFORMATION ON THAT MM-HMM.
WITHIN THE CONFINES OF THAT HEARING AND, AND THE, THE RULES THAT GOVERN THAT HEARING AND THE RECORD THAT'S CREATED DURING THAT HEARING.
IF, IF, IF THAT IS TO MOVE FORWARD, I I DON'T THINK THEY'RE GOING TO GIVE YOU ANY CLEARER ANSWER ON THAT TONIGHT.
SO YEAH, I'M A LITTLE JUNIOR TO THIS WHOLE PROCESS, SO I JUST, UM, THANKS FOR THE INSIGHTS.
[02:20:13]
UH, CHRIS MCKAY, UH, 180 WALNUT STREET.UM, I THINK YOU KIND OF ANSWERED MY QUESTION HERE.
LIKE, I KNOW THE TOWN HAS GOTTEN MULTIPLE LEGAL OPINIONS.
YOU HAVE OBVIOUSLY SPENT A TON OF MONEY ON MULTIPLE LEGAL OPINIONS.
LIKE WE'LL LOSE THE CONDITIONAL USE HEARING.
SO MY QUESTION IS LIKE, SO SAY WE MAKE YOU GO TO THE CONDITIONAL USE HEARING, LIKE, DOES IS, DOES THIS OFFER INCLUDE MORE HOUSES NEXT TIME? SAY YOU WIN THE 1200, WHAT YOU'RE LIKELY TO DO, IS THERE GONNA BE A NEW PROPOSAL THAT INCREASES THE AMOUNT OF HOUSES? NO, WE'RE GONNA STAY WITH THE 12.
UM, I JUST WANNA SAY THAT I THINK, UH, A TOWN WITH CHILDREN IN, IN IT IS A GOOD THING.
UM, SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT WHOLE THING IS ABOUT.
UM, MY CHILDREN HAVE A LOT OF FRIENDS IN NEW DEVELOPMENTS, YOU KNOW, SO WE KNOW PEOPLE.
UM, I ALSO WANNA SAY JUST IN THE HISTORY OF ALL THIS, LIKE I'VE GOTTEN FLYERS FROM THE LOCAL REPUBLICAN PARTY AND JUST THE LANGUAGE THAT'S BEEN USED IN HERE ABOUT RENTERS AND LIKE HOMES THAT TOUCH EACH OTHER OR WHATEVER IS FRANKLY DISGUSTING.
UM, SO I HOPE WE CAN WRAP THIS UP AND, UH, YOU KNOW, END THIS PARK HOUSE LIKE Q ANON NONSENSE.
ARE THERE, UH, ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FROM THE PUBLIC THAT HAVE NOT YET HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK? SO GARY BERMAN WOULD LIKE TO SAY SOMETHING.
I AM THE OWNER OF RO FOR HOLDINGS.
AND I WANT TO THANK YOU ALL YOU, I, I DON'T CHAIR THE, THE SEATS THAT YOU EACH SIT IN, BUT SOMETIMES YOU'VE GOTTA MAKE TOUGH DECISIONS.
AND THERE WAS A TOUGH DECISION MADE BY THE GOVERNOR 10 YEARS AGO, AND I FEEL FOR EVERYONE IN THIS ROOM OF WHAT HAPPENED.
WHICH IS WHY WHEN I DECIDED TO PICK A BUILDER, I CHOSE NVR BECAUSE THEY WERE WILLING TO WORK AROUND WHAT I WANTED TO DO AND DONATE HALF OF MY LAND BACK TO THE TOWNSHIP.
UM, THAT WAS VERY IMPORTANT TO ME.
I SAT AND I LISTENED TO EVERYTHING EVERYONE HAD TO SAY IN EVERY COMMUNITY, UM, COMMENT SESSION.
I MAY NOT HAVE BEEN HERE, BUT I'VE HAD PEOPLE LOOK AT THAT CAMERA AND I WAS ON THE OTHER END WATCHING IT, OKAY? AND I FEEL FOR EACH ONE OF YOU AND I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE GOING THROUGH, BUT REMEMBER, YOU ALL LIVE IN HOMES THAT SOMEONE ELSE DIDN'T WANT.
YOU ALL LIVED IN HOMES THAT SOMEONE ELSE DIDN'T WANT.
AND NOW YOU'RE IN THOSE HOMES NOT WANTING THE PEOPLE THAT ARE ABOUT TO BE YOUR NEIGHBORS.
I WANT TO THANK EACH ONE OF YOU.
I KNOW IT'S VERY HARD, THE DECISION YOU HAVE TO MAKE.
UM, I HOPE YOU SEE THAT I'M REALLY TRYING HARD TO WORK WITH THE COMMUNITY TO WORK WITH YOU, UM, TO WORK WITH NBR AND TO TRY TO COME UP WITH SOMETHING THAT WILL MAKE SOMEONE, EVERYONE MOSTLY HAPPY.
I'M NOT GONNA MAKE EVERYBODY HAPPY, BUT I'M TRYING.
AND I THINK IF YOU SEND THIS TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, IT WILL GIVE US FURTHER OPPORTUNITY TO TRY TO MEET THAT GOAL.
AND YOU HAVE MY WORD THAT I WILL CONTINUE TO TRY TO MEET THE GOAL OF THE COMMUNITY OF YOU AND OF NVR SO THAT MAYBE WE CAN GET THROUGH THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND TRY TO MAKE EVERYBODY HAPPY.
AND I HOPE YOU CAN SEE THAT, UM, MY ATTORNEY'S GOT SOME CLOSING, UH, REMARKS AND UH, AND THEN HOPEFULLY WE WILL, WE'LL GET A POSITIVE DECISION.
YEAH, WE DID, WE DID PROMISE THAT.
I KNOW THERE ARE A FEW PEOPLE WHO WANT TO COME BACK UP.
SO WE WILL AFFORD ANYBODY A, UH, AT THIS POINT, A SECOND OPPORTUNITY.
OKAY, WELL THEN COME ON, I'LL BE QUIET.
UM, AND I REALLY DO, LIKE MRS. TORI SPOKE ABOUT REALLY TRYING TO KEEP AN OPEN MIND TO WHAT YOU'RE DOING AND WHAT YOU'VE PRESENTED TONIGHT.
I DO APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT YOU MENTIONED ABOUT, UM, LIMITING IT TO 600 HOUSES AND YOU DONATE THE LAND BACK.
SO CLEARLY WE PICKED UP SOME, SOME, SOME GOOD INFORMATION TONIGHT.
