[00:00:04]
[CALL TO ORDER Due to technical difficulties the clock on screen is incorrect during a portion of the meeting]
ORDER TONIGHT.I'M GONNA CALL ORDER THE, UM, THE, UH, MAY 15TH, UM, UPPER PROVINCE TOWNSHIP, UH, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING.
[MOTION TO APPROVE PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA]
TONIGHT.UM, AND EVERYBODY KNOWS WHAT THAT IS, SO WE DON'T HAVE TO REVIEW THAT.
UM, I'M GONNA START THE MEETING
[PUBLIC COMMENT FOR NON-AGENDA ITEMS]
OFF BY ASKING FOR PUBLIC COMMENT ON NON AGENDA ITEMS. THIS WOULD BE ON ANYTHING BUT THE AGENDA IN FRONT OF US THAT HOPEFULLY YOU ALL HAVE A COPY.SO, IS THERE ANY COMMENTS, QUESTIONS, UH, THAT YOU WANT TO ASK ABOUT A NON AGENDA ITEM? THIS IS A CHANCE TO DO IT.
IT WAS SOMETHING THAT I TOOK TO THE COUNTY, BUT THEY SENT BACK TO YOU GUYS.
COULD JUST STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.
TONY, WE DON'T GET ON MIC, SO SPEAK UP A LOT.
UM, SO OVER A YEAR AGO, OR TWO YEARS AGO, SOMEONE WAS IN OUR BACKYARD PLAYING AROUND WITH THE WIRES ON THE POLE, AND THERE WAS TWO WIRES HANGING DOWN.
I CALLED YOU GUYS, YOU GUYS TOLD ME TO GO TO THE COUNTY.
THE COUNTY SENT ME BACK TO YOU GUYS, ALTHOUGH THEY CHECKED IT OUT AND SAID IT'S VERIZON OR COMCAST.
I DON'T KNOW WHOSE THEY ARE, BUT THEY'RE STILL HANGING IN MY BACKYARD.
I HAD TAKEN PICTURES OF 'EM AND GAVE 'EM TO THE COUNTY.
I DON'T HAVE 'EM WITH ME HERE, SO I JUST WANT SOMEONE TO COME OUT AGAIN, CLIP THOSE WIRES OFF BECAUSE I HAVE AN 8-YEAR-OLD GRANDSON TO 17 YEAR OLDS THAT GO IN MY BACKYARD.
AND I DON'T LET THEM SWING ON THOSE THINGS, AND I DON'T EVEN WANT TO TOUCH 'EM.
SO I DON'T KNOW WHO WOULD I? OBJECTION.
I I WOULDN'T TRUST ME CLIPPING ANYTHING.
SO I'M GOING TO TALK TO PUBLIC WORKS.
AND, AND SEE WHAT THEY HAVE TO SAY.
SO SEND ME ANOTHER EMAIL TOMORROW TO REMIND ME, BECAUSE I'M OLD AND 12.
BUT, UM, IF, IF YOU COULD, I WOULD APPRECIATE THAT.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT WILL HAPPEN, BUT WE'LL TAKE A LOOK.
ANYTHING ELSE ON NON AGENDA ITEMS? NOT HEARING ANY.
WE'RE GONNA MOVE THEN TO OUR APPLICATION
[APPLICATIONS TO BE HEARD ON MAY 15, 2024]
FOR THIS EVENING, WHICH IS CONTINUING, UH, UH,AND I THINK MR. MULLEN, YOU HAVE SOME PRESENTATION YOU'RE GONNA MAKE TONIGHT? YES, SIR.
SO I'M GOING TO OPEN UP, I'M JUST GONNA MAKE A COUPLE SUGGESTIONS ABOUT MOVING FORWARD AFTER MR. MULLEN AND HIS TEAM OF MARRIED MEN START TALKING IS THAT, UM, WE'RE GONNA HOLD COMMENTS TO A THREE MINUTE, UH, PIECE.
YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT GONNA HAVE, LIKE WE DID THE OTHER NIGHT, WE JUST GO FOR HOURS AND HOURS.
WE'RE GONNA ASK YOU TO MAKE YOUR COMMENT.
WE'RE ALSO GONNA ASK YOU, AND WE'VE DONE THIS BEFORE, BUT IT DOESN'T ALWAYS WORK.
IT'S DON'T REPEAT SOME WHAT SOMEBODY ELSE HAS DONE.
AND, UH, THIRDLY IS I THINK WE'VE GOT TO KEEP TO THE POINT WHERE I DON'T WANT YOU TO COME UP HERE.
I CAN'T STOP YOU, BUT I WOULD APPRECIATE IF YOU DON'T COME UP HERE AND TELL US HOW MUCH YOU HATE THIS.
WE GET IT, YOU KNOW, WE GET IT.
I MEAN, WE'VE GOT TO COME UP WITH A SOLUTION THAT'S REASONABLE.
I MEAN, YOU KNOW, CONTINUING TO GET UP HERE AND TELL US THAT WE DON'T WANT THIS OR WE WANT IT TO BE ALL R ONE, OR THAT WE WANT THESE GUYS TO GO AWAY AND DONATE THE LAND TO THE TOWNSHIP AND, AND HAVE A, A NICE HEART IN THE REST OF THEIR LIFE.
IF YOU HAVE A GOOD REASONABLE SOLUTION OR IF YOU HAVE A VERY SPECIFIC QUESTION TO ASK THESE GENTLEMEN, THAT'S FINE.
BUT PLEASE, LET'S, LET'S GET PAST THE, THIS JUST ISN'T GONNA WORK.
'CAUSE WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING HERE.
ALL WE CAN DO IS TRY TO, UH, WITH THE HELP OF THESE GENTLEMEN, MANAGE IT AND MAKE IT AS REASONABLE AS WE CAN.
UH, THE TIME FOR ARGUING THAT WE DON'T WANT THIS AND WE DON'T LIKE IT, AND WE ARE NOT GONNA, IT'S OVER.
SO, UH, THREE MINUTES AND JUST REALLY PERTINENT IDEAS OR QUESTIONS THAT ARE VERY SPECIFIC THESE GUYS CAN ANSWER AFTER ED MAKES HIS PRESENTATION.
I'VE ADDED ONE NUMBER TO MY MURRAY BAND AND THAT'S GARY BERMAN.
YOU SPEAK UP, HEAR? UH, CAN YOU HEAR ON IT? GREEN ROADS ON THERE WE GO.
I TRYING GET ANYTHING TO WORK AT THIS POINT.
I ADDED ONE PERSON TO MY BAND OF MARY MEN, UH, GARY BERMAN, WHO'S THE PRINCIPAL FOR OF
IN ADDITION TO RENY SATANI FROM NVR ROBERT MCCRACKEN FROM MVR, RON KLAUS, OUR PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER FROM BOER ENGINEERING.
MATT HAMMOND, PROFESSIONAL TRAFFIC ENGINEER FROM TRAFFIC PLANNING AND DESIGN.
AND ERIC HEEL FROM B CREATIVE SERVICES, LLC AND A ICP PLANNING CONSULTANT.
AND ERIC WILL BE DOING A LOT OF TALKING TONIGHT.
'CAUSE WE SAID HE WOULD TALK TO TOWNSHIP WITHOUT FIRE POLICE AND EMT AND THEN HE WOULD CALCULATE WITH SCHOOLS AS TO OUR IMPACT ON THEM.
BUT WE'RE GONNA START OFF WITH
[00:05:02]
I THINK YOU GOT ALL YOU GOT ON SWITCH CHAIRS.I CAN SLIDE PUT IT OVER THERE ON THIS, ON THE, UH, PODIUM IF YOU WANNA DO THAT.
I WANT YOU TO KNOW, MR. GR, YOU STOLE THAT STUFF.
HE WAS VERY MUCH LOOKING FORWARD TO MADE THE MARRIED MAN COMMENT,
WITH ALL DUE RESPECT,
SO WE APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE HERE BEFORE YOU AGAIN TONIGHT.
UM, AND APPRECIATE THE COMMUNITY COMING OUT AGAIN.
UH, SINCE TWO WEEKS AGO, UH, WE'VE BEEN WORKING HARD TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE COMMENTS, SOME OF THE QUESTIONS, CONCERNS THAT WE HEARD, AND PROVIDE AS MUCH DETAIL AS WE CAN.
SO WE'RE PREPARED TO SHARE THAT ADDITIONAL DETAIL TONIGHT.
UM, WE ALSO HAD AN OPPORTUNITY ON MONDAY TO MEET WITH THE STEERING COMMITTEE FOR THE PARKHOUSE FRIENDS GROUP.
UM, OBVIOUSLY WE HAVE A NUMBER OF FUNDAMENTAL DISAGREEMENTS OR DIFFERENCES, BUT I, I DO THINK, AND TO, TO QUOTE YOUR WORDS, MR. WRIGHT, THEY DID COME IN WITH SOME GOOD SPECIFIC SOLUTIONS THAT WE COULD AT LEAST TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION.
SO I GENUINELY LIKE THANK YOU EVERYBODY FOR COMING OUT, HAVING THAT CONVERSATION.
UM, AND I THINK TO YOUR POINT, THAT IS EXACTLY HOW WE COME UP WITH SOME KIND OF COMPROMISE HERE THAT'S ULTIMATELY WORKABLE.
SO WE APPRECIATE EVERYBODY DOING THAT.
UM, AND WE WANT TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE ITEMS THAT WE DISCUSSED.
I DON'T WANNA SPEAK FOR THE PARKHOUSE FRIENDS GROUP, BUT I AM GOING TO AT LEAST GIVE OUR PERSPECTIVE WHAT WE SAW, SAW SOME OF THE PRIMARY ISSUES WERE, AND, UM, THOSE THAT WE CAN ADDRESS IN THOSE THAT FRANKLY, YOU KNOW, I DON'T THINK THAT WE CAN, YOU KNOW, COME TO WHERE THEY WANT US TO BE, BUT WE'LL LAY THAT OUT.
SO KIND OF BACK UP FOR A SECOND.
UM, THAT, THAT'S REALLY OUR GOAL TONIGHT.
ADDRESS, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE SAW AS THE PRIMARY CONCERNS THAT WE'VE HEARD, BOTH FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION, FROM THE BOARD IN PREVIOUS MEETINGS, FROM THE COMMUNITY AT THESE MEETINGS, AND SPECIFICALLY FROM THE PARKHOUSE FRIENDS.
UM, AND TO JUST ITEMIZE THOSE IN NO PARTICULAR ORDER.
IT'S BEEN IMPACT TO SCHOOLS, IMPACT TO POLICE, FIRE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES, TRAFFIC HOUSING TYPES AND, AND HOW THEY'RE MIXED ACROSS THE COMMUNITY.
AND THEN HOW WE CAN POTENTIALLY INCORPORATE, INCORPORATE SOME TRAIL NETWORKS HERE AND REALLY IMPROVE THE, THE PROPERTY FOR THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY.
AND THEN SPECIFICALLY FROM THE PARK HOUSE FRIENDS GROUP, UM, THAT THE, THE, IF WE HAD TO LIST THE THREE PRIMARY CONCERNS, ALTHOUGH I THINK THEY TELL YOU THEY HAVE MORE THAN THAT, IT WAS DENSITY, UM, HEIGHT OF THE PROPOSED HOMES, SPECIFICALLY THE STACKED TOWN HOMES, AND THEN ACTUALLY THE LAYOUT AND OVERALL LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED HOMES ON THE PROPERTY.
SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE WILL TALK ABOUT, UM, IN MORE DETAIL.
SO IN TERMS OF SCHOOLS, FIRE, POLICE, EMS AND TRAFFIC, WE OBVIOUSLY HAVE OUR PROFESSIONALS HERE THAT ED REFERENCED.
UM, BUT BEFORE I ASKED 'EM TO COME UP, I DID WANT TO TRY AND AT LEAST ADDRESS SOME OF THE OTHER ISSUES THAT DON'T NECESSARILY FALL INTO THEIR WHEEL WHEELHOUSE.
AND THE FIRST TO BE TOTALLY TRANSPARENT IS DENSITY.
AND I THINK WE'RE VERY CLEAR AT THE LAST MEETING THAT, YOU KNOW, THE DENSITY WE'VE COME IN WITH IS THE FINAL PROPOSAL IN TERMS OF OUR OVERALL DENSITY.
UM, BUT WE ALSO WANTED TO JUST REITERATE THAT THIS ISN'T, WASN'T THE FIRST PROPOSAL.
WE WORKED FROM THERE TO A PLAN OF 727 UNITS TO THEN TO A PLAN OF 679, A PLAN OF 614, AND ULTIMATELY TO THE 600 THAT YOU SEE BEFORE YOU.
SO IT'S NOT THAT WE WEREN'T OPEN TO A CONVERSATION OR A COMPROMISE, BUT WE DO FEEL STRONGLY THAT THIS IS THE COMPROMISE THAT WE'VE ULTIMATELY ARRIVED AT.
SO WITH ALL THAT SAID, I THINK A NUMBER OF, THE NUMBER OF THE OTHER ITEMS THAT WE DISCUSSED, UM, WE CAN ACCOMPLISH AT LEAST SOME OF WHAT THE COMMUNITY AND THE TOWNSHIP IS LOOKING FOR.
SO THE FIRST THING I WANTED TO POINT OUT, AND WE DON'T HAVE OUR HANDY LASER POINTER HERE TONIGHT, BUT IS THE, UH, ARE SOME OF THE TRAIL NETWORKS THAT WE WERE AT? OH, THERE WE GO.
SO, UM, WE TALKED ABOUT THIS A LITTLE BIT.
THE LAST MEETING, OBVIOUSLY VERY, VERY SEE EVERYTHING THERE.
THAT'S WHY, UM, THESE WERE VERY PRELIMINARY, VERY CONCEPTUAL.
AND WE ACTUALLY REACHED OUT TO SOME OF THE PEOPLE WHO MADE COMMENT AT THE LAST MEETING ABOUT WHETHER THEY WANTED TO HAVE SOME INPUT HERE.
THIS WOULD BE SUBJECT TO OBVIOUSLY SIGNIFICANT FURTHER CONVERSATION WITH THE TOWNSHIP, THE COUNTY, UH, COMMUNITY RESIDENTS, EVERYTHING.
BUT WHAT WE STARTED WITH WAS NOT ONLY HOW DO WE INCORPORATE TRAILS INTO THE COMMUNITY ITSELF, BUT HOW DO WE CONNECT THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS AND ULTIMATELY TRY TO CREATE A CONNECTION DOWN TO THE COUNTY PARK HERE, THE SCO RIVER PARK, AND REALLY DOWN TO THE TRAILHEAD THAT LEADS YOU DOWN TO THE CHUCO RIVER TRAIL.
SO THAT STARTED WITH, OKAY, HOW DO WE GET PEOPLE FROM THOSE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS FROM OLD STATE ROAD, UM, FROM THE OTHER SIDE OF SECOND AVENUE AND FROM WITHIN OUR COMMUNITY DOWN AND ACROSS THAT.
SO WHAT WE'VE PROPOSED HERE IS, UM, THREE PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS.
AGAIN, THESE WOULD HAVE TO BE WORKED WITH, WITH THE TOWNSHIP AND END UP ON THOSE ROADS THAT ARE PENDOT OWNED.
BUT THE IDEA BEING, UM, IF WE COULD DO SOME KIND OF CROSSINGS HERE THAT, YOU KNOW, SIMILAR TO WHAT YOU SEE ON THE SKEL RIVER TRAIL IN CHESTER VALLEY TRAIL, WHERE YOU HAVE CROSSINGS
[00:10:01]
ON THE PUBLIC ROADWAY.YOU KNOW, THE IDEA HERE WAS ON MEADOW GREEN DRIVE THAT CONNECTS TO AN EXISTING SIDEWALK, AND THAT'S THE ONLY PLACE THAT THERE'S EXISTING SIDEWALK ALONG THERE ON, ON THE STATE ROAD.
SO THAT WOULD BE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR ALL THESE RESIDENTS TO COME DOWN, CONNECT, BRING IT THROUGH.
OBVIOUSLY SOME OF THESE TRAILS HAVE SHOWN AND WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING AS DEDICATED OPEN SPACE.
SO THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THE TOWNSHIP WOULD HAVE TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION.
BUT AGAIN, THIS WAS PRELIMINARY, SO BRING THOSE TRAILS.
AND THESE WOULD BE JUST BY THE WAY, LIKE MULTIMODAL ASPHALT TRAILS, SIX FEET WIDE, SO SUITABLE FOR WALKING, BIKING, RUNNING.