BUT I WOULD JUST TELL YOU, I STILL STRUGGLE AND MAYBE YOU CAN'T APPRECIATE IT.
I REALLY DON'T LIKE YOUR COMMENT ABOUT BUILDING AND NEW NEIGHBORS.
WE DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH HAVING NEW NEIGHBORS.
AND WHEN WE WERE BROUGHT TOGETHER TO MEET WITH, TO TALK ABOUT IT, WE WERE TOLD OUR ONE WAS A NON-STARTER.
YOU GUYS DIDN'T WANT TO TALK TO US, RIGHT? SO WE WERE LIKE, OKAY, WE WON'T TALK.
I THINK MOST OF THE COMMUNITY IS TO THE POINT WHERE AS
[02:25:01]
SHE SAID, WE'LL TAKE THE 1203 INSTITUTIONAL, IT'S NOT MUCH DIFFERENT THAN 600, 6 60, WHATEVER THE NUMBER IS.LIKE WE DON'T SEE A DIFFERENCE THERE.
SO MAYBE WE'RE ON DIFFERENT PAINS AND I'M SORRY.
RIGHT? THAT'S JUST A DIFFERENCE.
AND WE ALSO AGREE THAT THE 1203 WON'T GET THROUGH CONDITIONAL USE.
YOU GOT ALL YOUR ATTORNEYS THAT SAY OTHERWISE WE'RE WILLING TO GO TO THE MATTER, RIGHT? WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS WORK WITH YOU ON SOMETHING.
I THINK I'D LOSE HALF OF THE SUPPORT IN THIS GROUP IF WE WOULD DO R ONE.
WE ARE SO FAR AWAY FROM 175 HOUSES TO EVEN 600.
I THINK THERE'S SOMETHING IN THE MIDDLE THAT COULD WORK FOR US.
THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO.
THE OTHER TWO POINTS I'D LIKE TO MAKE, 'CAUSE I'M TRYING TO MAKE IT SHORT.
I USED TO SERVE ON THE SCHOOL BOARD.
YOU MAY NOT KNOW THIS OAKS IS SLAMMED WITH STUDENTS.
THERE'S NOT A LOT OF ROOM DOWN THERE.
AND WHILE THIS IS NOT GONNA ADD TONS OF STUDENTS THERE, WE STILL HAVE AN APARTMENT COMPLEX THAT HASN'T OPENED UP AT WEGMANS, WHICH GRANTED IT'S AN APARTMENT COMPLEX, BUT THERE'S NOT GONNA BE JUST ONE KID FROM THERE GOING TO OAKS AND ALL THE KIDS IN THIS DISTRICTS AREA WILL GO TO OAKS.
THERE'S NO ROOM THERE, RIGHT? THEY'D HAVE TO REBUILD.
I WAS HERE WHEN WE BUILT FIVE ELEMENTARIES A HIGH SCHOOL AND RENOVATED THE JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL.
I DON'T WANT TO GO THROUGH SOME OF THAT STUFF AGAIN.
SO JUST WATCH OUT ON THE SCHOOL STUFF WHY THAT HAS AN IMPACT FOR US HERE.
BUT AGAIN, THE CORE COMMENT HERE THAT I'M TRYING TO GET ACROSS FROM THE COMMUNITY, I BELIEVE, 'CAUSE I THINK I HELP REPRESENTATIVES, WE'LL TAKE THE 1203, WE ARE WILLING TO COMPROMISE TO SOMETHING ELSE.
NONE OF US HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT, BUT WE'RE NOT ANYWHERE NEAR R ONE.
SO NOW I'LL ASK IF ANYBODY WHO HASN'T BEEN UP, UH, WOULD LIKE, UH, A, A SECOND OPPORTUNITY, AGAIN, LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES IF YOU'D LIKE TO ASK ANY NEW QUESTIONS OR CONCLUDE YOUR REMARKS FROM THE FIRST OPPORTUNITY.
UM, SO I'M NOT SURE HOW TO SAY THIS.
I DON'T MEAN TO BE DISRESPECTFUL AT ALL.
WHEN YOU SAY, TAKE MY WORD FOR IT.
UM, BECAUSE IF WE LOOK AT THE HISTORY OF THIS, THE, THE FIRST PLAN WAS THE WILLIAMSBURG THING, RIGHT? WHICH PEOPLE OBJECTED TO.
AND THEN THE, THE RESPONSE TO THAT WAS THE 2400, 1200, WHATEVER, LIKE THE THING THAT WAS HONESTLY LIKE A BIG FU TO THE COMMUNITY.
IT WAS LIKE, YOU DON'T WANT THIS NICE BEAUTIFUL THING THAT ISN'T WITHIN THE CURRENT ZONING.
I'LL GIVE YOU SOMETHING WITHIN THE ZONING THAT I KNOW YOU'RE NOT GONNA LIKE, RIGHT? AND THAT'S STILL OUT THERE.
I THINK THE WHOLE INTENTION WAS ALWAYS TO GET AWAY FROM THE, THE INSTITUTIONAL, YOU KNOW, THE OPEN SPACE INSTITUTIONAL OVERLAY.
SO YOU CAN GET RESIDENTIAL AND THAT'S FINE.
I MEAN, IF YOU WANNA MATCH THE CHARACTER OF THE COMMUNITY, WHICH IS WHAT YOU KEEP SAYING YOU WANNA DO, YOU WANNA REFLECT THE CHARACTER.
I THINK YOU'VE HEARD THAT LOUD AND CLEAR TONIGHT.
SO I MEAN, ARE YOU WILLING TO GO TO R ONE, WHICH IS A NO BRAINER? BECAUSE GUESS WHAT? THAT THAT ORDINANCE IS THERE.
WE DON'T HAVE TO CHANGE ANYTHING.
GO FOR IT, RIGHT? UM, I WOULD NOT OPPOSED TO YOU WANTING TO REZONE THAT TO THAT PERSONALLY.
UM, HOWEVER YOU'RE LOOKING FOR SOMETHING IN BETWEEN.
WE GOTTA FIND SOMETHING IN BETWEEN THERE EVENTUALLY.
BUT I THINK THIS, THIS IS NOT IT.
UM, AND I JUST WANNA REMIND THE BOARD, I SHOULD REMIND YOU, BUT, UM, ASK OF YOU GUYS KIND OF, OF WHAT, UM, I THINK BLAKE SAID BEFORE, BECAUSE I'M A LITTLE RILED UP NOW.
UM, THE AMENDMENT THAT WAS PROPOSED EARLIER THIS YEAR WAS, WAS BAD.
THE NEW ONE TONIGHT, LIKE TO USE BLAKE'S WORD IS INSIDIOUS.
SO WHEN THEY SAY, TAKE OUR WORD FOR IT, WE'RE GONNA DO THE RIGHT THING.
I I, TRUST ME, ONCE THIS IS AN AMENDMENT, UM, IF YOU GIVE 'EM WHAT THEY WANT, THEY'VE ALREADY SAID THIS IS A CONCEPTUAL DESIGN.
GOD KNOWS WHERE IT COULD GO FROM THERE ONCE YOU OPEN UP THE ZONING TO A NEW AMENDMENT.
SO I, I WOULD OPPOSE ANY AMENDMENT CHANGE OR I SAY THAT ANY ZONING CHANGE UNLESS IT'S VERY INCREDIBLY RESTRICTIVE.
UM, BECAUSE HONESTLY AGAIN, NO OFFENSE, THESE GUYS ARE IN TO MAKE MONEY.
I DON'T TRUST THEM TO TOTALLY DEVIATE FROM THAT PLAN REGARDLESS OF WHAT THEY SAY TONIGHT.
BECAUSE ONCE WE GET AN APPROVED ZONING, THEY CAN DO WHATEVER THE HELL THEY WANT.
SO I JUST WANNA ENCOURAGE YOU GUYS IF YOU VOTED NO BEFORE TO AGAIN VOTE NO AGAIN UNLESS WE PUT A LOT OF RESTRICTIONS ON WHAT'S BEING PROPOSED.
ANYONE ELSE? 1 35 BENNINGTON ROAD.
HOPING TO, UH, CLARIFY A COUPLE POINTS.
UH, FIRST OF ALL, UM, I KNOW THAT THE CURRENT OSR TWO ZONING SPECIFIES A TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY AND THE PROPOSED ZONING AMENDMENT SPECIFIES TRAFFIC IMPACT STATEMENT.
[02:30:02]
IS THERE ANY CLARIFICATION THAT WE'D BE HAPPY TO CHANGE THIS STUDY? WE'VE ALREADY DONE IT.I GUESS THAT IS A WORDING CHANGE THAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED.
UM, I HEARD ABOUT COVENANTS ARE COVENANTS LEGALLY BINDING.
WE WOULD'VE TO WORK SOMETHING OUT THE TOWNSHIP SOLICITOR THAT HE WOULD FIND BINDING IN ORDER TO DO THAT.
AND THAT'S WHAT WE WOULD PROPOSE TO DO.
WE HAVE NO INTENTION TO BUILD MORE THAN 600 UNITS.
SO I THINK I HEARD ABOUT DONATIONS ASSOCIATED WITH A COVENANT, BUT CURRENTLY THAT WOULD NOT BE LEGALLY BINDING.
I DON'T THINK THAT'S TRUE, GREG, YOU, I I DON'T THINK IT'S BEEN DETERMINED WHAT THE ACTUAL INSTRUMENT WOULD BE TO RESTRICT THE LAND.
AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WOULD COME IN, UH, FAR DOWN THE, THE LINE BASED ON THE OFFER OF THE, OF THE PROPERTY OWNER TO, TO HOW THEY DONATE THE LAND TO THE TOWNSHIP.
BUT IT WOULD BE IN, UNDER THIS CONCEPT, THE UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THE WHATEVER AGREEMENT IS REACHED, UM, WOULD, WOULD PERMANENTLY RESTRICT THE, THE, UH, DEVELOPMENT OF THE LAND.
THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION.
TO ME, AS A LAYMAN, IT SOUNDS LIKE A PROMISE AND IT'S NOT REFLECTED IN THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT.
SO I WOULD NOT, THE TOWNSHIP CAN'T REQUIRE A COVENANT AND WE HAD NO INTENTION OF REQUIRING A COVENANT.
THIS IS AN OFFER FROM THE, THE PROPERTY OWNER TO DONATE, WHETHER IT'S A COVENANT OR A, A STRAIGHT UP DEEDED DONATION TO THE TOWNSHIP OF THE LAND.
THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION.
BUT I UNDERSTAND THAT WAS PART OF THE PRESENTATION FOR THE BOARD, FOR THEIR CONSIDERATION OF THE ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT.
AND ONE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE OTHER.
AND WHATEVER WAS DECIDED FINALLY WOULD BE DONE PRIOR TO THE ADOPTION OF THE ORDINANCE.
SO IT WOULDN'T BE THAT THE ORDINANCE WOULD GET ADOPTED AND THEN WE WOULD SAY FORGET IT WHEN WE'RE STILL BUILDING MORE.
THAT WOULD BE ALL WORKED OUT LEGALLY BEFORE THE ADOPTION OF THE ORDINANCE.
I, I DON'T KNOW HOW, WHAT YOU CALL, SO IT'S NOT MY FIRST TIME HERE, BUT, UM, KRISTEN TROUTMAN 1320 BLACKROCK ROAD.
UM, ONE OF THE THINGS I'VE HEARD TONIGHT IS MINIMAL IMPACT ABOUT A LOT OF THINGS.
I HAVEN'T HEARD ANYTHING ABOUT FIRE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES AND POLICE.
UM, I LIVE ACROSS THE ROAD FROM THE FIREHOUSE ALMOST NEXT DOOR TO THE POLICE STATION.
THERE ARE DAYS WHERE OUR FIRE TRUCKS AND AMBULANCES GO OUT, COME BACK AND IMMEDIATELY TURN AROUND AND HAVE TO GO BACK OUT AGAIN.
SO WHAT KIND OF IMPACT DO YOU THINK 600 OR 1200 UNITS ARE GOING TO HAVE ON SOMETHING THAT WE ALL PAY TAXES FOR? AND HOW MUCH IS THAT GONNA JACK UP WHAT WE CURRENTLY PAY IN TAXES TO HELP COVER THIS MONSTROSITY? I KNOW IT'S GONNA BE DEVELOPED.
UM, AND MY OTHER QUESTION, UM, IS THE DONATION OF ALMOST ABOUT HALF OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH IS GREAT.
I, AND I'M JUST WONDERING WHY YOU WANT TO HAVE LOT LINES DRAWN ON THIS THING THAT'S GONNA BE PART OF A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT.
AND THE ONLY THING I CAN FIGURE OUT IS THAT FOR YOU PERSONALLY, BECAUSE YOU DONATED THAT RAW ACREAGE AS IT IS RIGHT NOW, IS WORTH WAY LESS TO YOU FROM A TAX STANDPOINT THAN PROPERTY THAT'S GONNA HAVE WHATEVER, 15 OR 30 INDIVIDUAL LOTS, BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE MORE BENEFICIAL TO YOU WHEN YOU MAKE A DONATION FOR YOUR TAXES.