UM, WE BROUGHT THAT DOWN TO HERE ULTIMATELY.
SAME THING HERE ON SECOND HALF.
NOW, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WAS POINTED OUT TO US ON MONDAY, AND I THINK IS A VERY VALID POINT, IS THERE'S SOME SITE DISTANCE ISSUES UP HERE ON THE SECOND HALF THAT YOU HAVE.
SO THAT, ORIGINALLY WE WERE THINKING, PUTTING A CONNECTION IN HERE WOULD BE ADVANTAGEOUS BECAUSE YOU CAN CONNECT TO THE EMERGENCY ACCESS THAT ACTUALLY EXISTS OVER THERE ALREADY.
UM, IT'S POINTED OUT AGAIN, BECAUSE OF SITE DISTANCE, WE MIGHT WANNA BRING THAT DOWN FURTHER ON SECOND AVE.
BUT THAT'S SOMETHING GIVEN THAT WE HAVE THE FRONTAGE THAT WE COULD LOOK AT AND THEN BRING THE TRAIL BACK UP AGAIN.
THE IDEA IS HOW DO WE CONNECT THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS INTO THIS TRAIL SYSTEM AND ULTIMATELY GET PEOPLE DOWN ON THE SCHULE RIVER TRAIL.
AND THEN WHAT WE'VE PROPOSED HERE IS BRINGING IT ACROSS THIS ENTRANCE TO THE COMMUNITY ON BLACKROCK ROAD, AND THEN CREATING ANOTHER PEDESTRIAN CROSSING HERE, WHICH WOULD THEN BE COORDINATED ULTIMATELY WITH THE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT.
THAT'S PART OF THE PROPOSED TOWNSHIP AND PENDO PLAN, UM, TO ULTIMATELY EXPAND THAT TO A 2 MILLION BRIDGE.
AND THE CONCEPTS AT LEAST THAT I'VE SEEN THAT HAVE BEEN PUT TOGETHER BY THE TOWNSHIP AND REVIEWED BY PENDOT ALSO INCLUDE EITHER SIDEWALKS OR, YOU KNOW, WHAT COULD ULTIMATELY POSSIBLY BE TRAIL CONNECTIONS.
SO THAT'S THE THOUGHT ON HOW WE CAN GET PEOPLE DOWN TO THE TRAILS THERE.
SO, AGAIN, VERY PRELIMINARY, BUT WE WANTED TO SHOW LIKE, THIS IS SOMETHING WE THINK, YOU KNOW, IT'S GREAT FOR THE COMMUNITY HERE FOR PROPOSED RESIDENTS, IF THIS PROJECT MOVED FORWARD, IT'S ALSO GREAT FOR THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY TO CREATE THOSE CONNECTIONS DOWN THERE.
SO THAT, THAT WAS THE FIRST THING WE WANTED TO ADDRESS IN TERMS OF THE TRAILS.
UM, OUT OF THE PROPOSED HOMES.
SO THIS, THIS WAS ONE THING THAT WAS CLEARLY OF CONCERN OF SOME PEOPLE.
WE HAVE THESE SIX BUILDINGS IN HERE THAT ARE SUPPOSED TO BE STACKED TOWN HOME UNITS, UM, WHICH ARE UP TO 50 FEET HIGH IN THE PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENT.
UM, WE DID TRY TO CITE THOSE IN A WAY, INTERNAL TO THE COMMUNITY WHERE THEY WOULD BE SCREENED AND NOT NECESSARILY VISIBLE.
SO WHAT WE ARE MORE THAN HAPPY TO TAKE A LOOK AT, IF WE WERE TO MOVE FORWARD TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT PROCESSES, HOW CAN WE RELOCATE SOME OF THOSE TO, TO AREAS WHERE THERE WOULD BE IN THE LOWER LYING AREAS OF THE SITE.
SO THE, THE HEIGHT WOULDN'T BE ESSENTIALLY WE, WE WOULD BRING THE, THE PERCEIVED HEIGHT DOWN FROM THE SURROUNDING AREA.
AND THEN EVEN LOOKING AT POSSIBLY COULD WE REDUCE THE NUMBER OF BUILDINGS THAT WE HAVE.
AGAIN, IT'S A SMALL PORTION OF WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING.
IT'S ULTIMATELY ONLY 30, 33 FOOTPRINTS AND 76 UNITS, UH, IN THOSE STACK TOWN HOMES.
AND THERE'S ONLY SIX BUILDINGS.
BUT AGAIN, THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING WE'D BE WILLING TO TAKE A LOOK AT.
BUT IT'S PART AND PARCEL, LIKE A LOT OF WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE, THAT IS PART AND PARCEL OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT PROCESS.
IT'S LOCATING THESE BUILDINGS.
WHERE DO THEY FALL WITHIN THERE AGAIN, THAT, THAT'S SOMETHING WE'RE, WE'RE ABSOLUTELY OPEN TO A CONVERSATION ON.
UM, THE NEXT PIECE WAS HOUSING TYPE.
AND I THINK ONE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT MAY HAVE COME UP THE LAST PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OR AT THE BOARD MEETING WAS HOW DO WE ULTIMATELY ARRIVE AT, YOU KNOW, ROUGHLY 25% OF THE UNITS BEING AGE RESTRICTED? AND THE ANSWER WAS REALLY PRETTY SIMPLE IN THAT WE THOUGHT IT CREATED THE MOST VIBRANT COMMUNITY THAT PROVIDED THE MOST OPPORTUNITY FOR ALL DIFFERENT KINDS OF BUYER PROFILES AND REFLECTED THE LARGER COMMUNITY AS A WHOLE.
UM, WE DID DO A LITTLE BIT OF, YOU KNOW, RESEARCH JUST IN THE OVERALL DEMOGRAPHICS OF THE TOWNSHIP.
UH, INTERESTINGLY, 37.5% OF THE POPULATION IN THE TOWNSHIP IS AGE 25 TO 34.
19.7% IS AGED 45 TO 64, 9 0.9% IS AGE 65 PLUS, OBVIOUSLY IT DOESN'T ADD UP TO A HUNDRED PERCENT 'CAUSE IT DOESN'T INCLUDE CHILDREN UNDER THE AGE OF 18.
UM, BUT THE THINKING THERE WAS, SORRY.
SO IF 65 PLUS IS 9.9% AND THEN THERE'S MAYBE ANOTHER FIVE TO 10% OF THAT, THAT'S IN THAT 54 TO 64 RANGE, WELL, WE'RE ACTUALLY REPRESENTING MORE THAN WHAT'S CURRENTLY IN THE COMMUNITY IN TERMS OF WHAT WE'RE SHOWING HERE WITH 25% OF THE UNITS AS AGE RESTRICTED.
SO THE OTHER PIECE OF THIS IS, YOU KNOW, WHY DO IT AS 25% AGE RESTRICTED? THIS ALLOWS US TO ACCELERATE THE PACE OF THE ENTIRE BUILD OUT OF THE PROJECT.
IT'S BENEFICIAL TO US, FRANKLY AS A BUILDER BECAUSE WE CAN GET THROUGH IT MORE QUICKLY.
IT'S ALSO BENEFICIAL TO THE COMMUNITY AND THE TOWNSHIP TO THE COMMUNITY.
OBVIOUSLY THE CONSTRUCTION TIME IS, IS REDUCED THAT YOU GET FROM A CONSTRUCTION SITE TO A FULLY DEVELOPED NEIGHBORHOOD MUCH MORE QUICKLY.
FROM THE TOWNSHIP'S PERSPECTIVE, ALL OF THE RATEABLES, UM, AND THE BENEFITS THAT COME OUT OF WHETHER IT BE TRANSFER TAX, PROPERTY TAXES, UH, BUILDING PERMIT INCOME, EVERYTHING, THOSE OCCUR OVER A MUCH SHORTER TIMELINE.
SO THE IDEA WAS WE THINK AS A COMMUNITY THAT'S A MIX OF
[00:15:01]
PRODUCT TYPES.IT KINDA REFLECTS THE OVERALL COMMUNITY AND IT ALSO JUST CREATES, YOU KNOW, A A SHORTER PROJECT THAT FOR EVERYBODY IS PREFERABLE.
UM, AND THEN THE LAST ONE, I'M GONNA TOUCH ON THAT AGAIN, THIS ISN'T SOMETHING THAT IT REALLY WE'VE GOTTEN INTO PREVIOUSLY, BUT, UM, AND AGAIN, I WOULD SPEAK A LITTLE BIT ON BEHALF OF AT LEAST WHAT WE HEARD ON ON MONDAY WAS, UM, THE, THE, THE PERK HOUSE FRIENDS.
AND WE, I, YOU KNOW, SOME VERY RATIONAL REASONS FOR WHY THEY FELT THAT MOVING THE HOUSING FROM THE, WHAT WE'LL CALL THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE COMMUNITY HERE TO THE NORTH SIDE.
SO LET'S ESSENTIALLY SAY SLIDE IT UP OLD STATE ROAD, UM, WAS BETTER PLANNING AND, AND WAS A BETTER LAYOUT.
UM, YOU KNOW, I THINK THERE'S ARGUMENTS TO BOTH SIDES, FRANKLY.
WE WERE ASKED WHY DID WE ORIGINALLY PUT THE HOUSING HERE? AND, AND OUR ANSWER WAS WE WERE TRYING TO AT LEAST RESPECT SOME OF THE, THE FINDINGS IN THE NATURAL LAND TRUST REPORT THAT IDENTIFIED THESE AREAS UP HERE AS, AS HIGHER VALUE AREAS.
WITH ALL THAT SAID, AGAIN, THAT'S A CONVERSATION WE'RE ABSOLUTELY OPEN TO HAVING, BUT IT ALSO IS NOT, HAS REALLY, IT'S NOT A ZONING ISSUE, RIGHT? HOW WE LOCATE WHERE THE HOMES ARE AND EVERYTHING ELSE IS NOT A ZONING ISSUE.
IT IS VERY MUCH A LAND DEVELOPMENT ISSUE AND WE GREATLY RESPECT AND APPRECIATE THE POINTS THAT THE, THE PARK HOUSE FRIENDS MADE.
MY SUGGESTION WOULD BE WE NEED INPUT FROM EVERYONE IF, IF WE WERE TO GO DOWN THAT ROAD.
AND THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT THE LAND DEVELOPMENT PROCESS IS FOR.
SO ULTIMATELY GET INPUT FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION, THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, THE ORGANIZED COMMUNITY GROUPS, THE COMMUNITY AS A WHOLE, TOWNSHIP STAFF PROFESSIONALS, AND FIGURE OUT, OKAY, WHAT DOES MAKE THE MOST SENSE HERE IN TERMS OF WHERE WE LOCATE THE HOMES AND THE COMMUNITY.
UM, AND PART OF THAT IS GONNA BE FOR THE TOWNSHIP IS WHERE DO WE THINK THE OPEN SPACE PROVIDES THE MOST BENEFIT? SO THAT'S A CONVERSATION, LIKE I SAID, THAT WE'D BE HAPPY TO SIT DOWN AND CONTINUE THAT, BUT THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT THE LAND DEVELOPMENT PROCESS IS FOR.
AND ULTIMATELY REALLY, AND, AND TO A LARGE EXTENT, BUT THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S ROLE WOULD BE IF WE WERE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH LAND DEVELOPMENT.
SO WE WANTED YOU GUYS TO KNOW, WE, WE HEARD YOU, UM, WE'RE OPEN TO THAT CONVERSATION, BUT AGAIN, WE, WE HAVE TO GET TO THE, THE STEP IN THE PROCESS OF WHERE THOSE DISCUSSIONS CAN HAPPEN.
SO, YOU KNOW, WITH THAT SAID, YOU KNOW, AND I KNOW WE, WE WE'RE GOING QUICKLY HERE, BUT I THINK AT LEAST IN TERMS OF DENSITY, KIND OF HEIGHT OF THE HOMES AND WHERE WE LOCATE THEM OVERALL MAKE UP OF THE COMMUNITY TRAILS, AND THEN JUST THE LOCATION ON THE SITE HERE, AT LEAST WE HEARD SOME OF THE, THE CONCERNS.
UM, I THINK A NUMBER OF THEM WE CAN WORK TO ADDRESS AND SPECIFICALLY, YOU KNOW, THE THREE PRIMARY CONCERNS THAT I NOTED FROM THE MEETING ON MONDAY THAT WE, THAT WERE EXPRESSED TO US, DENSITY, HEIGHTENED LOCATION OF THE STACK TOWN HOMES AND THE OVERALL LOCATION OF THE, THE HOMES IN THE COMMUNITY.
SO OUTTA THREE OF THOSE WE'RE, WE'RE OPEN TO THE CONVERSATION AND THE LAND DEVELOPMENT PROCESS, THE DENSITY WERE NOT, AND I THINK WE'VE MADE THAT CLEAR THROUGH THE PROCESS, BUT WE ARE ATTEMPTING TO HEAR THE CONCERNS AND, AND COME TO SOME COMMON COMPROMISE.
AND IF WE WANNA MOVE FORWARD WITH THE TAX AMENDMENT, WE LOOK FORWARD TO SITTING DOWN AND ACTUALLY BEING ABLE TO REALLY ITERATE THOSE DISCUSSIONS THROUGH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT PROCESS.
UM, REALLY, UM, AND YOU TOUCHED ON ONE, THE DENSITY.
UH, JUST BRIEFLY, BECAUSE I DON'T WANNA FOCUS ON THE NEGATIVE, BUT JUST BRIEFLY, WHAT WERE SOME OF THE OTHER ISSUES THAT YOU ARE NOT, OR THAT YOU GUYS CONSIDER ARE OFF THE TABLE? JUST SO WE LEARN, I MEAN, WE GOT THE PROPOSAL YEAH.
THAT WAS SENT OUT BY, BY, UH, THE FRIENDS OF PARKHOUSE.
UH, BUT JUST SO THE ROOM KNOWS, EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS WHAT THINGS THAT ARE NOT SOMETHING YOU'RE WILLING TO, UH, NEGOTIATE OR TALK ABOUT ANY FURTHER, WHICH WE UNDERSTAND DENSITY IS A BIG ONE.
I I THINK IT'S DENSITY, DENSITY IS A BIG ONE.
THE OTHER ONE WAS, HEY, CAN CAN WE JUST DO AWAY ENTIRELY WITH TOWN HOMES AND DO ALL SINGLE FAMILIES HERE? UM, THE ANSWER TO THAT WAS, WAS NO.
AND I THINK FRANKLY, A LARGE DRIVER OF THAT IS IF WE WERE EVEN ENTERTAIN THAT IT REMOVES, REALLY REMOVES THE ABILITY TO EVEN TALK ABOUT ANY KIND OF OPEN SPACE.
IF YOU DEDICATED IT, IT, YOU KNOW, AT THAT POINT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT LOTTING OUT THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY.
UM, AND ULTIMATELY, YOU KNOW, THAT SEEMS LIKE IT'S NOT THE BEST INTEREST, NOT OF JUST POTENTIALLY, YOU KNOW, WHAT COULD BE DEVELOPED HERE, BUT THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD AS WELL.
AND IT ALSO MAKES IT MUCH TOUGHER THEN TO INCORPORATE THESE KIND OF TRAIL NETWORKS.
SO I, AND THAT KIND OF GOES HAT IN HAND WITH THE DENSITY CONVERSATION, RIGHT? RIGHT.
IT, IT, IT, IT'S NOT EXACTLY THE SAME, BUT ONE AND THE SAME.
I, I THINK, YOU KNOW, AND AND GARY I WOULD ASK YOU, I I, WELL YEAH, BUT WERE THERE ANY OTHER ISSUES THAT WE DISCUSSED THIS KIND OF, HEY, THIS IS UNWORKABLE FOR US, THAT, THAT THE, THAT THE STEERING COMMITTEE PRESENTED? NO, THE DENSITY IS ONE OF THEM.
AND UM, AND THE HOUSING TYPE YEAH.
I THINK THE HOUSING TYPE AND THE DENSITY ARE PRETTY MUCH THE SAME.
I THINK, I THINK WE UNDERSTAND THAT.
AND AGAIN, JUST FOR EDUCATION OF THE PEOPLE IN THE ROOM THAT DIDN'T SEE THE, THIS LETTER FROM FRIENDS OF PARKHOUSE, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THEY UNDERSTOOD THAT WHAT YOU GUYS ARE SAYING, OKAY, WE'RE WILLING TO TALK ABOUT THIS AND THIS, BUT WE'RE NOT WILLING.