YOU WANT ANSWER? I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW THAT YOU CAN TELL ME WHAT THE IMPACT'S GONNA BE ON OUR EMERGENCY SERVICE, PART OF OUR, PART OF OUR COMMUNITY IMPACT STUDY.
WE'LL ADDRESS THAT, WHICH WILL BE DISCUSSED AT LENGTH WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
IF WE GO THERE, WE WILL ADDRESS ALL OF THOSE THINGS.
AND GOTTA REMEMBER IF YOU LOOK AT THE CHART, WELL, THE CHART'S DOWN THERE, BUT THERE WERE COSTS INCURRED BY THE TOWNSHIP AS A RESULT OF THIS DEVELOPMENT, WHICH WERE THOSE THINGS.
AND ALSO REMEMBER THAT THE PEOPLE WHO WERE LIVING THERE ARE PAYING THE SAME TAXES YOU ARE.
OH, I KNOW, BUT I'M JUST SAYING I KNOW WHAT WE HAVE CURRENTLY.
[02:35:01]
AND HOW MANY MORE TRIPS IS THIS GONNA REQUIRE FOR 600 MORE UNITS OR 12 MORE UNITS? WE'LL ADJUST THAT.BUT IT'S GONNA IMPACT EVERYBODY FROM A TAX STANDPOINT, UM, BECAUSE EVERY YEAR GOES UP LIKE EVERYTHING ELSE GOES UP.
SO, UM, AND OH, WHAT YOU CAN ASK OVER THERE.
UM, MY OTHER CONCERN, I I ABSOLUTELY DO NOT AGREE WITH YOUR NUMBERS FOR STUDENTS.
UM, AND WHAT MAKES YOU THINK 62 PLUS HOUSEHOLDS? AS WE ALL KNOW, IN TODAY'S WORLD, THERE ARE A LOT OF GRANDPARENTS RAISING GRANDCHILDREN.
UM, BUT I MEAN, IF YOU EVEN JUST GO WITH A SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED COLUMN THAT'S 44 UNITS WITH, CAN YOU, I'M TRYING GET MY, SORRY,
IF YOU SAY A TWO PARENT HOUSEHOLD, JEFF, STOP.
IF YOU DISCOUNT THE PARENTS, WHICH IS WHATEVER, 50 SOMETHING, 60 CHILDREN, BUT YOU'RE SAYING 41, I'LL SAY 68 KIDS.
UM, AND IF YOU GO ACROSS THE BOARD, IT JUST, IT MAKES ZERO SENSE THAT PEOPLE ONLY HAVE ABOUT A HALF OR THREE QUARTERS OF A CHILD PER UNIT.
UM, AND THAT, AGAIN, IS GONNA IMPACT EVERY SINGLE PERSON IN THIS ROOM BECAUSE LIKE I SAID, THE TAXES GO UP EVERY YEAR, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT TAXES.
AND WHEN MY KIDS WERE GOING TO SCHOOL, WHEN PROVIDENCE HUNT WAS BUILT UP HERE AT ONE 13, THOSE KIDS FROM ONE 13 DOWN WENT TO OAKS.
THE NEW DEVELOPMENTS BEYOND ONE 13 WENT UP TO BROOK.
THAT WAS THE NEW SCHOOL AT THE TIME.
WE SINCE HAVE UPPER PROVIDENCE ELEMENTARY AND EVANS UP AT LIMERICK, BUT WHERE ARE THEY GONNA GO? I MEAN, THE GRADUATING CLASSES ARE CRAZY RIGHT NOW, SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
DO YOU NEED NORRIS 3 56 VISTA DRIVE? UM, I JUST HAVE TWO QUICK QUESTIONS, PLEASE.
AND, AND, UM, ONE OF THE, UH, THE FIRST QUESTION I HAVE IS IF WE, UH, PROVIDE THIS CHANGE IN ZONING, UM, DOES THAT THEN APPLY TO THE ENTIRE TOWNSHIP FOR ANYBODY ELSE WHO ASKS FOR THIS VARIATION, THIS CHANGE IN ORDINANCE? SO FOR EXAMPLE, WHAT IF THE PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANIES, ONE OF THOSE COMPANIES, UH, RELOCATES AND SUDDENLY THAT LAND IS AVAILABLE, HOW DOES THAT AFFECT? UM, IT WOULD ONLY APPLY TO SIMILARLY ZONED PROPERTIES.
SO IT'S NOT THE ENTIRE TOWNSHIP, IT'S ONLY PORTIONS OF THE TOWNSHIP THAT ARE ZONED UNDER THIS ZONING DISTRICT.
THE TOWNSHIP IS DIVIDED INTO MANY ZONING DISTRICTS.
I, I, JEFF, I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY THERE ARE, BUT THERE'S, LET'S SAY THERE'S A A DOZEN OR SO ZONING DISTRICTS IN THE TOWNSHIP, THIS WOULD ONLY APPLY TO ONE OF THEM.
SO IT'S ONLY A PARTICULAR PERCENTAGE OF PROPERTIES WITHIN THE TOWNSHIP THAT THIS WOULD APPLY TO.
AND, AND THEN ANOTHER, UM, QUESTION I ASK OF THE SUPERVISORS, NOT A QUESTION, A UH, REQUEST, I WOULD GUESS THE TRAFFIC STUDIES THAT WERE DONE, AND FORGIVE ME, I FORGET WHEN THEY WERE DONE.
UM, DOES ANY, DOES ANY TRAFFIC COUNTS WERE DONE IN JANUARY, MARCH OF 2023? JANUARY, UM, AND MARCH? YES, MA'AM.
I BELIEVE, UM, THAT, UM, THERE WAS A HOLIDAY WEEKEND IN ONE OF THOSE, UH, STUDIES AND, AND I REMEMBER A NUMBER OF US WERE, UM, SORT OF CONFUSED ABOUT THAT BECAUSE IT DIDN'T SEEM TO INDICATE WHAT THE TRAFFIC WOULD BE AT THAT TIME.
SO I WOULD JUST, I, I WOULD AGAIN REQUEST THAT THERE WOULD BE, THAT THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS REQUEST SPECIFIC STUDIES THAT WOULD REFLECT WHAT IT REALLY LOOKS LIKE ON SECOND AVENUE COMING OVER PHOENIXVILLE, THROWING OVER THE BRIDGE, COMING OUT DRIVELESS ROAD.