AND I CERTAINLY, I THINK THE BOARD UNDERSTANDS THAT DENSITY IS NOT YEAH.
SO THAT, I, I THINK THAT WAS REALLY IT, YOU KNOW, THAT THERE OBVIOUSLY SOME MORE MINOR ISSUES.
AND AGAIN, THIS WAS A FIRST MEETING I, WE'D HAPPY
[00:20:01]
TO CONTINUE HAVING THESE THROUGH THE PROCESS, UH, IF WE WOULD PROCEED WITH THE TEXT AMENDMENT.BUT I DO THINK IT, IT WAS A, AGAIN, AND I DON'T WANNA SPEAK FOR EVERYBODY.
LOOK, WE CAME AWAY FEELING LIKE, OKAY, THAT THAT WAS ACTUALLY A CIVIL, PRODUCTIVE CONVERSATION THAT WE CAN CONTINUE HAVING.
I'M GLAD YOU BROUGHT UP THAT LETTER.
'CAUSE UH, I WASN'T SURE WHERE WE WERE GONNA TALK ABOUT THAT TONIGHT BECAUSE, UH, YOU KNOW, WE WERE ADVISED THAT OUR JOB IS TO JUST LOOK AT WHAT'S BEING IN FRONT OF US TONIGHT, YOU KNOW, WHICH IS THE ZONING CHAIN.
SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE, SO I AND I UNDERSTAND A LOT OF THIS OTHER STUFF IS IN THE, IN THE DEVELOPMENT.
AND THAT'S, THAT'S REALLY WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IS, IS I DON'T THINK ANYTHING OTHER THAN WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT WITH THE DENSITY AND THE HOUSING TYPES IS A, IS A ZONING ISSUE.
IT REALLY IS A LAND DEVELOPMENT.
ALRIGHT, WITH THAT SAID, UM, I THINK WE'RE TURN IT OVER TO ERIC.
UH, ERIC TOLD YOU, WE TOLD AT THE LAST MEETING THAT HE WAS GOING TO ANALYZE THE SCHOOL REPORT THAT WAS DONE IN 2022.
AND WAS GOING TO MEET WITH THE TOWNSHIP FIRE PEOPLE, UH, POLICE AND EMT PEOPLE, WHICH HE DID.
AND NOW HE'S GONNA TELL YOU WHAT HE FOUND OUT.
UH, JEFF, IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND PICKING UP, I'M GONNA START WITH THE, UH, THE DISCUSSION WITH SCHOOL KIDS.
UH, THE FIRST TIME WE WERE IN, UM, THERE WAS SOME REACTION TO OUR PROJECTED POPULATION, SCHOOL AGE KIDS.
UH, I, I WAS USING WHAT I THOUGHT WERE THE MOST READILY AVAILABLE TO ME, UH, LOCAL, UM, DEMOGRAPHIC MULTIPLIERS FROM MONTGOMERY COUNTY.
UM, I DID COME TO LEARN, UH, AFTER TALKING TO THE SCHOOL SUPERINTENDENT THAT A DEMOGRAPHIC STUDY WAS PREPARED BY, UH, SUNDANCE ASSOCIATES, WHO DOES THE DEMOGRAPHICS AND ENROLLMENT ANALYSIS FOR THE SCHOOLS, UH, BACK IN 2022, UH, THAT CONTAINED DEMOGRAPHIC MULTIPLIERS THAT WERE EVEN MORE LOCAL, UM, THAT THEY DERIVED.
THEY HAD A COMPANY CALLED ECONSULT.
UM, JEFF, GO TO THE NEXT PAGE ON THAT SLIDE.
UM, THIS ISN'T THE ENTIRE REPORT, I JUST WANTED TO SHOW THE COVER.
AND THEN THE PAGE FROM THAT REPORT THAT SHOWED THE MULTIPLIERS THAT WE ENDED UP USING FROM ECONSULT SOLUTIONS, UM, THAT DERIVED USING, UM, VERY LOCAL DATA, UM, OVER, OVER A SERIES OF, UH, RECENT FOUR YEAR INCREMENTS.
SO, UM, WE FOUND THAT THIS WOULD BE A BETTER, UH, SOURCE TO USE IN OUR ANALYSIS.
SO, UH, THESE ARE THE NUMBERS WE USED AND CAME UP WITH A SLIGHTLY HIGHER NUMBER OF SCHOOL AGE KIDS.
ACTUALLY, THESE NUMBERS, UH, ARE UNIQUE IN THAT THEY PROJECT PUBLIC SCHOOL AGE KIDS, UM, THAT ARE COMING OUT OF HOUSES.
SO WE CAN BE RELATIVELY ASSURED, UM, OF THE, THE ACCURACY FROM THAT STANDPOINT TOO.
AND I'LL HAVE TO TRY TO GUESS WHICH KIDS ARE NOT ATTENDING PUBLIC SCHOOLS OR THIS IS PRETTY, UH, ACCURATE.
JEFF, IF YOU COULD GO TO THE SLIDE THAT SHOWS THE, UH, OBJECTIONS.
UH, THE OTHER TABLE, THAT ONE THERE.
SO THIS TABLE SHOWS BY UNIT TYPE USING THE MULTIPLIERS THAT WERE IN THAT REPORT ARE PROJECTED NUMBER OF PUBLIC SCHOOL AGE KIDS THAT'D BE LIKELY TO ATTEND THE, UH, SPRINGPORT AREA SCHOOLS.
AND WE CAME UP WITH ABOUT 234 STUDENTS.
UM, AND YOU CAN SEE THAT'S JUST TAKING THE NUMBER OF UNITS APPLYING OR MULTIPLYING IT BY PUBLIC SCHOOL AGE CHILDREN PER UNIT FROM THE ESI STUDY.
AND EXTENDING IT OUT TO THAT CONCLUSION OF 234.
JEFF, DO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.
NEXT, WE APPLIED THAT 234 SCHOOL AGE STUDENTS TO THE ANALYSIS THAT WAS PROVIDED BY SUNDANCE ASSOCIATES.
THAT SAME REPORT THAT WE USE THE MULTIPLIERS FROM, UM, IT CONTAINED THAT REPORT CONTAINED, UH, CAPACITIES FOR EACH FACILITY, UH, LOOKED AT AT THOSE CAPACITIES ON A DISTRICT DRIVE BASIS, ON THE BASIS OF ALL ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS.
AND THEN FOLKS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL WE LOOKED AT SPECIFICALLY, BECAUSE THAT'S THE SCHOOL THAT I'VE BEEN TOLD STUDENTS WITH HERE WILL BE ATTENDING.
UM, AND THEN THE MIDDLE SCHOOL, EIGHTH, EIGHTH GRADE CENTER AND NINTH GRADE CENTER.
AND THE SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL GRADES TEND TO DWELL.
SO START WITH THE, UH, FACILITY CAP THAT IS THE UPPER LIMIT OF EACH FACILITY TO HANDLE, UH, STUDENTS.
THAT'S THE NUMBER OF STUDENTS THAT CAN, UH, CAN FIT IN THE FACILITY.
UM, AND INCIDENTALLY THAT NUMBER'S A, A BIT LOWER THAN
[00:25:01]
THE NUMBER THAT IS USED AT THE STATE LEVEL.THIS IS USED BY THE DISTRICT IN ESTIMATING WHAT THE CAPACITY IS.
SO IT'S, THEY LEAVE A LITTLE BIT OF ROOM ABOVE THAT, UH, OVER, UH, THAT COULD ACCOMMODATE MORE STUDENTS THAN WOULD BE, UM, ANTICIPATED.
I THINK FACILITY CAP THAT THEY USE IS ROUGHLY 90% OF THE STATE REPORTED CAPACITY.
UM, WE THEN LOOKED AT THE 2021 ACTUAL ENROLLMENT, UM, THAT WAS IN THAT REPORT.
UH, THAT REPORT CONTAINED A 2026 PROJECTION, UH, BASED ON DEVELOPMENTS THAT WERE CURRENTLY IN THE PIPELINE.
IT ANALYZED EVERY LAND DEVELOPMENT THAT'S IN THE SCHOOL DISTRICT USING THE MULTIPLIERS THAT ESI DEVELOPED AND SUNDANCE PROJECTED, UH, WHAT THE, THE, THE SCHOOL AGE POPULATION WOULD BE IN 2026 FOR DISTRICT WIDE.
AND THEN EACH OF THOSE FACILITIES, WE THEN ADDED OUR 234 OBJECTIVE STUDENTS.
UM, THE WAY THAT, THE SAME WAY THAT SUNDANCE ASSOCIATES DID, THEY TOOK THOSE 230, WE TOOK THOSE 234 STUDENTS AND JUST ALLOCATED THEM EVENLY ACROSS GRADES K THROUGH 12.
UM, AND THEN YOU'LL SEE, UH, THE OVER UNDER CAP IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE SUM OF THE 2026 PROJECTIONS, WHICH IS THE, BASED ON THE GROWTH OF THE SCHOOL DISTRICT AND NATURAL GROWTH IN THE, IN THE, UH, IN THE DISTRICT.
WE ADDED OUR PROJECTED STUDENTS IN AND THEN, UH, CALCULATED THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE FACILITY CAP NUMBER AND OUR PROJECTIONS IN 2026.
AND IN EACH OF THOSE CASES WE'RE COMING IN BELOW THE FACILITY CAP.
UM, WHETHER IT'S ON A DISTRICT WIDE BASIS OR FOR EACH OF THOSE FACILITIES THAT THESE STUDENTS WOULD BE ATTENDING.
UM, THAT'S COUNTING ALL THE PROJECTED NEW POPULATION FROM NEW DEVELOPMENT PLUS PARKHOUSE, UM, TO ARRIVE AT THAT NUMBER.
SO, UM, WE FEEL THAT THIS, THERE IS INCREMENTAL GROWTH HAPPENING, UH, BUT WE FEEL THIS TO BE A FAIRLY CONSERVATIVE NUMBER BECAUSE, UH, SEVERAL OF THOSE DEVELOPMENTS THAT ARE LISTED IN THE REPORT ARE STILL NOT EVEN APPROVED YET.
SO THESE KIDS WON'T BE COMING ONLINE ON DAY ONE OF 2024 OR 25 OR 26.
BUT OVER THE COURSE OF YEARS AS HEAT DEVELOPMENTS MAY OR MAY NOT GET BUILT OUT, UH, WE DIDN'T REDUCE OUR ESTIMATES ON THE BASIS THAT SOME OF THESE AREN'T DEVELOPED.
WE JUST ASSUMED THAT ALL OF THEM WOULD BE, UM, USING THE POPULATION PROJECTIONS THAT SUNDANCE ASSOCIATES PROJECTED.
UM, THAT'S REALLY MY PRESENTATION FOR SCHOOL AGE KIDS.
UH, ED, UNLESS YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE THAT YOU THINK NEEDS NO, I THINK THAT PRETTY MUCH DONE.
I KNOW WHERE THE CONCERNS WAS, WHETHER OUR DEVELOPMENT WOULD REQUIRE THE CONSTRUCTION OF NEW SCHOOLS FOR SCHOOL, AND THAT CERTAINLY SHOWS THAT IT DOES NOT.
SO WHY DON'T YOU NOW GO INTO THE DISCUSSION THAT YOU HAD WITH THE POLICE, FIRE AND EMT.
UM, ON MAY 2ND, I MET WITH, UM, I HAD A MICROSOFT TEAMS MEETING, I SHOULD SAY, WITH, UH, PUBLIC SAFETY PERSONNEL THAT INCLUDED, UH, MIKE RUSSELL, FIRE CHIEF, UH, DEPUTY FIRE CHIEF, UH, DIMING POLICE, CHIEF FREEMAN, UH, POLICE LIEUTENANT SHEEN, AMBULANCE CHIEF GIULIANO, AND MR. GRACE, UM, YOUR PLANNING ZONING DIRECTOR, JUST TO HAVE SOME DISCUSSIONS ABOUT WHAT PUBLIC SAFETY, UH, STAFF IS FACING IN TERMS OF, UH, DEMAND AND CAPACITY IN THE COMING YEARS.
UM, I THINK IT WAS WIDELY ACKNOWLEDGED THAT THE INCREMENTAL GROWTH PRESSURES THAT ARE OCCURRING IN, IN THE TOWNSHIP AND SURROUNDING AREAS, UM, ARE GOING TO BE PLACING SOME STRAINS ON PUBLIC SAFETY, UM, IN TERMS OF, YOU KNOW, PROVISION, UH, STAFFING AND IN TERMS OF CAPITAL NEEDS.
UM, THE QUESTION REALLY IS NOT IF THOSE PRESSURES WILL HAPPEN, BUT MORE SO WHEN WILL THEY HAPPEN AND WHEN WILL THEY NEED TO MAKE INVESTMENTS IN BOTH STAFF AND CAPITAL EQUIPMENT TO ENSURE THAT THEY CAN PROPERLY RESPOND.
THAT WAS PRETTY UNIVERSAL ACROSS THE BOARD FROM ALL OF THE STAFF.
UM, YOU KNOW, THEY, THEY ALL EXPRESSED THAT, THAT THERE WOULD BE, UM, NEEDS FOR, FOR GROWTH IN TERMS OF STAFF AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS.
[00:30:01]
THEY ALSO ACKNOWLEDGED THOUGH THAT IT'S NOT ENTIRELY BECAUSE OF THIS ONE DEVELOPMENT, BUT BECAUSE OF NUMEROUS DEVELOPMENTS THAT ARE OCCURRING, UH, IN THE SERVICE AREA.UH, IT'S JUST THAT THIS ONE HAPPENS TO BE OF SIZE THAT, UH, THEY SAID MAKES IT CERTAIN THAT THEY'RE GONNA NEED TO DO THESE, UH, IMPROVEMENTS AT SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE.
UM, ALL OF 'EM ARE PLANNING FOR GROWTH IN TERMS OF STAFFING AND, AND CAPITAL NEEDS.
UH, THAT WOULD INCLUDE, UM, YOU KNOW, NEW OFFICERS IN THE CASE OF POLICE, UM, POSSIBLY NEW CAPITAL, UH, NEEDS IN TERMS OF, UH, EQUIPMENT LIKE POLICE CARS, POSSIBLY, UM, FIRE EQUIPMENT, UM, APPARATUS LIKE THAT.
UM, SIR, I'M SORRY, ONE SECOND.
WHAT'S THE ISSUE? THE ISSUE IS THE CHIEF OF POLICE, THE HEAD OF THE FIRE DEPARTMENT.
IF WE WANT THEIR OPINION, THE BOARD SHOULD ASK THEM AND THEY SHOULD TESTIFY DIRECTLY WHY THIS GUY IS GIVING WHAT THEY SAID.
HE PUT, SIR, THEY ARE THE TOWNSHIP PROFESSIONALS, WHETHER YOU AS A RESIDENT OR ANY APPLICANT IS ENTITLED TO MEET WITH THE TOWNSHIP PROFESSIONALS TO GET THEIR OPINION ON THE, ON OPERATIONS WITHIN THE TOWNSHIP.
AND THIS WAS DISCUSSED AT THE LAST PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AND THE APPLICANT FOLLOWED THROUGH ON THAT REQUEST THAT WAS MADE THAT THEY GET THAT INFORMATION FROM THE APPROPRIATE JUDGE.
THOSE PROFESSIONALS SHOULD BE HERE US THEIR OPINION NOT HIDDEN.
I WILL RE THAT'S YOUR OPINION.
AND THEY COULD BE IF THE PLANNING COMMISSION REQUESTED THEM TO BE HERE, THEY DID NOT.
SO WHETHER IT'S HEARSAY OR NOT IS IRRELEVANT BECAUSE YOU, AS YOU MENTIONED, THIS IS NOT A TRIAL AND HE'S GOING TO RELAY THAT THERE IS AN ORDINANCE HEARING ON THE 29TH THAT IT'S POTENTIAL THAT THOSE PROFESSIONALS WILL BE ASKED TO GIVE THEIR OPINION AT THAT PROCEEDING.
IT'S NOT NECESSARILY THIS PROCEEDING THIS EVENING BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
ALL I'M SAYING IS THAT THE PLAN ADMISSION WANTED THE INFORMATION, THEY SHOULD GET IT SERVED.
I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
WE'RE GONNA LET THE APPLICANT CONTINUE WITH THEIR PRESENTATION.
UM, AND DON'T GET ME WRONG, I DON'T WANT TO SPEAK FOR THESE PROFESSIONALS.
I THINK THEY, THEY COULD PROBABLY RELATE THEIR CHALLENGES MUCH BETTER THAN I COULD.
IT WAS JUST ACKNOWLEDGED TO ME THAT YES, THERE WILL BE A NEED FOR, UH, OPERATIONAL, UM, INVESTMENTS AND IN CAPITAL INVESTMENTS IN THE FUTURE AS A RESULT OF THESE DEVELOPMENTS THAT ARE OCCURRING.
UM, WE DID, UH, PREPARE A FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS THAT PROJECTED, UM, FUTURE ANNUAL REVENUES TO THE TOWNSHIP THAT WOULD GO TOWARDS, UH, YOU KNOW, THE OPERATIONS OF THE TOWNSHIP.
UM, AND WE PROJECTED FUTURE EXPENSES THAT WOULD BE INCURRED AS A RESULT OF THIS DEVELOPMENT THAT WAS BASED ON THE BUDGETED EXPENSES THAT THE TOWNSHIP HAS TODAY, WHICH INCLUDES ALL THE PUBLIC SAFETY COSTS, UH, TO PROVIDE THOSE SERVICES, UH, IN THEIR OPERATING BUDGET.
AND, UH, OUR CONCLUSION WAS THAT, UH, ON AN ANNUAL BASIS, ONCE THE DEVELOPMENT IS, IS FULLY OPERATIONAL UP AND RUNNING, THAT THE COST, THE REVENUES WOULD EXCEED COSTS, UH, ON AN ANNUAL BASIS BY ABOUT $623,000.
UM, THOSE ARE REVENUES THAT COULD GO TOWARDS OPERATIONAL EXPENSES, UM, NEW STAFF, UM, IT COULD GO TO TOWARDS CAPITAL EXPENSES.
THE OTHER THING THAT HASN'T BEEN COUNTED IN THAT THOSE ARE ANNUAL, UH, REVENUES OVER COSTS.
THERE WILL ALSO BE SIGNIFICANT TRANSFER TAXES THAT WILL BE PAID, UM, NOT ONLY ON THE ANNUAL BASIS, BUT ON THE FIRST HOME SALE FROM THE BUILDER TO THE FIRST OWNER.
UM, YOU KNOW, BASED ON OUR, THE NUMBER OF UNITS AND, YOU KNOW, OUR PROJECTIONS FOR THE VALUES PER UNIT, WE'RE LOOKING AT A TOTAL MARKET VALUE FOR THIS, UH, DEVELOPMENT IN EXCESS OF, UH, $440 MILLION.
UM, HALF A PERCENT OF THAT WOULD GO TO THE TOWNSHIP AND HALF A PERCENT OF THAT, UH, THE SALES ON THAT, ON THOSE UNITS WOULD GO TO THE SCHOOL DISTRICT.
UM, THAT WOULD, YOU KNOW, RESULT IN SIGNIFICANT REVENUES THAT COULD BE USED FOR, TO DEF FREIGHT COSTS FOR THINGS LIKE CAPITAL INVESTMENTS, NEW, UH, NEW INFRASTRUCTURE OR NEW APPARATUS FOR, UH, FOR POLICE AND FIRE.
UM, THAT WOULD BE FOR THOSE PROFESSIONALS TO ASSESS THE ADEQUACY OF
[00:35:01]
THOSE REVENUES TO DO THAT.UM, ALSO THE OTHER DEVELOPMENTS THAT THEY REFERENCED THAT ARE CAUSING, UH, SERVICE DEMAND CHALLENGES TO THEM WOULD ALSO BE PAYING SIMILAR TRANSFER TAXES AND ANNUAL REVENUES IN FORM OF REAL ESTATE TAXES, UH, EARNED INCOME TAX REVENUES, UH, AND, AND OTHER THINGS THAT, UH, ARE OUTLINED IN THE TOWNSHIP BUDGET.
SO, UH, WE BELIEVE THAT'S, THAT'S THE PURPOSE FOR THESE, THESE PUBLIC TAX LEVIES IS TO ASSIST WITH, UM, CONTINUED OPERATIONS AND GROWTH IN TERMS OF, UH, PROVIDING THESE PUBLIC SERVICES.
UM, AGAIN, I DON'T WANNA SPEAK FOR THE PUBLIC SAFETY PERSONNEL.
I THINK THEY COULD PROBABLY, UH, RELATE, YOU KNOW, THEIR, WHAT THEY SEE AS THEIR CHALLENGES MUCH BETTER THAN I COULD.
IT DOESN'T, IT DOESN'T, UM, IT DOESN'T, I DON'T THINK SURPRISE ANYBODY ON THIS BOARD THAT THE POLICE CHIEF OR THE FIRE CHIEF WANTS NEW EQUIPMENT, MORE PEOPLE.
I MEAN THAT'S, I MEAN THAT'S WHAT THEY WANT, RIGHT? THEY ALWAYS WANT THE BEST IN NEW EQUIPMENT.
THEY ALWAYS WANT NEW, WHATEVER ELSE THEY CAN GET.
I MEAN, THAT'S THEIR JOB, RIGHT? I THINK WHAT WE ARE MISSING HERE IS EXACTLY WHAT IMPACT THIS AND OTHER NEW DEVELOPERS ARE GONNA HAVE ON, YOU KNOW, THE STAFF TODAY.
DOES THAT MEAN WE GOTTA HAVE THREE NEW FIREMEN IMMEDIATELY OR IS IT SOMETHING THAT RAMPS UP, UH, BECAUSE OF JUST, JUST THE NATURE OF, OF, OF, OF DEVELOPMENT? UM, AND I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING WE'RE STILL NOT SURE HOW THAT WORKS.
AND I TOTALLY, I STILL DON'T AGREE WITH YOUR SEVEN POINT AND SOME OF THESE IN THE, OR ONE HOUSE IS 0.73 CHILD, YOU KNOW, IT JUST SEEMS IMMEDIATELY LOW TO ME AND I KNOW IT'S NOT YOUR NUMBER, BUT THAT JUST SEEMS LIKE THAT'S NOT, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW.
IT JUST A THIRD, TWO THIRDS OF A CHILD JUST DOESN'T SEEM LIKE ENOUGH TO ME.
IS THERE ANY WAY, YOU KNOW, THAT WE, AND I ASKED THIS TO GREG AND AND HE TOLD ME I WAS CRAZY, WHICH ANOTHER WHOLE ISSUE.
BUT WHAT IF YOU'RE WRONG? WHAT IF YOU'RE WRONG? WHAT IF THERE'S 500 KIDS THAT COME OUT OF THIS COMMUNITY, YOU KNOW, THEN THE TAXPAYERS ARE GONNA HAVE TO PICK THAT UP, RIGHT? TAXPAYERS HAVE TO EAT THAT.
AND, UH, WHAT IF WE NEED 20 NEW POLICE CARS BECAUSE OF, YOU KNOW, ALL THE DEVELOPMENT? I MEAN, I KNOW YOU CAN PUT OUT PROJECTIONS AND THEY, YOU KNOW, I KNOW YOU DID A GREAT JOB AND THANK YOU.
YOU DID DO WHAT WE ASKED YOU TO DO.
THIS GENTLEMAN, YOU KNOW, YOU DID DO WHAT WE ASKED YOU TO DO.
UM, BUT YOU KNOW, MY, MY ISSUE WITH THAT IS WHAT, YOU BUILD THIS THING, YOU GO AWAY, YOU MOVE ON TO YOUR NEXT PROJECT AND WE'RE STUCK WITH PUTTING A NEW SCHOOL IN OR WE'RE STUCK WITH BUILDING 20 NEW POLICE CARS.
'CAUSE YOUR PROJECTIONS JUST DIDN'T MAKE IT RIGHT.
THAT'S, THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE HERE.
I'M JUST TRYING TO BE SENSIBLE.
SO I APPRECIATE WHAT YOU'RE DOING.
I I'M JUST NOT SURE THAT ALL THESE NUMBERS MAKE A WHOLE LOT OF SENSE AT THIS POINT.
BUT, BUT I APPRECIATE YOU DOING IT AND IT'S FAIR.
AND JUST TO SAY I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND THE CONCERN.
WHAT WE CAN DO IS WORK WITH THE BEST INFORMATION.
AND I UNDERSTAND THAT JUST LIKE ANY, ANYTHING ELSE THAT WE DO IN ANY OTHER ASSET GRAMMY, I UNDERSTAND WE HAVE TO TAKE THE BEST INFORMATION WE HAVE AND I AGREE.
I AGREE AND, AND YOU DID A GREAT JOB AT THAT.
YOU DID EXACTLY WHAT WE ASKED YOU TO DO.
UH, YOU KNOW, KNOW, AGAIN, IT DOESN'T SURPRISE ME, THE POLICE CHIEF AND THE FIRE CHIEF WANT NEW EQUIPMENT OR LOOKING FOR, THEY'RE, I'M SURE EVERY YEAR THE SUPERVISOR WILL TELL YOU THEY GET IT FROM THEM.
HEY, WE NEED A NEW FIRE TRUCK.
I'M SURE THAT THAT'S STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE, RIGHT? THEY WANT THE NEWS.
AND THE BEST, I I I'M NOT SURE THAT THE NUMBERS JUST DON'T ADD UP YET, BUT YOU DID WHAT WE ASKED YOU TO DO.
UH, MATT HAMMOND, UH, LOOKED INTO A LITTLE FURTHER, UH, IN LIGHT OF SOME OF THE COMMENTS AND PHOTOGRAPHS.
UH, AND MATT, WHY DON'T YOU TELL US WHAT YOU'VE FOUND? GOOD EVENING.
SO OBVIOUSLY THERE WERE A NUMBER OF QUESTIONS RAISED, UH, AT THE LAST PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AND AS WELL AS THE MEETING, UH, THAT WE HAD WITH, UH, THE COMMITTEE ON MONDAY.
UM, RELATING TO TRAFFIC, I BELIEVE AT THE LAST PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, I DID SPEND SOME TIME GOING OVER THE TRAFFIC STUDY AND THE ANALYSES AND THINGS THAT WE'VE FOUND, UH, TO DATE.
UM, TALKED ABOUT THE NUMBER OF INTERSECTIONS STUDIED AS PART OF THIS DEVELOPMENT.
UM, THERE WAS A QUESTION AS TO, UH, THE LOCATION OF THOSE INTERSECTIONS.
[00:40:01]
IMMEDIATELY SURROUNDING THE DEVELOPMENT, BUT BEING OUTSIDE OF THE AREA AND, AND TRYING TO ENCOMPASS, UH, SOME OF THE PROBLEM AREAS OF THE TOWNSHIP.UM, MY ANSWER TO THAT IS THAT OF THOSE 15 INTERSECTIONS, UM, OBVIOUSLY WE COUNTED SOME OF THOSE AND INCLUDED SOME OF THOSE BE SURROUNDING THE DEVELOPMENT.
UH, BUT WE'VE ALSO GONE ABOUT A MILE TO A MILE AND A HALF RADIUS, UM, FROM THE PROPERTY, UH, IN RELATION TO THE INTERSECTIONS THAT WE LOOKED AT, WHICH IS A PRETTY SIGNIFICANT DISTANCE, UM, AT LEAST IN MY EXPERIENCE IN PREPARING TRAFFIC STUDIES, UH, TO GO A MILE AND A HALF OUTSIDE AND LOOK AT INTERSECTIONS THERE, UM, IS ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT PENN OUT WOULD REQUIRE.
UM, BUT REGARDLESS, IT WAS SOMETHING THAT, UH, THE TOWNSHIP IN PENDO FELT WE SHOULD DO, UH, BASED ON THE PREVIOUS PLAN OF 1,203 UNITS.
BUT WE'VE STILL INCORPORATED THAT SAME STUDY AREA AS PART OF THE CURRENT PROPOSAL OF 600 UNITS.
UM, SO THAT WAS ONE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT WAS RAISED.
THERE WAS ALSO A QUESTION, A FEW QUESTIONS RAISED ABOUT OLD STATE ROAD, UM, AND ITS CURRENT WIDTH.
UH, THE FACT THAT, UH, THERE'S BUSES THAT TRAVERSE OLD STATE ROAD AND IT'S DIFFICULT FOR VEHICLES AND BUSES TO, UH, PASS EACH OTHER ON THE ROADWAY BECAUSE OF THE NARROWNESS OF OLD STATE ROAD.
OLD STATE ROAD, UH, DEPENDING ON WHERE YOU ARE ON THAT ROADWAY, UH, IT'S APPROXIMATELY 18 TO 20 FEET WIDE IN TOTAL WIDTH.
SO ABOUT NINE TO 10 FOOT TRAVEL LANE.
SO IS BY ALL MEANS, UH, A NARROW STREET.
BUT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE FAILED TO MENTION, UM, AS PART OF OUR PREVIOUS PRESENTATION IS THE FACT THAT ACCORDING TO THE TOWNSHIP ORDINANCES, UH, WE ARE REQUIRED TO, UH, BRING, UH, ROADWAYS UP TO STANDARDS AS IT RELATES TO THE ORDERS REQUIREMENTS.
I BELIEVE, UM, OLD STATE ROAD IS CLASSIFIED AS A FEEDER ROAD, UH, IN THE TOWNSHIP, WHICH REQUIRES 60 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY.
BUT BEYOND THAT, THE REQUIRED RIGHT WAY WIDTH FOR FEEDER ROAD IS 30 FEET.
SO, UM, IF YOU WERE TO TAKE THE HALF WIDTH OF OLD STATE ROAD 38 FEET, THAT'S 19 FEET.
ASSUMING THE ROAD IS 18 TO 20 FEET, AGAIN, NINE TO 10 FEET ON OUR SIDE, WHICH MEANS ESSENTIALLY THAT IS PART OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT PROCESS, UM, BY ORDINANCE, WE WOULD BE REQUIRED TO WIDEN THE OLD STATE ROAD, ALMOST NINE TO 10 FEET ALONG THE FRONTAGE.
AND WHEN I SAY THE FRONTAGE, I'M TALKING ABOUT ESSENTIALLY FROM SECOND AVENUE, UH, TO THE ONE PROPERTY, UH, ADJACENT HERE, WHICH THIS DISTANCE HERE IS APPROXIMATELY 4,000 FEET, ALMOST THREE QUARTERS OF A MILE IN THAT AREA.
WE DO NOT CONTROL THIS CORNER PROPERTY HERE AT THE INTERSECTION, THE SECOND AND OLD STATE.
WE ALSO DO NOT CONTROL THIS PROPERTY.
SO EXTENDING THE LIMITS OF THAT WIDENING WOULD, WOULD BE A FUNCTION OF THE RIGHT OF WAY AVAILABLE.
UM, THERE'S TWO CORNERS, BUT AT LEAST FOR 4,000, 4,600 LINEAR FEET IN THIS AREA, UH, WE'D BE REQUIRED TO WIDEN THE ROAD, ANOTHER NINE TO 10 FEET ALONG OUR FRONTAGE.
THERE WAS ALSO SOME DISCUSSION WITH RESPECT TO, UM, AND ONE OF THE THEMES KEEPS COMING UP IS ABOUT THIS ONE LANE BRIDGE ON ONE 13.
AND JUST TO BE CLEAR, UH, AS PART OF THE TOWNSHIP'S PROPOSED ROUNDABOUT PROJECT, UM, INCLUSIVE OF THAT IS A WIDENING OF THAT BRIDGE TO PROVIDE FOR A TWO-LANE BRIDGE IN THIS AREA.
AS YOU APPROACH THE PROPOSED ROUNDABOUT, THERE ARE TWO ALTERNATIVES BEING, UH, INVESTIGATED BY THE TOWNSHIP.
BOTH INVOLVE THE ROUNDABOUT AND BOTH INVOLVE THE WIDENING OF THAT SINGLE LANE BRIDGE.
UM, OVER, UM, ON ONE 13, AS RANDY HAD MENTIONED.
AS PART OF THAT, THERE'S ALSO A SIGNIFICANT, UH, PEDESTRIAN NETWORK PROPOSED AS PART OF THAT ROUNDABOUT, UH, CONNECTING ALL FOUR QUADRANTS, UH, OF THE ROUNDABOUT, WHICH WOULD TIE INTO THIS TRAIL SYSTEM THAT WE HAVE DEPICTED OR ANY HAS DEPICTED ON, UH, THIS PLAN.
OTHER CONCERNS RELATED TO, UM, BUSES AND THE NUMBER OF BUS STOPS THAT WOULD BE NECESSARY ALONG, UH, OLD STATE ROAD OR THE ROADS IN GENERAL, UH, RELATED TO THE, THE, THE MARKET RATE PORTION OF THE DEVELOPMENT.