I LEAVE EARLY IN THE MORNING TO GO TO SCHOOL.
I SIT AT THE, AT THAT STOP SIGN AND FOR, I CAN'T TELL YOU HOW LONG IT IS, LETTING THE SCHOOL BUSES GOING BACK AND FORTH.
UM, ALSO IN RE REGARDS TO, UM, BEING A TEACHER, UH, IN A NEIGHBORING DISTRICT, I DO REMEMBER ACTUALLY BEING AT ONE OF THESE MEETINGS WHERE WE HAD A, UM, A, A UH, TEACHER FROM OAKS ELEMENTARY SAYING THERE WAS NO MORE ROOM THERE.
AND I THINK WE ALSO HAVE SOME PEOPLE ON COUNCIL THAT HAVE THEIR KIDS GO TO SCHOOL.
UM, SO I WOULD TAKE THAT INTO ACCOUNT AS WELL.
I AM TRYING TO, WE'RE TRYING TO REMAIN OPEN, UM, OPEN-MINDED ABOUT THIS, BUT THESE ARE THINGS THAT WE NEED TO REALLY DELVE INTO DEEPLY FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE LIVING HERE AND DEAL WITH THESE, UH, ISSUES ON A DAILY
[02:40:01]
BASIS.WE WANNA MAKE IT, UM, ACCEPTABLE TO EVERYONE, WHATEVER THE COMPROMISE IS GOING TO BE.
CAN I JUST, JUST FOR ONE POINT OF CLARITY, I'M SORRY, GO AHEAD.
NO, JUST ONE POINT OF CLARIFICATION.
'CAUSE I KNOW IT WAS BROUGHT UP EARLIER.
ONE OF, I BELIEVE ONE OF THE GENTLEMEN SAID THAT HE SAW OUR TRAFFIC DEVICES OVER THE WEEKEND COUNTY TRAFFIC.
I, I DON'T KNOW WHOSE THOSE WERE, THEY WERE NOT MINE.
OUR TRAFFIC COUNTS WERE DONE ON TUESDAYS AND THURSDAYS.
AND AS PART OF THE TRAFFIC STUDY, ALL OF THE RAW DATA THAT WAS COLLECTED WITH THE DATES, THE TIMES AND LOCATIONS, THE WEATHER WILL BE PROVIDED TO THE TOWNSHIP AND WILL PROVIDED TO PENDO FORWARD VIEW.
NO TRAFFIC COUNTS WERE CONDUCTED ON A SATURDAY OR SUNDAY OR A FRIDAY OR A MONDAY AS PART OF THE TRAFFIC SCENE.
JUST, JUST WANNA MAKE THAT CLEAR.
DO WE, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THOSE, WHO THOSE CAMERAS WERE THEN THAT WERE TAKING ON THE WEEKENDS.
LAURIE HIGGINS 1 0 1 COUPLE OF THINGS I NOTICED IS THAT PEOPLE WANT, IS OPEN SPACE AND NO DEVELOPMENT AT ALL.
AND SOME OTHER PEOPLE WANT R ONE DEVELOPMENT AND ONLY 185 HOUSES.
AND I DON'T SEE THOSE TWO THINGS AS BEING MUTUALLY UH, POSSIBLE.
AND 1200 HOMES IS OBVIOUSLY FAR MORE THAN YOU WANT.
I DON'T THINK YOU'RE EVER GOING TO GET TO 180 5 BECAUSE OF COURSE MR. BERMAN IS IN THE BUSINESS TO DEVELOP PROPERTIES, SELL HOMES, AND MAKE MONEY.
EVERY BUSINESS, ALL OF THE BUSINESSES EVERYWHERE, WHETHER YOU HAVE YOUR OWN OR WHETHER YOU WORK FOR SOMEONE ELSE, THEIR BUSINESS IS TO BE IN BUSINESS TO MAKE MONEY.
I GRANT THAT WE'D ALL LOVE IT IF EVERYTHING WERE FREE AND IF WE COULD HAVE EVERYTHING WE WANTED.
IF I HAD A MAGIC WAND, I WOULD MAKE SURE THAT NONE OF THAT PROPERTY GOT DEVELOPED.
BUT I KNOW THAT'S NOT GOING TO BE THE ANSWER.
AND I KNOW THAT 185 HOMES WITHIN OUR WAND ZONING IS ALSO NOT GOING TO BE THE ANSWER.
THE COMPROMISES ARE EVERYBODY'S COMPROMISES.
MR. BERMAN IS HAVING TO COMPROMISE AND ALL OF US ARE HAVING TO COMPROMISE.
WHAT DO YOU WANT? OPEN SPACE OR DENSITY TO GET AS MUCH OPEN SPACE AS YOU WANT.
YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO GO FOR MORE DENSITY.
IF YOU WANT R ONE, YOU'LL GET 185 HOMES AND NO OPEN SPACE WHATSOEVER.
PLEASE THINK ABOUT WHAT YOU ACTUALLY WANT.
UH, JUST ONE, UH, QUICK FOLLOW UP.
UM, ON THIS DRAWING, THERE'S A RED LINE AND INSIDE THE RED LINE THERE'S A NOTE THAT SAYS TOWNSHIP OPEN SPACE.
AND THIS IS A DRAWING THAT WAS DONE BY NVR, THE DRAWING THAT WAS SUBMITTED, WHICH IS DONE BY HEISER, HAS ANOTHER NOTE, HAS THAT SAME NOTE.
HOWEVER, IT'S KIND OF IN THE VALLEY OF THE CREEK THERE.
AND THERE'S OTHER LINES CALLED LIMITS OF CONSTRAINED LAND.
SO NOW IF THAT'S THE EXPLANATION FOR THE TAX VALUATION ISSUE, THAT'S GREAT, BUT OTHERWISE, AS BILL MENTIONED, IT LOOKS LIKE THERE MIGHT BE SOME DECEPTION.
SO VERY SIMPLE QUESTION IS ALL OF THE LAND INSIDE OF THE RED LINES OPEN SPACE, IT WILL END UP ALL BEING OPEN SPACE.
THE TOWNSHIPS DONATED TO THE TOWNSHIP.
IF THEY DON'T WANT IT, OUR HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION WILL OWN IT.
OKAY? I DON'T CARE WHAT YOU DO WITH THE GOVERNMENT, IF THOSE ARE THE LINES.
THEY'RE LINES VERY GOOD, BY THE WAY.
I STILL SEE THAT DOG JUMPING FOR THE FRISBEE.