AS PART OF THAT, UH, WE WOULD WORK WITH THE TOWNSHIP, UH, TO, UH, PROVIDE THE SCHOOL DISTRICT THE ABILITY, UH, THROUGH AGREEMENTS WITH THE HOA TO ALLOW THE BUSES TO ENTER THE DEVELOPMENT, UH, RATHER THAN, UH, PICK UP THE CHILDREN, UH, ON THE STREETS SURROUNDING, UH, THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.
AND FINALLY, THERE WERE A NUMBER OF COMMENTS THAT WERE MADE, UH, IN REGARDS TO THE NATURE OF THE GEOMETRY OF THE INTERSECTION OF OLD STATE.
[00:45:01]
THE INTERSECTION OF SECOND, UH, BLACKROCK AND, UH, DRE ELVIS, AS WELL AS THE INTERSECTION OF, UH, TRAP AND ONE 13.WE ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THERE ARE CONCERNS WITH RESPECT TO THOSE INTERSECTIONS.
UM, IT APPEARS THAT A LOT OF, AT LEAST AT SECOND AND, UM, OLD STATE AND AT TRAP AND ONE 13, A LOT OF THAT RELATES TO SITE DISTANCE.
UM, YOU'LL KNOW THAT THERE'S TREES THAT ARE GROWING, PRETTY MATURE TREES VERY CLOSE TO THE EDGE OF THE ROADWAY.
OBVIOUSLY WE WOULD LOOK TO DO WHAT WE CAN TO ADDRESS THAT SITUATION.
UM, WHETHER SOME OF THE TREES ARE WITHIN THE RIGHT WAY, THE BRANCHES, OVERGROWING, PROHIBITED, SITE DISTANCE, THINGS OF THAT NATURE.
THOSE ARE THINGS THAT WE COULD WORK WITH THE TOWNSHIP ON ACCOMPLISHING, UH, IF THOSE TREES OR THOSE ISSUES WERE OUTSIDE OF THE RIGHT OF WAY.
AGAIN, WE DON'T CONTROL THOSE AREAS, BUT, BUT AGAIN, WORK WITH THE TOWNSHIP.
ANOTHER OPTION, AND A AND IT WAS BROUGHT UP A COUPLE TIMES ABOUT TRAP, UM, AND THE INTERSECTION OF ONE 13.
AND I LOOKED AT IT PRELIMINARILY AND, AND THIS IS MY NOTES START TO IMAGINATION OF, UH, A SOLUTION.
BUT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE DID LOOK AT IS BECAUSE TRAP ROAD KIND OF COMES ALMOST LIKE A, A, A MUG HANDLE, RIGHT? SO THERE'S ONE INTERSECTION HERE, IT CURVES AROUND, THERE'S ANOTHER INTERSECTION THERE CLOSER TO THE SIGNAL IS INTERSECTION WITH BLACKROCK.
WHAT I DID NOTICE, UM, IN LOOKING AT IT AGAIN, IS THERE'S MUCH BETTER SITE DISTANCE AT THIS SIDE OF TRAP ROAD AND ONE 13 THAN THERE IS HERE FOR VEHICLES EXITING.
SO ONE OF THE POTENTIAL SOLUTIONS THERE, AND AGAIN, NOT SOMETHING THAT I'VE NECESSARILY HAD A DISCUSSION WITH THE TOWNSHIP TRAFFIC ENGINEER ON OR WITH
UM, THERE'S A FEW EXISTING RESIDENTIAL UNITS ON TRAP ROAD, OBVIOUSLY THEY'D HAVE TO BUY INTO THAT, BUT THAT WOULD BE A FAIRLY, UH, SIGNIFICANT IMPROVEMENT FROM A, UH, SITE THAT'S PERSPECTIVE, A SAFETY PERSPECTIVE BECAUSE OF THE EXITING MOVEMENTS ON THIS SIDE OF THE ROAD RIGHT HERE IS ACTUALLY ON A, ON A MORE STRAIGHTAWAY PORTION OF THE ROAD.
UM, BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, UH, THIS IS THE VERY BEGINNING OF THE PROCESS, A VERY LONG PROCESS FOR THAT MATTER.
UM, AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, WE WILL NEED TO CONTINUE TO COORDINATE WITH THE TOWNSHIP CONSULTANTS, UM, MR. VALENCIA AND PENDOT AS IT RELATES TO THE OVERALL ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS AND WHAT CAN AND CAN'T BE DONE.
UM, BUT UH, WITH THE, UH, PROVISION OF THE ROUNDABOUT, THE WIDENING OF THE BRIDGE ON ONE 13, THE WIDENING OF OLD STATE ROAD, UM, SOME SITE DISTANCE IMPROVEMENTS, THE POSSIBILITY OF, OF, UM, MODIFICATIONS TO TRAP ROAD, UM, AS WELL AS THE IMPACT FEE, UH, THAT THAT IS, UH, DUE.
UH, WE THINK THERE'S A PRETTY SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF IMPROVEMENTS THAT BE DONE OUT HERE TO, TO NOT ONLY IMPROVE UPON WHAT EXISTS TODAY, BUT WHAT WILL, UH, BE ABLE TO MITIGATE THE IMPACT OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.
QUESTION, QUESTION, UH, BEFORE YOU LEAVE, UH, ANTHONY, YOU MIGHT BE SISTER MATT.
UM, WHAT'S THE TIMETABLE FOR THE TURNABOUT? IS IT, IS IT ON THE PLAN, BUT IT COULD BE FIVE YEARS AWAY? I MEAN, IS THIS DEVELOPMENT BUILT BEFORE THAT OR IS IT SIMULTANEOUSLY OR IS THAT GONNA BE BUILT FIRST OR WHAT'S THE POINT? THAT'S A GOOD, GOOD QUESTION.
I WISH I HAD A CRYSTAL BALL I GUESS, BUT IN TERMS OF THE PRELIMINARY, WE'RE RIGHT NOW WE'RE IN PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING FOR THE ROUNDABOUT.
UM, SO AS MATT SAID, IT INCLUDES THE, UM, EXPANSION OF THE BRIDGE FOR THE WIDENING OF THE BRIDGE SECTION.
SO WE'VE GONE THROUGH ONE REVIEW NOW WITH, UH, PENDO.
UM, WE'RE GEARING UP FOR OUR SECOND SUBMISSION, UH, IN THE COMING, IN THE COMING MONTHS TO ADDRESS THE PENDO CONCERNS THERE.
THERE'S BEEN INTERMITTENT, UH, MEETINGS IN BETWEEN.
UM, SO ONCE WE MAKE THE NEXT SUBMISSION, YOU KNOW, WE'LL GET A LOT OF ADDITIONAL ITEMS FLUSHED OUT.
BUT THE NEXT STEP IS IDENTIFYING FUTURE PA FUTURE PONDS FOR, SO WHAT WE HAVE RIGHT NOW THAT THE TOWNSHIP HAS DUE TO GRANT THAT WE RECEIVED IS PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING, UH, WHICH INCLUDES T, S AND L STRUCTURE RELATED DOCUMENTATION.
UM, THE CONSTRUCTION IS ANOTHER QUESTION.
WE'VE APPLIED FOR A GRANT FOR CONSTRUCTION ANTICIPATION.
SO, UH, YOU KNOW, THE TIMEFRAME'S A LITTLE TOUGH TO TO VENTURE, BUT BASED ON THE FUNDING THAT WE RECEIVED, THE FUNDING REQUIREMENTS, IF WE WERE TO BE SUCCESSFUL IN THE CONSTRUCTION, UH, FUNDING FOR THE PENDOT GRANTS, YOU'RE LOOKING AT A ANYWHERE FROM A THREE, THREE TO FIVE YEAR WINDOW FOR CONSTRUCTION.
[00:50:01]
I'M HEARING YOU SAY THAT THEY COULD, THIS COULD BE BUILT BEFORE THAT DONE THREE TO FIVE YEARS.RIGHT? SO YOU MEAN THE DEVELOPMENT COULD BE BUILT BEFORE, JUST, AND AGAIN, AS WE DON'T CONTROL THE PROCESS, OBVIOUSLY IT'S LARGE, BUT I WOULD ANTICIPATE THE LAND DEVELOPMENT PROCESS WE HAVE AT LEAST SEVERAL YEARS GOING THROUGH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT PROCESS.
THEN YOU HAVE PRETTY LENGTHY CONSTRUCTION PROCESS BEFORE YOU HAVE THE FIRST RESIDENTS ACTUALLY, YOU KNOW, LIVING IN HOMES OUT HERE, I THINK YOU'RE TALKING EASILY THROUGH.
AND I UNDERSTAND THAT, I MEAN, I'M NOT LOOKING FOR ANYBODY TO GIVE YOU A DATE, BUT I THINK ACTUALLY, AND AGAIN, THOSE WOULD BE THE FIRST RESIDENCE, BUT OBVIOUSLY I WOULD THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, IT WOULD BE A DISASTER TO HAVE THIS BUILT AND NOT HAVE THAT DONE.
WOULD YOU NOT AGREE? I I CAN'T SPEAK TO IT BEING A DISASTER, BUT WHAT I, WHAT I CAN SAY IS, YEAH, I THINK OBVIOUSLY THAT HELPS THE EXISTING, THE EXISTING ISSUES AS WELL AS CERTAINLY ADDRESSES THE CONCERNS ABOUT TRAFFIC COMING OUTTA THE COMMUNITY.
I'LL CHARACTERIZE IT AS A DISASTER BECAUSE I GO THROUGH THERE AND I KNOW WHAT IT IS TODAY.
OH YEAH, WELL IF YOU PUT 500 MORE HOUSES THERE AND PEOPLE COMING OUT, WHAT THAT TRAFFIC WOULD LOOK LIKE.
SO, AND THE OTHER, SO, UM, BUT I AGREE, I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
I'M NOT, I'M NOT BLAMING ANYBODY HERE.
I'M NOT, I'M JUST ASKING QUESTIONS.
AND THE OTHER POINT I WOULD MAKE IS THE, THE ACT 2 0 9 FEE, THAT WOULD BE PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT THAT WE'RE ASSESSED FROM THE TOWNSHIP.
UM, AS MR. VALENCIA TALKS ABOUT FUNDING, OBVIOUSLY THAT WOULD BE AVAILABLE TO THE TOWNSHIP AS A FUNDING MECHANISM FOR THE ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION THERE.
WHETHER YOU CHOOSE TO USE IT THAT WAY OR NOT IS IS I GOTCHA.
AND, AND LET ME JUST ADD ONE MORE THING.
SO WHEN WE STARTED THIS PROCESS AND WE ENGAGED PENNDOT, UH, DUE TO THE FACT THAT ONE 13 SECOND AVENUE STATE ROADS, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT PENNDOT SAID TO US FROM THE VERY BEGINNING, BECAUSE THEY WERE AWARE OF THE TOWNSHIP'S DESIRE TO, TO IMPROVE THIS INTERSECTION, WAS TO INCLUDE AND MAKE ACCOMMODATIONS FOR THE ROUNDABOUT, WHETHER IT WAS CONCEPT A OR CONCEPT B OR CONCEPT ONE OR CONCEPT TWO.
SO PENDOT IS SO FAR UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT THIS IS A REAL PROJECT IN TERMS OF THE ROUNDABOUT.
THEY WANT US TO ACCOMMODATE FOR IT.
AND WE'VE BEEN PROCEEDING FORWARD THAT THE TIMEFRAMES WILL ESSENTIALLY LINE UP, I CAN SAY THE EXACT, BUT THEY COULD LINE UP IF, IF THE PROJECT, THE TOWNSHIP'S ROUNDABOUT PROJECT WERE TO HIT A SNAG AND JUST FALL APART COMPLETELY, PENDOT WOULD REQUIRE US TO COME UP WITH OTHER SOLUTIONS TO ADDRESS THE IMPACT.
BECAUSE RIGHT NOW THEY'RE ASKING US TO ASSUME THE ROUNDABOUT TO BE CONSTRUCTED.
SO WE'RE TAKING ADVANTAGE, OBVIOUSLY, OF THE APPROVED OPERATIONS OF THE INTERSECTION DUE TO THE ROUNDABOUT.
BUT IF FOR WHATEVER REASON THERE WAS NO FUNDING WHERE THE PROJECT GOT SHELVED OR IT WAS PUSHED OFF FOR 10 YEARS, THEN PEN UP WOULD REQUIRE US TO COME UP WITH A DIFFERENT SOLUTION OR PROVISION OF THE ROUNDABOUT.
BUT THEY'LL REQUIRE US TO DO SOMETHING SO THAT IT IS NOT A DISASTER.
I MEAN, YOU COULD JUST VOLUNTEER TO PAY FOR IT.
I, I GET, IT'S JUST A QUESTION.
I HAVE A LOT OF FAITH IN ANTHONY THAT HE'S GOING TO KEEP US, UH, UP A BRIDGE OF WHAT'S GOING ON.
OH, IS THIS SAFE TO ASSUME IN THIS SCENARIO WHERE THE LAND DEVELOPMENT, UH, CONSTRUCTION BEGINS, BUT THE ROUNDABOUT AND THE EXPANSION OF THE BRIDGE HAS NOT STARTED YET.
THAT THAT COULD LIMIT THE ENTRANCE AND TRAFFIC FLOW OF CONSTRUCTION VEHICLES REQUIRED FOR YOUR CONSTRUCTION AND WOULD POTENTIALLY BE SENDING ALL OF YOUR VEHICLES ON OLD STATE ROAD? UM, I, I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU, IF YOU'VE LOOKED INTO THE STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY OF THAT BRIDGE TO SUPPORT THE CONSTRUCTION VEHICLES YOU'LL BE BRINGING IN ONCE YOU COMMENCE CONSTRUCTION? I HAVE NOT, BUT I'M ALSO NOT AWARE OF ANY SPECIFIC LIMITATIONS ON THAT BRIDGE.
I BELIEVE IT DOES ALLOW TRUCKS TO TRAVEL ON ONE 13TH THROUGH THAT AREA.
I'M JUST NOT AWARE OF SPECIFIC, UH, WEIGHT LIMITATIONS.
IT WOULD OBVIOUSLY BE SOMETHING, UM, THAT WE WOULD NEED TO LOOK INTO IF IT GOT TO THAT POINT FOR THE LONG IN THE PROCESS WHERE THE, UM, YOU KNOW, THE PROJECTS WEREN'T IN ALIGNMENT FROM A TIMING PERSPECTIVE.
UM, AND THEN WE WOULD NEED TO DETERMINE WHAT THE APPROPRIATE METHOD OR MEANS OF CONSTRUCTION ACCESS IS.
'CAUSE AS OF RIGHT NOW, WE'RE ASSUMING THE PROJECT ARE ALIGNED.
I'M NOT ASSUMING THAT THERE'S ANY ISSUES WITH THAT BRIDGE FROM A WEIGHT CAPACITY STANDPOINT, UH, TO SUPPORT CONSTRUCTION VEHICLES.
UM, BUT IT IS SOMETHING THAT WE CAN LOOK AT FURTHER ON THE PROCESS.
AND WOULD THAT POTENTIALLY BE A TRIGGER FROM PENDOT FOR THEIR IMPACT STUDY? WHAT IS THAT? I'M SORRY, WHAT DO COULD PENDOT POSSIBLY, OR MAYBE IT IS PART OF THEIR IMPACT STUDY REQUIREMENTS FOR YOU IN TERMS OF ENTRYWAY OF CONSTRUCTION VEHICLES? UH, IT IS NOT.
SO TYPICALLY ENTRY CONSTRUCTION VEHICLES ARE NOT NORMALLY PART OF THE IMPACT ANALYSIS.
UM, AS YOU GO THROUGH THE PROCESS WITH THE TOWNSHIP AND PENNDOT USUALLY TRY TO DO ONE ON THE PARALLEL PATH.
UM, YOU GO THROUGH THE HIGHWAY OCCUPANCY PERMIT PROCESS AND UM, AS WE GET FURTHER ALONG, AS RANDY MENTIONED, THIS COULD BE A TWO YEAR LAND DEVELOPMENT
[00:55:01]
PROCESS IF WE'RE FORTUNATE ENOUGH TO MOVE FORWARD AT THE SAME TIME WE'RE GOING THROUGH THESO A LOT OF THE WHAT IFS RIGHT NOW WILL BE FLUSHED OUT BY THEN.
UH, BUT TYPICALLY PENDO WILL ISSUE THE PERMITS ONCE THEY'RE SATISFIED THAT YOU'VE COMPLY WITH THEIR REQUIREMENTS AND YOU'VE DONE ALL OF THE MITIGATING, UM, UH, OR, OR PROPOSED NECESSARY MITIGATING MEASURES.
UM, AND THEN NORMALLY WHAT'LL HAPPEN IS WE WOULD UTILIZE ONE OF THE PROPOSED ACCESS POINTS AS OUR CONSTRUCTION ACCESS.
UM, BUT AGAIN, THINGS CAN CHANGE AS WE MOVE FORWARD.
UH, BUT WE WOULD BE ABLE TO COME UP WITH A PLAN THAT WOULD BE SUITABLE TO ALL, UH, WITH RESPECT TO CONSTRUCTION.
BUT I THINK WE'RE WAYS AWAY FROM WHETHER OR NOT THAT'S GONNA BE A PROBLEM.
JUST THOUGHT IT'D BE IMPORTANT SINCE YOU BROUGHT UP THE TIMING OF THE TWO I IMPORTANT, LOOK AT ALL ASPECTS, THE WHOLE ASPECT OF THAT.
ANY COMMENTS? I WAS GONNA SAY, AJ, TO THAT POINT AND ADD TO WHAT MATT WAS SAYING THROUGH THAT PENNDOT REVIEW PROCESS, THE CON CONSTRUCTION IS REVIEWED THROUGH THAT AS THEY WOULD FOR OUR PROJECT WITH THE ROUNDABOUT AND ALSO FOR THE LAND DEVELOPMENT PROCESS.
SO THEY WOULD LOOK AT HOW ARE YOU GONNA CONSTRUCT IT, HOW ARE YOU GONNA STAGE IT, DO YOU HAVE SUFFICIENT ROADWAY WIDTHS AND ALL THAT WOULD BE FLUSHED OUT DURING, UH, THAT PROCESS.
SO IF THERE'S A NEED TO DETOUR OR WHERE'S IT GONNA IMPACT, YOU KNOW, THAT'S, IT'S NOT STUDIED AS MATT SAID, IT'S LIKE A TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY, BUT IT'S, IT'S LOOKED AT FROM A WHAT'S HAPPENING PRACTICALLY AROUND HERE, WHAT INTERSECTIONS, WHAT'S THE ROADWAY WIDTH AND THAT KIND OF GETS FLUSHED OUT IN ENGINEERING.
YEAH, I THINK AJ AND I, I THINK HER CONCERN IS THAT, YOU KNOW, IN THE CONSTRUCTION PERIOD OR WHATEVER, IF IT MOVES FORWARD THAT WE'RE NOT ADDING MORE JUNK TO THIS INTERSECTION.
SO THAT'S YOU, YOU AGREE THAT? ALRIGHT.
THAT'S ALL WE HAVE TO PRESENT.
ALRIGHT, THANKS FOR COMING IN TONIGHT.
I CAN SEE THE END OF THE VILLAGE GATE.
ALL RIGHT, WELL, THANK YOU, UH, GENTLEMEN.
SO, UH, ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON THE BOARD BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO, UH, OR COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD RIGHT NOW? NICOLE? ANYTHING, UH, HERE? NOTHING.
WELL THEN, UH, WE'LL OPEN IT UP NOW FOR, UH, FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.
UH, YOU SEE WHAT WE GOT HERE AND, UH, AGAIN, I, YOU KNOW, PLEASE KEEP IT TO A SENSIBLE WHAT I MEAN, WHAT'S REALLY SOMETHING WE CAN WORK ON, NOT, NOT SOMETHING THAT IT IS NOT VIABLE.
SO PLEASE, WHOEVER'S NEXT, JUST EITHER THE DRILL COME UP AND NAME YOUR, UH, YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND MR. CHAIRMAN.
CAN WE JUST CHECK AND SEE? DOES THIS WORK? YES.
I CAN'T TELL HERE I TALK SLOW.
IT'S JUST, I'M GONNA MOVE THIS AND PUT YOU RIGHT UNDER THAT MIC.
SO DOES THIS WORK? YOU NEED BOTH? YES.
YOU GOTTA HOLD THAT CLOSE TO YOU, YOU KNOW, THAT IS THIS OKAY? YEAH.
ALRIGHT, SO, UH, BRAD BURWOOD, 1 3 8 BENNINGTON ROAD.
ALL RIGHT, SO, UM, I ACTUALLY WROTE SOMETHING THIS TIME.
SO I JUST WANNA SAY THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS IN THE AMEND TEXT AMENDMENT ARE NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE CURRENT OSR TWO, AND THEY'RE NOT EVEN CONSISTENT WITH THE PROPOSED LEGISLATIVE INTENT, SPECIFICALLY SECTIONS, UH, B AND C WHERE IT SAYS DEVELOPMENT SHOULD BE CONSISTENT AND COMPATIBLE WITH PROTECTING THE EXISTING COMMUNITY CHARACTER.
UM, C SAYS, TO PROTECT THE EXISTING VISTAS INTO AN RURAL CHARACTER OF LARGE TRACTS, OF UNDEVELOPED LAND, RIGHT? UM, THERE'S BEING CHANGES PROPOSED IN OSR TWO, SEVERAL OF THEM.
THE BIGGEST ONE OBVIOUSLY BEING DENSITY.
UM, THIS IS GOING AT FOUR TIMES INCREASE, WHICH WE'RE ALREADY KNOW IS GOING FROM 1.25 TO FIVE HOUSES PER ACRE, WHICH IS CRAZY.
UM, LOT SIZE BEING REDUCED FROM 6,500 TO 5,000 SQUARE FEET, YOU KNOW, LOT WIDTH, YOU KNOW, FRONTAGE, BUNCH OF THINGS.
THE ONE I WANT DWELL ON IS THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT.
THE CURRENT MAXIMUM HEIGHT IN THIS ZONING ORDINANCE, OSR TWO IS 35 FEET.
UM, IT'S BEING PROPOSED TO TAKE IT UP TO 48 OR 50 FEET.
FOR TOWN HOMES ARE STACKED TOWN HOMES.
THAT IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH ALL THE ADJACENT ZONING OF R ONE HOUSINGS IN THE SURROUNDING AREA OF THE PARKHOUSE PROPERTY.
FURTHERMORE, IT IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT FOR ANY RESIDENTIAL ZONING IN THE TOWNSHIP.
SO I'M GONNA BORE YOU WITH THIS.
I, I'M ASSUMING WHAT'S ON THE WEBSITE IS ACCURATE.
ACCORDING TO THAT R ONE RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL 35 FEET, MAXIMUM HEIGHT, R TWO RESIDENTIAL 35 FEET R THREE RESIDENTIAL, 35 FEET, R FOUR RESIDENTIAL, 35 FEET VP VILLAGE PRESERVATION, 35 FEET YORK'S MIXED MEDIA.
I WASN'T SURE WHAT THAT WAS, BUT I THREW IT IN 35 FEET.
MIXED RESIDENTIAL, 35 FEET CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT, 35 FEET OSR ONE, OPEN SPACE RESIDENTIAL, 35 FEET, O SR TWO, OPEN SPACE RESIDENTIAL, 35 FEET GOLF COURSE,
[01:00:01]
UH, RESIDENTIAL 35 FEET AND AGE RESTRICTED, UM, RESIDENTIAL 35 FEET EVERY OTHER OR, YOU KNOW, RESIDENTIAL AREA, THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT FOR PRIMARY RESIDENCE IS 35 FEET.SO AS FAR AS SAYING WE CAN TAKE THIS UP TO 48 AND 15, BE CONSISTENT WITH THE CHARACTER OF THE, THE TOWNSHIP.
UM, THAT'S BASICALLY A 43% INCREASE INTO THE CURRENT HEIGHT FOR ANY RESIDENTIAL ZONING IN THE TOWNSHIP.
UM, AND IT'S NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE EXISTING COMMUNITY CHARACTERS AS I MENTIONED.
SO I'M GONNA ASK THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AS I'LL ASK THE, I'M SORRY, PLANNING, PLANNING GUYS.
UM, AS I WILL ASK THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, IF YOU ACTUALLY APPROVE THIS, TO NOT APPROVE IT, BECAUSE THIS IS CREATING A SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT CHARACTER VISTA THAT IS NOT COMPATIBLE WITH THE CURRENT TOWNSHIP.
THAT'S MY STATEMENT AND I JUST WANT PERSONAL COMMENT.
UM, I THINK IT'S VERY DISAPPOINTING THAT THE, THE DEVELOPER IS SAYING HE'S UNWILLING TO NEGOTIATE ON THE DENSITY, WHICH IS THE BIGGEST CONCERN THIS COMMUNITY'S RAISED.
ALL HE IS WILLING TO NEGOTIATE ON IS ALL THE THINGS TO MAKE IT LESS OFFENSIVE.
THAT'S BASICALLY SAYING WHAT SHAPE LIPSTICK DO WE WANT TO PUT ON THE PIG.
WHY DON'T YOU COME UP HERE AND SIT HERE, MA'AM, SO THAT YOU'RE NEXT? NO, NO, YOU'RE FINE.
TALK LOOSELY SO THAT EVERYBODY KNOWS YOU'RE NEXT.
KRISTEN TROUTMAN 1320 BLACKROCK ROAD.
UM, MY FIRST QUESTION IS, WHAT IS THIS PARCEL ACTUALLY ZONED? IT ISD OPEN SPACE CONSERVATION WITH AN OVERLAY OF THE INSTITUTIONAL DISTRICT.
BECAUSE IN YOUR INN ORDINANCE, IN THE TOWNSHIP, THIS PARCEL IS NOT LISTED AS A DESIGNATED PARCEL FOR IN IF YOU LOOK AT THE LINE THAT SAYS SUCCESSOR PARCEL, WHEN IT WAS SUBDIVIDED FROM THE LARGER PARCEL, THIS PARCEL BE CONTINUES.
THAT INSTITUTIONAL ZONING DISTRICT 'CAUSE THIS AND ALL SUCCESSOR PARCELS.
UM, MY NEXT QUESTION IS ON YOUR PLANS AND ON YOUR APPLICATION, YOU SAY THE TOTAL PARCEL IS 186 ACRES AND LIKE 1 77 IS DEVELOPABLE.
THE COUNTY RECORDS INDICATE THAT THE PARCEL IS 176.4 ACRES.
SO I'M WONDERING WHERE YOU GET THE, THE EXTRA 10 ACRES FROM YES, RON, COULD YOU ADDRESS THAT? THERE, THERE'S THE, THE NET OF 180 PLUS OR MINUS 186.
AND THE DIFFERENCE WITH THAT BETWEEN THE 1 77, 1 76 PRICE TO DO WITH THE, THE NET RIGHT OF WAY BEING BACKED OUT THERE, THE PROP, WELL, IT'S NOT UP ON THE SCREEN, BUT THE PROPERTY MAY, THE DEED MAY ACTUALLY GO TO THE CENTER LINE OF THE, OF THE ROADWAYS, WHEREAS WHEN YOU TAKE OUT THE RIGHT OF WAY, YOU'RE LOSING ACRES THERE.
OKAY, BECAUSE I WAS JUST WONDERING BECAUSE IF YOU'RE USING THE 180 6 AS THE TOTAL AND THEN GOING WITH X AMOUNT OF UNITS PER ACRE, THAT'S GONNA GIVE YOU A HIGHER DENSITY.
UM, MY OTHER COMMENTS ARE IN REGARD TO THE SCHOOL CHILDREN AND WHICH SCHOOL AND THE BUSES.
UM, LIKE I STATED BEFORE, WHEN MY KIDS WENT TO SCHOOL, ONE 13 WAS THE CUTOFF FOR OAKS ELEMENTARY.
SO MOST LIKELY ANY CHILDREN IN THIS DEVELOPMENT WILL BE GOING TO EITHER UPPER PROVIDENCE ORBROOK OR ROERS FORD.
SO THAT WASN'T TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT IN YOUR CHART.
UM, AND THERE ARE OTHER DEVELOPMENTS IN THE PIPELINE, WHICH ARE IN THE OAKS, IF YOU WANNA CALL IT TERRITORY OUT ALONG 29 ON HOPWOOD ROAD, THE APARTMENT COMPLEX OVER HERE.
SO THOSE CHILDREN MOST LIKELY WILL BE GOING TO OAKS.
UM, AND THEN IN REGARDS TO SCHOOL BUSES, I USED TO WORK FOR THE TRANSPORTATION COMPANY THAT WORKS WITH THE SCHOOL DISTRICT, AND I KNOW IT'S ALWAYS BEEN A DISTRICT POLICY, WELL UNTIL RIVER CREST TO NOT SEND BUSES INTO NEIGHBORHOODS BECAUSE THEN EVERYBODY ELSE WANTS THE BUSES TO COME INTO THEIR NEIGHBORHOODS INSTEAD OF STOPPING OUT ON THE ROADS.
UM, AND JUST IN MY, MY GUT TELLS ME, I MEAN, I ASSUME YOU'RE GOING FOR THE OS R TWO, SO YOU CAN DO WHATEVER.
IT'S NOT GONNA BE, UM, ANYTHING RELATED TO SENIOR EXCEPT FOR THE HOUSING DOWN AT THE ONE CORNER.
UM, AND SO I'M JUST WONDERING SINCE IT'S IN AND OSC, HOW YOUR PLAN CAN EVEN COME IN TO BE MOSTLY PRIVATELY OWNED HOMES AND NOT SENIOR CARE FACILITIES OR LICENSED NURSING FACILITIES, WHICH ARE LIKE THE ONLY RESIDENTIAL PERMITTED USES IN I-N-N-O-S-C CURRENTLY.
SO IF YOU COULD SPEAK TO THAT, I WOULD JUST COMMENT THAT, UH, FIRST OF ALL, YOU MENTIONED THE YERKES APARTMENTS THAT ARE COMING, THEY ARE INCLUDED IN THE SCHOOL DISTRICT STUDY.
SO THOSE UNITS HAVE ALREADY BEEN TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT AND RECOGNIZING THE NUMBER OF CHILDREN COMING INTO SCHOOLS.
[01:05:01]
IS JUST AS WE NEGOTIATE WITH RIVER CRET AND THE SCHOOL DISTRICT TO GO INSIDE AND NEGOTIATE HERE, I WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT.OKAY, WELL IT'S NOT JUST THE RPS APARTMENTS, IT'S ALSO THE APARTMENTS OVER HERE BY WEGMANS AND THE KARA HOMES ON HOPWOOD ROAD.
SO ALL THE FOLKS KIDS, THEY DON'T GO TO THE OAK SCHOOL ELEMENTARY? YES.
NO, THEY WILL BE, NO, THEY DON'T.
THE, THE APARTMENTS THAT AREN'T BUILT, I DON'T, I DON'T.
OH, THAT, WHICH, WHICH ONES ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT BY WEGMANS ACROSS, THOSE WERE ALREADY ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE SCHOOL BOARD.
THE ONES THAT ARE BUILT AND THE ONES THAT ARE COMING IN PLACE.
WELL THERE'S BEEN A SLIGHT CHANGE TO THAT PLAN BECAUSE THEY ADDED ANOTHER APARTMENT BUILDING, 115 UNITS, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN.
THEY TOOK OUT THE HOTEL, THEY HAD ALL THE OTHER 485 WHEN IT WAS ORIGINALLY PROPOSED WERE ALREADY ACCOUNTED FOR BY THE SCHOOL BOARD IN THEIR PLANS.
YEAH, THE NEW ONE, IT JUST HAPPENED A MONTH OR SO AGO, IS A HUNDRED 15TH.
THEY'RE GETTING RID OF THE HOTEL AND THEY'RE PUTTING OUT ANOTHER APARTMENT.
WELL, AS I WAS REFERRING TO BRIEFLY, UM, MY GUT TELLS ME IF THE TOWNSHIP GOES WITH THIS NEW OSR TWO FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT, ESSENTIALLY WHAT I FEEL LIKE IS HAPPENING IS IT'S A QUID PRO QUO BECAUSE THEY'RE GONNA GET WHAT THEY WANT AND THE TOWNSHIP'S GONNA GET 88 OR 90 ACRES OF OPEN SPACE.
AND I JUST FEEL LIKE THAT'S NOT IN THE BEST INTEREST OF EVERYBODY IN THE COMMUNITY.
I KNOW EVERYBODY LIKES OPEN SPACE, BUT AS OF 2021, THE TOWNSHIP HAD 75 PARCELS IN THE TOWNSHIP OF OPEN SPACE.
SOME ARE JUST LITTLE SNIPPETS OF GROUND, OTHER ONES ARE LARGER PARCELS.
I THINK WE, I THINK WE'VE GIVEN YOU MORE THAN YOUR 3%.