THE OTHER DOCUMENT IS AN ENGINEER DOCUMENT.
I APPRECIATE THE PE AND THE ENGINEERS.
I SEE THIS AS A PICTURE THAT IS NOT A PLAN.
[02:45:05]
ANYONE ELSE WHO'D LIKE, UH, A FINAL OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE COMMENT OR ASK QUESTIONS? UM, JUST JUST A COUPLE RESPONSES TO SOME OF THE COMMENTS THAT WERE MADE, UH, IN RESPONSE TO THE TRAFFIC STUDY AND NOT BEING REQUIRED TO FIGURE OUT WHAT'S GOING ON IN TOWARDS PHOENIXVILLE.AND I, I GET THAT AND THAT'S MAKES SENSE THAT YOU WOULDN'T HAVE TO DO THAT.
BUT THAT'S THE WHOLE ARGUMENT WITH THE DENSITY THAT'S BEEN PROPOSED HERE IS THAT THIS PROPERTY IS IN A CORNER OF THE TOWNSHIP, A RURAL CORNER WITH REALLY NO, UH, ROADWAYS THAT CAN HANDLE THIS TRAFFIC IN ANY DIRECTION GOING BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE STILL GONNA GO TO PHOENIXVILLE EVEN THOUGH OUR STUDY WASN'T DONE IN PHOENIXVILLE.
AND THAT ROAD TURNS INTO AN URBAN FABRIC PRETTY QUICK.
AND GOING NORTH, IT'S A TWO-LANE ROAD UNTIL YOU GET UP TO SKIP BACK.
SO THAT'S MILES AND MILES OF A TWO-LANE COUNTRY ROAD.
UM, REGARDING YOUR COMMENT ABOUT WE ALL LIVE IN HOMES THAT NOBODY WANTED BUILT.
UM, I MOVED HERE IN 1977 AND I HAD NO NEIGHBORS.
ALL THESE ONE ACRE DEVELOPMENT PROPERTIES WERE FARMS, PRIMARILY DAIRY FARMS AS THEY GOT DEVELOPED, HEY, I DIDN'T WANNA SEE THE FARMS GO AWAY, DIDN'T WANNA LOSE THAT RURAL ATMOSPHERE, BUT THAT'S WHAT IT WAS ZONED FOR.
AND THAT WAS THE APPROPRIATE ZONING IN THIS CORNER OF THE TOWNSHIP.
THIS DENSITY CAN BE BUILT IN THIS TOWNSHIP, BUT OUT WHERE WE HAVE THE INFRASTRUCTURE 4 22, ROUTE 29 DOWN AT EGYPT ROAD AND OAKS, THAT'S WHERE WE HAVE THE, THE ABILITY TO HANDLE THIS INCREASED DENSITY.
UM, AND THEN REGARDING WHATEVER THE OPEN SPACE IS GONNA BE AND THE CONCERN THAT AS WE WORK OUT THE STORM WATER, WHATEVER OTHER ISSUES MIGHT COME ONTO THE OPEN SPACE, I THINK IT SHOULD BE DEED RESTRICTED BEFORE THESE THINGS ARE WORKED OUT.
SO INSTEAD OF STORM WATER BASINS GETTING PUSHED INTO THE OPEN SPACE, STORM WATER BASINS ARE PUSHED INTO THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AREA.
SO WE STILL GET WHATEVER OPEN SPACE IS BEING PROPOSED.
ANYTHING FURTHER? THERE'S, I THINK THE OPPORTUNITY, IF THE BOARD HAD ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS POINT, BEEN PRETTY THOROUGHLY COMMENTED ON BY THE PUBLIC, I HAVE QUESTIONS FOR PHIL.
YOU LOOK LIKE YOU'RE POSTURED TO GO.
NO, NO, GO AHEAD AND I I'LL GO LAST.
NOW, FIRST TIME I'VE LOOKED AT ANY OF YOU IN THE EYES AND THAT'S AN EXTREMELY IMPORTANT THING SITTING IN THESE SEATS FOR US TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT.
BEING HERE TODAY AND BEING ABLE TO TALK THROUGH THE FACTS HAS BEEN EXTREMELY HELPFUL.
BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT WE HAVE ALL THE ANSWERS YET.
AND HERE'S WHERE MY BRAIN'S AT.
OKAY? WE'RE FIVE WEEKS AWAY FROM MAY 30TH, WHICH IS THE DEADLINE IS FIVE WEEKS ENOUGH TIME FOR YOU TO COME PREPARED TO ANSWER THE OVERLYING ISSUES AND QUESTIONS THAT REMAIN TO BE ANSWERED BY THE COMMUNITY AND THEY ARE THE SCHOOLS, RIGHT? A BIG DEBATE ON SCHOOLS.
I THINK IT IS VERY IMPORTANT TO TOUCH BASE WITH SPRING FORD SCHOOL DISTRICT AND REALLY HAVE THE NUMBERS.
HOW MANY BELOW AGE FIVE SCHOOL CHILDREN THAT ARE NOT YET IN THE SYSTEM EXIST IN THE COMMUNITY? WHERE ARE THEY GOING? I THINK THEY'RE GOING TO OAKS.
I I DON'T KNOW THAT FOR SURE, BUT LET'S VALIDATE THAT OAKS IS JAM PACKED.
I APPRECIATE THE FINANCIAL STUDY.
[02:50:01]
$4 MILLION A YEAR IN INCOME TO THE SCHOOL BOARD IS VERY LITTLE, VERY LITTLE.IF YOU LOOK AT THE ACTUAL BUDGET OF THE SCHOOL BOARD, BUILDING A NEW SCHOOL IN THIS TOWNSHIP IS GONNA COST EVERYBODY ALL 24,000 PEOPLE.
THAT'S WHY THAT IS SO IMPORTANT TO ANSWER.
OKAY? AND IT'S NOT ANSWERED TONIGHT.
SO I, SO I, SO I, I STICK WITH THAT.
THE EMS STUDY, THE DEBATE OF THE 1203 AND THE IMPACT ON EMS. CHIEF RISSEL HERE WOULD BE A GREAT PERSON TO SPEAK TO ABOUT THAT.
I DON'T KNOW THAT YOU HAVE OR NOT.
WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE COMPROMISE PLAN, THE COMPROMISE PLAN HAS A SMALL AMOUNT OF OVER 55.
WHAT IS MAGIC ABOUT THAT MIX OF OVER 55 AND NOT OVER 55, RIGHT? WHERE'S THE SWEET SPOT IN THIS COMPROMISE PLAN TO BALANCE EMS AND TO BALANCE SCHOOL IMPACT THE ROAD IMPACT.