I THINK, I THINK WE UNDERSTAND YOUR POINT.
UM, YOU KNOW, THE 12, THE 1203 STILL ON THE TABLE.
THANK YOU TO THIS LADY FOR ALLOWING ME TO STEP UP HERE.
UM, BILL FELTON, OLD STATE ROAD, THE MIC BILL FELTON, OLD STATE ROAD.
UM, AND I'M GLAD MR. SATANI POINTED OUT THAT WHAT WE'RE REALLY TALKING HERE ABOUT IS THE ZONING, NOT NECESSARILY THE DETAILS OF THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT.
YEAH, WE'RE NOT IN THE, WE'RE GONNA TALK ABOUT THE ZONING.
AND, UH, YOU KNOW WHAT, WHAT, WHAT'S CRITICAL ARE THE NUMBERS THAT, YOU KNOW, PARKHOUSE FRANCIS HAS PROPOSED 253 UNITS.
THESE GUYS ARE STUCK ON THE 600 UNITS.
UM, I THINK IF WE'RE NOT AGREEMENT IN AGREEMENT ON THE NUMBER OF UNITS THAT WE SHOULD KEEP WITH THE INSTITUTIONAL OVERLAY ZONING, I BELIEVE THAT THE, UH, CAVEATS IN THE ZONING OF THE INSTITUTIONAL OVERLAY ARE APPLIED AND ENFORCED.
WE WILL END UP WITH A DEVELOPMENT THAT HAS LESS NEGATIVE IMPACTS THAT SCHOOL TRAFFIC.
IT'S A RESTRICTED EMS SERVICES, AESTHETICS, ET CETERA.
THEN THIS PROPOSED 600 UNIT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, PUT A LAB.
UM, NOW YOU, YOU BROUGHT UP ANOTHER GOOD STATISTIC AND THAT WAS THAT, UH, ONLY 9% OF THE 55 AND OVER POPULATION OF THIS TOWNSHIP IS OF THAT DEMOGRAPHIC.
AND SO PERHAPS THAT UPPER PROVIDENCE IS NOT MEETING THE HOUSING REQUIREMENTS FOR THAT DEMOGRAPHIC.
I MEAN, THE BABY BOOMERS ARE WHAT, 20% OF THE POPULATION? 25%.
JUST, I JUST WANTED TO BE CLEAR WITH THAT.
SO MAYBE THERE'S A COMPROMISE OPPORTUNITY HERE THAT, YOU KNOW, INSTEAD OF 600 UNITS OR INSTEAD OF, UH, 253 UNITS, MAYBE THERE'S A NUMBER IN BETWEEN THERE.
ARE YOU ASKING? WELL, I'M, I'M MAKING THE COMMENT.
YEAH, THAT'S LOOKING FOR REACTION.
THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'VE PROPOSED.
AND, AND THE POINT I MADE EARLIER, WHAT WE'VE PROPOSED IN TERMS OF THE AGE RESTRICTED UNIT IS RESTRICTED UNITS IS ALREADY IN EXCESS OF GENERALLY WHAT PERCENTAGE OF THE POPULATION.
SO IF ANYTHING, WE ARE GOING TOWARDS ADDRESSING IF THERE IS A NEED FOR, FOR MORE AGE RESTRICTED HOUSING, WE ARE GOING TOWARDS ADDRESSING THAT BY, BY AS WELL AS A COMPROMISE.
I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, IT WOULD GIVE YOU MORE UNITS, BUT IT WOULD ALSO ADDRESS THE ISSUE.
AND THE BIG ISSUE SEEMS TO BE THE, THE SCHOOL AGE, UH, RESIDENT.
AND JUST, AND THAT'S A GOOD OPPORTUNITY JUST TO POINT OUT, I THINK MR. RIGHTS AT YOUR COMMENT EARLIER, AND WE UNDERSTAND EVERYBODY'S DOUBT FOR THE 0.7, THAT IS AN AVERAGE, REMEMBER? SO THAT 0.7, IT IS AN AVERAGE, RIGHT? I GOT GRANDKIDS, NONE OF 'EM ARE 0.7
[01:10:01]
WOULD BE A LOT EASIER FOR ME.WHAT'S THAT BILL? I THINK HE MAKES SOME GOOD POINTS.
BUT YOU KNOW, THIS BOARD, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS AS A BOARD.
I MEAN, WE'RE AT THE STAGE HERE.
WHERE DO WE CONTINUE TO PUSH THESE GUYS TO SAY NO AND THEN HAVE THEM DO WHATEVER THEY HAVE TO DO TO GET THIS BUILT.
AND WE TAKE A CHANCE AT 1,203 UNITS BEING BUILT.
I, I KNOW THERE'S PEOPLE THAT THINK THAT'S NOT POSSIBLE OR THAT THEY WON'T DO THAT, BUT WE CAN ONLY PLAY CHICKEN SO LONG.
SOONER OR LATER WE GOTTA DECIDE DO WE GOT A GOOD DEAL ON THE TABLE HERE TO TRY TO MANAGE THAT MOVING FORWARD, RIGHT.
BECAUSE WE COULD LOSE EVERYTHING HERE.
WELL THAT'S, THAT'S OUR POSITION IS 600 UNITS IS LOSING EVERYTHING.
THE FACT THAT IT'S NOT AGE RESTRICTED.
1203 STILL ON THE TABLE, 1203 IS ON THE TABLE.
BUT AS I'VE POINTED OUT, AND WE AS WE'VE BEEN ADVISED, THAT IF THEY ARE FORCED TO STICK TO THE CAVEATS OF THE ZONING OF THE INSTITUTIONAL OVERLAY, THAT THAT PROBABLY WON'T HAPPEN.
WE'LL END UP, WE'LL END UP WITH SOMETHING BETTER CHICKEN THAN THE 600.
YOU, YOU'RE IN THE AGE GROUP AND I REMEMBER WE USED TO PLAY CHICKEN WHEN YOU WERE A KID.
YOU KNOW, YOU RIDE YOUR BIKE, YOUR, YOU KNOW, THAT WAS YOU, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE PLAYING HERE.
AND WE CAN, WE CAN, WE CAN, WE CAN PUSH THESE GUYS AND WE CAN LOSE.
SO, AND THAT'S WHAT THIS BOARD'S GOTTA DECIDE.
DO WE HAVE A PLAN HERE THAT WE THINK WE CAN MAKE WORK AND MANAGE? WELL, HEY, I'M JUST, I'M JUST COMING UP WITH SOMETHING.
UH, YOU KNOW, IF IT, IF IT WAS PUSHED TO A, A, A COURT TO DECIDE WHAT SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SHOULD BE, IT WOULD PROBABLY BE R ONE.
'CAUSE THAT'S WHAT THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY IS.
I I THINK WE'VE BEEN ADVISED BY ATTORNEYS THAT'S NOT THE WAY IT WILL GO.
WELL MAYBE IT MIGHT NOT GO, BUT IF IT DID GO THAT WAY, WELL IF IT DID GO THAT WAY, IT DID GO, WE WOULDN'T BUILD ANYTHING ON THIS IF WE HAD IT OUR WAY, YOU KNOW, IFS AND BUTS.
BUT, BUT THE DENSITY OF OUR WALL, WE KNOW THIS BILL.
THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING EARLIER BEFORE WE STARTED, AND I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS AND THEY'RE GOOD.
BUT WE, WHAT WE ARE CHARGED TO DO HERE IS TO TRY TO FIGURE OUT ARE WE AT THE POINT WHERE WE GOT THE BEST DEAL WE CAN GET? I ADVISE NO.
AND I UNDERSTAND THAT AND I APPRECIATE YOU FIGHTING.
I WOULD, I WOULD ASK THAT YOU AND WE'RE GOING TO LOOK RECOMMEND DENIAL OF THE APPLICATION, THE ZONING.
UM, MARLENE LASKA, UM, 1142 EGYPT ROAD.
UM, I WAS GOING TO SAY, UM, MULTIPLE THINGS, BUT THE TWO COMMENTERS RIGHT BEFORE ME, UM, BASICALLY SAID THE SAME THING.
UM, SO TO ME, THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM IS NOT ACCOMMODATING A, UH, THE DENSITY FACTOR IS BASICALLY NOT COMPROMISING IT.
AND, AND, AND THAT'S THE BOTTOM LINE.
UH, IT, IT'S, IT'S NOT A COMPROMISE.
IF YOU CANNOT CONSIDER ANY OF THE DENSITY, UH, FACTOR, THEN, THEN YOU'RE NOT COMPROMISING.
AND, UM, I, I DO WANT TO SAY THAT I, I DO RECOMMEND TO DENY THE OSR UH, OSR UH, DASH TWO, UM, CHANGE.
UM, IT, UM, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S NOT THE, UM, THERE ARE TOO MANY ISSUES WITH, WITH WHAT THEY ARE PROPOSING, UM, TO, TO FOLLOW THROUGH WITH THAT.
SO, UM, BUT THE, UM, WELL, WHAT DO YOU SUGGEST WE, WHAT WOULD YOU HAVE SUGGESTED? I JUST GO WITH THE, UH, UH, CONDITIONAL USE HEARING AND THAT THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT I SEE RIGHT NOW IS, IS THE ONLY FACTOR OR, OR THE ONLY RECOURSE THAT WE HAVE BECAUSE THEY WILL NOT NEGOTIATE WITH THE DENSITY.
AND, AND IF, IF YOU DON'T NEGOTIATE, THEY'RE NOT COMPROMISING.
I THINK THE, THE, THE PARKHOUSE FRIENDS HAD A VERY, VERY GOOD PROPOSAL AND IT, IT, IT WAS RIGHT ON IT.
IT ACCOMMODATED EXACTLY WHAT THE COMMUNITY WANTS.
AND THE FACT THAT THEY CAME RIGHT OUT AND SAID THAT THEY WILL NOT COMPROMISE ON DENSITY.
I MEAN, THAT, THAT RIGHT THERE IS, IS, IS NO COMPROMISE.
I MEAN, WELL, I'LL FINISH MAAM.
THEY HAVE COMPROMISED ON DENSITY.
I WOULD JUST MAKE THE POINT THAT THAT'S WHAT I AS CLOSE TO THE DEFINITION IS 50% RIGHT.
IS ABOUT AS CLOSE TO THE DEFINITION OF IT MIGHT NOT BE WHAT THEY LIKE.
AND I UNDERSTAND THAT, I UNDERSTAND THAT'S NOT, BUT THEY HAVE COMPROMISES.
WELL, AND THAT YOU CAN'T SAY THEY HAVEN'T COMPROMISE.
[01:15:01]
AND THAT WAS FROM 7 27.WE FURTHER COMPROMISE THE 6 79.
WE FURTHER COMPROMISE THE SIX 14.
I UNDERSTAND YOU MAY NOT LIKE IT STILL.
BUT I, I DON'T THINK, AGAIN, I DON'T THINK IT'S FAIR TO, TO SIT HERE AND SAY WE HAVEN'T BEEN WILLING TO COMPROMISE.
'CAUSE WE ARE AT 50% OF WHAT WE CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH UNDER THE CONDITION.
BUT, BUT WHAT DO YOU, THE PROPOSAL FROM THE FRIENDS MARK OUTS, FRIENDS, YOU, YOU TOTALLY WIPED THAT OFF 253.
AND THE ANALOGY I MADE TO THE PARKHOUSE FRIENDS, AND PEOPLE MAY NOT LIKE IT IF, IF YOU WERE TO DECIDE TO SELL YOUR HOUSE TOMORROW AND YOU THOUGHT THAT YOUR HOUSE WAS WORTH $500,000 AND THAT'S WHAT THE MARKET WOULD SUPPORT.
AND I CAME TO YOU AND SAID, I APPRECIATE THAT, BUT I REALLY THINK YOU SHOULD SELL IT FOR 80% LESS.
AND YOU SAID, WHY? I SAID, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT I'D LIKE TO SEE.
WOULD YOU SELL IT FOR 80% LESS? I WOULD, I WOULD TRY TO TRY TO MARKET FIRST.
YOU DON'T NEED THE COMMUNITY'S PERMISSION TO SELL IT.
WE ARE NOT TALKING LINE, WE'RE NOT PUT IN THAT GAME.
AND AGAIN, YOU ALWAYS SAY SOMETHING, GET YOU, I I KNOW.
ALRIGHT, WELL GET OVER YOUR IMAGE.
WE'RE NOT YELLING OUT, WE'RE NOT PLAYING.
IT'S NOT THE ANSWER TO ANYBODY.
LIKE, BUT THAT IS, THAT IS EXACTLY THE, THE SCENARIO THAT'S BEING PROPOSED TO RORY FOR HOLDINGS IS, HEY, WE UNDERSTAND YOU'VE GONE TO 50%.
AND WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS WE'VE GIVEN AS MUCH AS WE CAN.
WELL THEN, UH, THE, THE RECOURSE IS THE CONDITIONAL USE HEARING THAT, THAT'S THE ONLY RECOURSE.
UM, THAT, THAT THE COMMUNITY WILL, IT'S ALWAYS GOOD RIGHT THERE.
AND THEN YES, IT'S ALREADY SCHEDULED.
SO, SO YEAH, I MEAN THAT'S THAT.
WE'RE NOT DEBATING THAT HERE TONIGHT.
OH, AND THE OTHER THING IS, UM, THAT YOU MAY NOT GET THE, THE POINT THAT THE OTHER POINT THAT I WAS GOING TO MAKE IS THAT YOU, THE WAY YOU YOU'RE PUSHING FOR THOSE 600 UNITS IS LIKE YOU SEE DOLLAR SIGNS IN YOUR, YOU MIGHT NOT BE ABLE TO GET THE RETURN ON INVESTMENT THAT YOU ANTICIPATED WITH, UH, INITIALLY.
SO IF, IF, IF YOU CAN'T GET THE, THE RETURN ON INVESTMENT, THEN YOU NEED TO COMPROMISE.
AND WE HAD A, WE, WE GAVE A A A GOOD PROPOSAL, BUT YOU DIDN'T, YOU DIDN'T TAKE IT.
THANK YOU JOE HANEY, 300 WILL OF BROOK LANE.
UH, NOW FOR AN ALTERNATIVE PERSPECTIVE, LIKE WE'VE OUR FIRST OFF, THANK YOU FOR OUR FANNING COMMISSION FOR LISTENING TO THIS, YOUR VOLUNTEERING TIME AND YOUR EFFORT.
APPRECIATE THE STAFF AS WELL, ESPECIALLY THE, UH, THE ATTORNEY, UH, TAKING OVER FOR JOE RENICK.
UM, I'LL BE DIRECTLY TO THE 0.6 HUNDRED'S BETTER THAN 12 HUNDREDS.
DIVERSITY OF UNIT TYPE IS BETTER THAN THE SAME UNIT TYPE 'CAUSE IT SPREADS OUT THE IMPACT OF SERVICES UPON THE TOWNSHIP.
UH, THAT'S CALLED DIVERSIFICATION.
I URGE THE BOARD TO LISTEN TO PROFESSIONALS, TOWNSHIP SOLICITORS, PEOPLE FROM NATURAL LANDS TRUST, DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES PROFESSIONALS HAVE KNOWLEDGE TRAINING EXPERIENCE.
THAT'S WHY THEY'RE CALLED PROFESSIONALS.
I'D ALSO LIKE TO CONSIDER THE IMPORTANCE OF SETBACKS AND BERMS. WE'RE GONNA HAVE THESE UNITS.
GOOD EXAMPLES OF NICE DEVELOPMENT IS NO TROUT PROPERTY.
THERE'S SOME NICE BERMS ALONG BLACK ROCK ROAD THERE.
A POOR EXAMPLE OF SETBACK IN BERMS IS THE PROPERTY RIGHT NEXT TO THAT, WHICH IS ON BLACK ROCK IN EGYPT.
BECAUSE YOU CAN SEE EVERYTHING RIGHT THERE.
IN CONCLUSION, I RECOMMEND THE 600 PLAN.
AMANDA TURNER, WHO 11 YEARS AGO.
I'M SORRY, I DIDN'T HEAR THAT.
SO, UM, MY, MY CLASS, I'VE LIVED HERE MY WHOLE LIFE 31 YEARS.
AND MY CLASS WAS THE CLASS AT SPRING FORWARD WHO WAS DESIGNATED WITH, WE WERE IN ALL THE
[01:20:01]
BUILDINGS FIRST.SO WE GOT IN ALL THE NEW BUILDINGS FIRST.
SO EVERY TIME THEY GO TO A NEW BUILDING, WE WERE THE FIRST PEOPLE IN IT.