WHAT IS IT GONNA DO TO THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES? THE ROADS ARE JAM PACKED.
YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO DO THE STUDY AND I GUARANTEE YOU'LL DO THE STUDY.
IT'S PART OF IT, BUT IT HAS TO LOOK A LITTLE BIT FURTHER.
I CAN'T JUST LOOK AT THE FOUR SURROUNDING ROADS.
IT'S GOTTA LOOK AT HOW ARE YOU GETTING TO PHOENIXVILLE, HOW ARE YOU GETTING ON 4 22? HOW ARE YOU GETTING TO IT? THESE PEOPLE AREN'T WORKING IN THIS COMMUNITY.
THEY'RE GONNA HAVE TO GET OUT TO GO TO WORK, RIGHT? SO THESE ARE THE BIG, IN MY MIND, WHAT I'M HEARING, THE TOP THREE CRITICAL PROBLEMS THAT ARE ON THE TABLE THAT I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANSWERS TO.
SO HERE'S THE QUESTION THAT I HAVE.
IS FIVE WEEKS ENOUGH TIME FOR YOU TO PREPARE TO ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS SATISFACTORILY FOR THE PROCESS? BECAUSE IF FIVE WEEKS ISN'T ENOUGH, MAY 30TH IS GONNA BE HERE.
WHAT DO WE DO? WE BELIEVE THAT FIVE WEEKS IS PLENTY OF TIME.
I JUST, I JUST CHECKED WITH MY EXPERTS AND THEY ALL SAID YES.
WE WILL BE PREPARED AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO ANSWER ALL THE QUESTIONS YOU JUST RAISED IN DETAIL.
AND WHEN WOULD THE NEXT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING BE? UM, NO, ACTUALLY IT WOULD BE MAY 1ST.
WE'VE CLEAR THAT'S, THERE'S NOTHING ON THAT SCHEDULE RIGHT NOW, SO IT WOULD BE IN TWO WEEKS.
GREG AND I HAVEN'T TALKED ABOUT THE DATES.
I'M HOPING THAT THAT DATE WORKS FOR HIM 'CAUSE HE'D BE COVERING THAT MEETING.
BUT THE WAY THE AGENDA PLAYED OUT IS WE HAVE MAY 1ST AND MAY 15TH AVAILABLE FOR THIS.
THAT ONE IS A COMPROMISE TO THE OTHER.
I THINK SPEAKING FOR THE COMMUNITY, WE WANT TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE COMPROMISE IS.
AND I, AND MR. BERMAN, YOUR DONATION TO THE LAND IS SPECTACULAR.
I THINK THAT IS A, A REALLY NICE GESTURE, FANTASTIC GESTURE ON YOUR BEHALF ON THE COMPROMISE TO DONATE THE LAND.
UM, WHAT, WHERE'S THE COMPROMISE FOR THE TOWNSHIP, I GUESS OTHER THAN THE LAND? WHEN YOU LOOK AT THIS PLAN, A PLAN BNVR MAKES THE SAME AMOUNT.
COMMUNITY LOSES IN BOTH IS KIND OF WHAT THE COMMUNITY'S SAYING.
SO HOW DO YOU, WHEN, IF THIS WOULD GO TO PLANNING COMMISSION, HOW DO YOU PROJECT WHAT'S IN IT FOR THE COMMUNITY MORE THAN JUST THE DONATED LAND? AND THAT'S WHERE YOU GET BACK TO THESE TOP THREE WHAT I'LL CALL CRITICAL ISSUES.
SO THAT'S KIND OF MY COMMENTS.
THERE WAS NO WAY FOR ME, AND I CAN'T SPEAK TO THE OTHER SUPERVISORS FOR ME TO MAKE AN INFORMED DECISION LAST TIME THIS CAME TO VOTE.
I DON'T HAVE THE ANSWERS I WANT YET, BUT AT LEAST WE HAD A CHANCE TO HAVE A DIALOGUE.
UH, I I DON'T REALLY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR YOU.
UM, IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS FOR ME WHEN I'M DONE, I'D BE HAPPY TO TO TAKE THOSE.
I BELIEVE IT'S BEEN OVER 20 MONTHS SINCE WE HAVE LAST BEEN TOGETHER, BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT YOUR VARIOUS PROPOSALS HAVEN'T BEEN ON OUR AGENDA THROUGH PUBLIC COMMENT AT VIRTUALLY EVERY MEETING IN THAT TIME PERIOD, THOUSANDS OF OUR RESIDENTS HAVE COMMUNICATED WITH US THROUGH PUBLIC COMMENT, PETITION, EMAIL, AND EVEN THE GOOD OLD US POSTAL SERVICE IN OPPOSITION TO YOUR VARIOUS PROPOSALS.
THEY HAVE BROUGHT FORWARD SCORES OF REASONS WHY THESE VARIOUS PLANS ARE DEFECTIVE AND WOULD BE POOR.
PLANNING IS A CORE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE TOWNSHIP.
I'M GONNA FOCUS ON TWO AREAS THAT I BELIEVE ARE DEFECTIVE IN THE MOST RECENT PLAN.
PROPOSAL DENSITY IS NUMBER ONE.
ALL THE PARCELS THAT TOUCH THIS ONE ARE NO DENSER THAN R
[02:55:01]
ONE AND THAT'S FOR GOOD REASON.THIS IS A REMOTE PART OF THE TOWNSHIP BY ROAD AND CANNOT BE EXPANDED DUE TO ITS PROXIMITY TO THE SCHULL RIVER.
IN FACT, BEFORE WE BUILT OUR CENTRAL FIRE STATION ACROSS THE STREET WITH 24 7 CAREER FIREFIGHTING STAFF, THE DRY BU, NO, THE DRY BUBU PENINSULA, WHICH BEGINS ON YOUR PARCEL, WAS MARKED IN RED BECAUSE NONE OF THE FIVE COMPANIES THAT SERVED THE AREA AT THAT TIME COULD RESPOND IN AN ACCEPTABLE TIME.
WHILE THAT IS CERTAINLY NOT THE CASE TODAY, IT ILLUSTRATES THE BASICALLY ONE ROAD IN ONE ROAD OUT LAYOUT OF THAT CORNER OR TOWNSHIP PLACING 600 FAMILIES ON THIS PARCEL OF LAND WOULD CAUSE TRAFFIC GRIDLOCK ALONG ROUTE ONE 13 BLACK ROCK AND DIEGO ROADS SEVERAL TIMES A DAY AS THESE NEW RESIDENTS HEAD OUT FOR WORK TO VARIOUS SCHOOL CAMPUSES AND SHOPPING.
THE SECOND AREA THAT I FIND EFFECTIVE IS ENVIRONMENTAL.
LAST YEAR AFTER RECEIVING A LETTER FROM MR. MULLIN'S EXPRESSING R WERE HOLDING'S DESIRE TO EXPLORE PRESERVING IN PART OR ALL OF YOUR PAR IS OPEN, OPEN SPACE.
THE TOWNSHIP AT ITS OWN COST HIRED NATURAL LANDS TRUST TO EVALUATE THE ENVIRONMENTAL STATE OF THE LAND.
THE REPORT DESCRIBES THE PLANTS AND ANIMALS ON THE LAND TODAY.
IT ALSO DESCRIBES THE HYDROLOGY OF THE LAND AND ITS IMPORTANCE AS PART OF THE SCHUELL RIVER CORRIDOR.
TO COMPILE THE REPORT, THEY USED THEIR OWN OBSERVATIONS AS WELL AS INFORMATION ALREADY DOCUMENTED BY THE PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES, THE PENNSYLVANIA FISH AND BOAT COMMISSION.
AND DESCRIPTIONS OF HOW THE LAND IN ITS CURRENT STATE HELP PROTECT THE PORT PROVIDENCE NATURAL HERITAGE AREA.
THE ASSESSMENT, THOUGH THE ASSESSMENT THOUGH THAT STANDS OUT MOST IN MY MIND IS THE VALUE OF THE PERVIOUS LAND FOR WATER INFILTRATION AND ITS BUFFERING EFFECT FOR STORM WATER AND AS A CLEANING FEATURE FOR THE WATER FLOWING INTO THE SCHULL RIVER.
LESS THAN THREE YEARS AGO, WE EXPERIENCED CATASTROPHIC FLOODING ALONG THE SCHUELL RIVER AND THE PERCU AND CREEK WITH FUNDS PROVIDED BY THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY.
THAT TOWNSHIP WAS ABLE TO PURCHASE ALMOST 50 HOMES THAT ARE TO BE DEMOLISHED AND THE LAND RETURNED TO REPAIRING B ALONG THE RIVER AND CREEK.
IN THE LAST 50 YEARS, WE HAVE EXPERIENCED A THOUSAND YEAR, 500 YEAR, AND THREE 100 YEAR STORMS AS DESCRIBED FOR INSURANCE PURPOSES.
AS RECENTLY AS JANUARY OF THIS YEAR, WE HAD OUR VOLUNTEER AND CAREER FIREFIGHTERS IN STATION ON A HIGH ALERT OVERNIGHT DUE TO THE HIGH LEVEL OF THE RIVER AND CREEK.
FORTUNATELY, THE RIVER STAYED BELOW MAJOR FLOOD STAGE THIS TIME.
YOU MAY ASK, WHAT IS A REASONABLE PLAN FOR DEVELOPMENT OF THIS PARCEL? I BELIEVE A PLAN THAT SEEKS R ONE DENSITY COSTS ON THE A AND C PORTIONS AS DESIGNATED ON MAP SEVEN OF THE NATURAL LAND REPORT WOULD BE A REASONABLE PROPOSAL.
I PURPOSELY EXCLUDED THE AREA V DUE TO THE HIGH POSSIBILITY OF ENCOUNTERING HUMAN REMAINS BURIED HERE.
AS THE PROPERTY WAS USED AS A PULPER FIELD FOR OVER A CENTURY AND NOT ALL OF THE GRAVE SITES HAVE BEEN DOCUMENTED, THIS IS ONE POSSIBLE PLAN THAT COULD GET MY ATTENTION AND WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH THE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT HAVE BEEN APPROVED AND BUILT ALL ALONG THE ROUTE ONE 13 CORRIDOR OF OUR TOWNSHIP.
MY PREFERENCE WOULD BE NOT TO HAVE ANY DEVELOPMENT OR NON-PAR SERVICE ON THIS PARCEL, BUT I REALIZE THAT IS NOT A REASONABLE POSITION.
I SINCERELY ASK THAT YOU WITHDRAW THE CURRENT PLAN AND RESUB RESUBMIT A PLAN ALONG THESE MORE REASONABLE PARAMETERS.
UM, I WOULD LIKE TO ALSO SAY SOMETHING, UM, I APOLOGIZE, UH, FIRST OF ALL FOR BEING LATE IN THE
UM, SO PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, GREG.
UM, SO THE VOTE TONIGHT IS JUST MOVE PROPOSAL FORWARD TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR THEIR INPUT.
WERE THEY NOT VOTING TO APPROVE ANYTHING OR ZONING IES ANY CHANGES RIGHT NOW? CORRECT.
UM, SO IT ALSO DOESN'T MEAN THAT WE MIGHT NOT BE GOING TO CONDITIONAL UC SO WE COULD STILL GO TO CONDITIONAL USE.
WE VOTES HAVE SEND THIS THE PLANNING TONIGHT.
IT DOESN'T PRECLUDE THE OTHER PROCESS.
SO I PERSONALLY DO NOT THINK THE MET PLAN THAT YOU SUBMITTED A FEW WEEKS AGO IS DIFFERENT FROM THE PLAN WE VOTED ON IN JANUARY.
UM, I THINK THEY'RE ALMOST IDENTICAL AND SO I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU WANNA BUILD.
UM, BUT AFTER THIS MUCH TIME, I'M REALLY DISAPPOINTED THAT NONE OF THE CONCERNS THAT THE TOWN TOOK WERE REALLY ADDRESSED.
THERE ARE STILL LEGITIMATE CONCERNS, UM, WITH INCREASED TRAFFIC ROADS, SCHOOL FLOODING, EMS, EVERYTHING THAT WE DISCUSSED THIS EVENING.
UM, SO MAGGIE SAID THERE'S IMPACT STUDIES, BUT THIS IS THE FIRST I'VE HEARD OF THE STUDIES, HAVEN'T SEEN ANY OF 'EM.
IN ADDITION, THE TOWN HOMES ALL GONNA BE EXPENSIVE AND THIS IS FURTHER CONTRIBUTING TO THE LACK OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN OUR AREA ALREADY.
SO I'M REALLY STRUGGLING TO SEE HOW ANY OF THE PROPOSAL HAS BEEN SUBMITTED DOESN'T SIGNIFICANTLY BURDEN THE TOWNSHIP.