UM, HOWEVER, YOU KNOW, WITH ALL THE DEVELOPMENT THAT HAPPENED IN MY LIFETIME, THOSE NUMBERS WERE ALWAYS GROSSLY UNDERRATED.
AND I KNOW YOU GUYS CAN'T HELP THAT.
THAT'S NOT LIKE THE SCHOOL GIVES YOU WHAT THE SCHOOL GIVES YOU, BUT I'M TELLING YOU RIGHT NOW, THEY ARE WRONG.
THERE'S NO WAY THAT IF YOU HAVE A SINGLE FAMILY HOME, THERE'S ONLY TWO THIRDS OF A CHILD.
AND, AND, AND LIKE WITH YOU SAID ABOUT MAKING STACKED TOWNHOUSES, 'CAUSE IT HELPS WITH FRESH TIME BUYERS AND YOU KNOW, HAVING PEOPLE WHO MAYBE DON'T WANT TO BUY A WHOLE HOUSE, BUT ONE, SOMEONE, YOU KNOW, IF WE'RE GOING WITH PEOPLE A LITTLE BIT YOUNGER THAN ME, PEOPLE MY AGE, MOST EVERYBODY I KNOW AFTER THEY BOUGHT A HOUSE, THEIR FIRST HOUSE, THAT'S WHEN THEY HAD THEIR CHILDREN.
SO THE TOWN HOMES ARE GREAT, BUT IF THEY'RE LIKE TWO IN TOWN HOMES, YOU CAN HAVE AND YOU CAN GET BY AND HAVE YOUR KID AND STILL LIVE THERE AND STILL BE COMFORTABLE.
SO JUST HOW NORMAL PEOPLE ARE.
I KNOW MOST PEOPLE IN MY GENERATION, MY AGE, THAT I KNEW HAD THEIR FIRST KID AFTER THEY BROKE THEIR HOUSE.
SO THAT'S KIND OF, AND I DON'T HAVE A, THE 600 IS WAY BETTER.
600 IS BETTER THAN 12 ON THREE.
MY THING IS, IF YOU RAISE THE LIMIT TO 50 FEET, I'M FIVE FOOT TWO, THAT'S NINE AND THREE AND TWO THIRDS OF ME TALL.
THERE'S NO WAY YOU ARE GONNA BURN AND COVER UP A 50 FOOT BUILDING.
SO I, AND I KNOW YOU SAID NO COMPROMISE ON DENSITY, BUT THAT'S WHAT EVERYBODY WAS HAVING A PROBLEM WITH.
AND SOME OF WHAT GETS ME IS YOU PUT IN ALL THIS WORK, YOU DID ALL THIS EFFORT AND I APPRECIATE IT.
BUT YOU DID ALL THIS EFFORT AND THE 1,203 STILL ON THE TABLE, WHICH KIND OF MAKES ME FEEL LIKE YOU'RE NOT SAYING SO MUCH.
OH, LET'S PUT IN THE EFFORT TO ACCOMMODATE.
BUT WE'RE STILL GONNA LEAVE THIS HERE BECAUSE IF WE CAN BUILD THAT, WE'RE GONNA BUILD THAT.
AND I DON'T KNOW THAT YOU GUYS INTENDED TO SOUND THAT WAY, BUT THAT'S HOW IT LOOKS.
AND WHETHER THAT'S BECAUSE OF HOW THE LAND WAS BOUGHT WAS KIND OF NOT THE BEST AND ALL THAT STUFF THAT HAPPENED IN THERE.
THAT MIGHT BE WHY TOO, THAT, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE STARTED OUT AND NOT NECESSARILY BEING TRUSTWORTHY OF YOU AND THE BUILDERS DID NOTHING.
YOU, YOU'RE JUST GONNA BUILD ON IT.
MY PROBLEM IS WITH THE STACKED TOWNHOUSES, 50 FEET IS A LOT.
AND THE FACT THAT EVERYWHERE ELSE IN THE TOWNSHIP IS 35 AND YOU WANNA DO, OKAY, THANK YOU.
THERE ARE, UM, THERE ARE DISTRICTS IN, UH, IN THE TOWNSHIP THAT PROVIDE FOR MULTIFAMILY BUILDINGS AT 60 FEET.
SO I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT.
THE
JUST SO THAT WASN'T DIRECTED TO YOU EITHER.
I WANTED TO CLARIFY THE EARLIER COMMENT THAT THERE'S NO RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ALLOWED OVER 35 FEET.
IS THAT, 'CAUSE THAT'S NOT OPTIONAL, BUT EVERYTHING AROUND HERE, WHICH WOULD BE THE TOWNSHIP COMMUNITY SPEAKING WITH THE MIC, YOU'RE GONNA CONTINUE ON.
ITS, YOU, YOU WERE HAVING BANTER BACK AND FORTH.
JUST, I NEED YOU TO SPEAK TO THE MIC.
I JUST, 'CAUSE WE'RE NOT GONNA HEAR YOU WHEN WE GO TO MAKE MINUTES.
IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S MAN RAY ROCKO 3 74 VISTA DRIVE.
UM, THE FIRST THING I'D LIKE TO SAY IS, UH, ON MONDAY I MAILED OUT, UM, AN EMAIL MESSAGE.
UH, THIS COPY OF OUR PLAN, THE PARK HOUSE FRIENDS.
I HAVE SOME COPIES IN BACK HERE, BUT I SENT OUT 3,500 OF THESE OVER THE WEEKEND OR ON MONDAY RATHER.
SO IF YOU DON'T HAVE IT, WANNA SEE WHAT OUR PLAN IS, UH, COMING BACK AND WE HAVE SOMETHING WE CAN SHARE WITH YOU.
UM, I FEEL BAD, A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO LAST, UH, PLANNING COMMISSION, I STOOD IN FRONT OF YOU AND OFF THE HIP, TRIED TO TALK ABOUT THE SCHOOL DISTRICT AND BEING A FORMER SCHOOL BOARD MEMBER, I DID MY DILIGENCE.
UM, I APPRECIATE YOU GUYS POINTING ME TO THE STUDY.
UH, 52 PAGES OF WONDERFUL INFORMATION THAT I DIGESTED.
AND I JUST WANNA SHARE FROM A CLARIFICATION PERSPECTIVE.
'CAUSE I DO THINK AT THE END OF THE DAY, UM, THE IMPACT OF THE SCHOOL DISTRICT ON TAXES, WHICH IS THE BIGGER, ONE OF THE BIGGER ISSUES THAT WE HAVEN'T REALLY TALKED ABOUT, ALTHOUGH, UH, MR. WRIGHT MENTIONED IT.
SO LET ME TRY TO BANK THROUGH THESE PRETTY QUICK.
'CAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF INFORMATION HERE IN 52 PAGES AND I CAN'T GET TO IT ALL.
BUT I'M TRYING TO PAINT A PICTURE HERE.
RIGHT? SO LISTEN, THE LAST YEARS IN THE, IN THE DISTRICT HAS BEEN FAIRLY FLAT, RIGHT? THE DISTRICT IS NOT ALWAYS FULLY INFORMED BY TOWNSHIPS OF GROWTH OF DEVELOPMENT.
THEY LEAVE THAT TO THE TOWNSHIPS.
THEY JUST MANAGE WHAT THE MESS COMES OUT OF IT, RIGHT? UM,
[01:25:01]
TALKING TO SCHOOL BOARD MEMBERS HERE, UH, THE DISTRICT IS SOUGHT AFTER.AND WHILE I'LL SAY THIS IS A FAIRLY COMPREHENSIVE LOOK AT ENROLLMENT, IT IS SOMEWHAT DATED, BUT IT IS AN EXCELLENT SOURCE OF HISTORICAL INFORMATION.
SO THERE'S AN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY THAT TALKS ABOUT THE POPULATION BEING DOUBLED IN THE LAST 20 YEARS.
LIVE BIRTHS ARE DECREASING AN IMPORTANT MEASURE IN THE STUDY AND FUTURE RESIDENTIAL PERMIT PERMITTING FOR 2022 THROUGH 2026 IS ON THE RISE WITH SIGNIFICANT INCREASES IN MULTIFAMILY HOUSING.
SO THAT'S PRETTY IMPORTANT FOR US.
'CAUSE THAT'S A CHANGE IN DYNAMIC OF THE HOUSING AND THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT WILL BE HERE.
THIS PLAN, AS I'LL TALK TO IN A MINUTE, IS KIND OF SO PART PARCEL OF THAT 80%, 88% OF THE CAPACITY OF THE DISTRICT WIDE ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS ARE AT 90% CAPACITY.
WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? REDISTRICTING NEW BUILDINGS, HIGHER TAXES.
NOT NECESSARILY ON THEIR FAULT, BUT THEY'RE PART OF THE PROBLEM, RIGHT? SO WHAT THE REPORT IS SUBJECT TO IS CHANGES IN PROGRAM OFFERINGS FOR ANYBODY WHO'S BEEN HERE, PARENTS HAVE BEEN WANTING FULL DAY KINDERGARTEN, IT'S PROBABLY COMING.
THAT DOESN'T MEAN MORE CLASS SIZES ARE AVAILABLE FOR NEW PEOPLE.
THIS ONE WAS KIND OF REALLY INTERESTING AND I'LL JUMP AHEAD A LITTLE BIT.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE PLAN, IT IS, UH, ENDING IN 2022, THE FIVE YEAR RESIDENTIAL PLANNING PERMITTING FOR ALL FOUR COMMUNITIES.
SPRING, UH, SPRING CITY, ROYERSFORD, LIMERICK, UPPER PROVIDENCE.
UM, THE FIVE YEAR PERMITTING IS 279 UNITS FOR ALL FOUR COMMUNITIES FOR ALL PLANNED PERMITTED RESIDENTIAL.
HOW MANY IS PARKHOUSE IN THAT? ANYBODY? 1203.
THAT'S HUGE RELATIVE TO THE PLANNING FOR THE DEVELOPMENT HERE.
THEY OUT OUTDOOR EVERYBODY ELSE IN THE FIVE YEAR PERIOD FOR PERMITTED ENDING IN 2022.
I'M GONNA GIVE YOU ANOTHER MINUTE OR SO.
I'M SAYING I'M GONNA GIVE YOU ANOTHER MINUTE.
YEAH, I I I'LL BE WRAPPING UP QUICK.
I SAID I THINK EVERYBODY GOT IT.
SO THE CONCERNS THAT CAME OUT OF IT, THE DISTRICT IS LOOKING FOR FULL DAY KINDERGARTEN, PARENT DRIVEN.
THAT'S GONNA BE CHALLENGING AND PUT SOME TAX PRESSURE ON US.
WE ALREADY KNOW SPRING CITY'S UNDER RENOVATION, RIGHT? WE'RE GONNA NEED ANOTHER ELEMENTARY SCHOOL.
THERE WAS A COMMENT FROM ONE OF THE BOARD MEMBERS THAT THE 55 AND PLUS MAY NOT HOLD.
I THINK RECENT LIMERICK ISSUES.
THEY HAD A DEVELOPMENT, IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE 55 AND ALL DIDN'T SELL.
THEY NEEDED TO MAKE CHANGES TO IT.
NOT SAYING THAT WILL HAPPEN HERE.
JUST A CONCERN TO BE WORRIED ABOUT UPPER PROVIDENCE AS WELL AS LIMERICK IS SEEING A RESURGENCE IN DEVELOPING RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPING.
NOT TO THE DEGREE THAT WE HAD 20 YEARS AGO, BUT THOSE SCHOOLS WERE NOT 90% CAPACITY THERE, RIGHT? WE DON'T HAVE THE ROOM AGAIN, NOT NECESSARILY THEIR FAULT.
WE ALL HAVE TO DEAL WITH IT WHEN THEY LEAVE.
MM-HMM,
TOM, YOU KIND OF HIT ON IT, RIGHT? AGREE IT IS.
YOU GUYS DID SOME AND LISTEN, I WANT TO APPRECIATE, I WISH WE HAD MET WITH YOU GUYS TWO YEARS AGO.
I REALLY APPRECIATE OUR MEETING ON MONDAY.
UH, AGAIN, I HAVE A COPY OF THE PLAN.
UH, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I WANTED TO FIRST OF ALL START OUT, UM, WITH IS A THANK YOU MR. BERMAN, LAWYERS FOR HOLDINGS.
UM, YOU HEARD US CLEARLY ON MONDAY AND AS, AS THE AUDIENCE MEMBERS HAVE THE PLAN, WE ALL HAVE A PLAN.
WE'VE SEEN IT, WE'VE MADE SOME RECOMMENDATIONS TO YOU, YOU THAT YOU'RE NOW CONSIDERING.
AND THAT ONLY TOOK TWO DAYS, RIGHT? SO MY CONCERN IS THAT IT IS TWO AND A HALF YEARS THAT IT TOOK US TO GET TO SIT DOWN.
WE'VE ONLY BEEN ASKING FOR THAT FOR THE TWO YEARS THAT THIS PROCESS HAS BEEN GOING ON.
IN FACT, THEY'VE DONE SO MUCH RESEARCH IN THE LAST TWO, TWO DAYS THAT WE BROUGHT TO THEIR ATTENTION AROUND TRAFFIC, HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE OF THE TOWNSHIP RESIDENTS AND CITIZENS THAT THEY'RE TAKING THIS VERY SERIOUSLY.
I ASK THE BOARD, THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO CONSIDER THIS AS A OPTION.
WE STILL HAVE SOME NEGOTIATION TO DO.
WE RECOGNIZE DEVELOPMENT WILL OCCUR.
WE RECOGNIZE THAT YOU HAVE AN INVESTMENT OF AT LEAST ABOUT AT COST VALUE, $41 MILLION INTO THE PROPERTY WITH ANOTHER 250,000 WHEN YOU SUBDIVIDED
[01:30:01]
IT.AND THEN YOU'VE BEEN PAYING FOLKS, THE PROFESSIONALS TO KIND OF PUT THE PLAN OUT HERE.
SO WE'LL ASSUME YOU'VE GOT ABOUT $60 MILLION OF AN INVESTMENT.
YOU'RE GONNA MAKE $444 MILLION ON TERM.
THAT'S A CRAZY AMOUNT OF MONEY WE'RE SUGGESTING YOU TAKE A LITTLE BIT OF A LOSS TO THE COMMUNITY.
WE RECOGNIZE THAT MR. BERMAN, WE RECOGNIZE THAT THIS IS YOUR PROFESSION, BUT THIS IS OUR COMMUNITY.
ALL WE ARE ASKING FOR IS TO REDUCE THE DENSITY.
PLEASE CONSIDER REDUCING THE DENSITY.
TOWN HOMES ARE NOT, ARE NOT COMPARABLE TO THIS COMMUNITY, IT'S JUST NOT IN THIS AREA.
WHAT WE ASK FOR IS FOR YOU AS PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS TO LOOK AT THE HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE.
IF I COULD, AND I KNOW THAT JEFF, YOU PROBABLY DON'T HAVE A POWERPOINT WITH THE ACTUAL SLIDE, BUT WE SUGGESTED FLIPPING THE, THE DEVELOPMENT SO THAT IT WOULD FOCUS UPWARDS ON THE NORTHERN PORTION OF THE PROPERTY BECAUSE IT'S A SAFETY ISSUE.
THERE IS NO WAY THAT A TRAFFIC CIRCLE OR A WIDENING OF A BRIDGE IS GOING TO FIX THE 4,000 PER MAX CALCULATION.
4,000 MORE CARS EVERY SINGLE DAY.
THAT'S, THAT'S MORE THAN 20% OF OUR, OF OUR COMMUNITY.
SO LET'S THINK ABOUT THE HEALTH AND SAFETY AGAIN, THE ONLY THING THAT I WOULD ASK FOR US TO CONSIDER, AND OF COURSE CONSTRUCTION AND LAND DEVELOPMENT IS A WHOLE NOTHER PIECE HERE, BUT IS LOOKING AT WHAT THE ACTUAL ZONING TEXT SAYS.
IT IS NOT COMPARABLE TO THE HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE.
IT IS NOT EVEN CLOSE TO BEING COMPARABLE TO THIS LOCAL SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES.
PLEASE CONSIDER, PLEASE CONSIDER A COMPROMISE.
WE'LL, WE'RE MORE THAN WILLING TO COME BACK AND MEET WITH YOU IN A DAY OR TWO IF YOU'D LIKE.
I HAVE TO GO TO PENTAGON TOMORROW.
THIS IS THE FOURTH OR FIFTH TIME I'VE BEEN HERE IN OPPOSITION TO THIS.
I'M VERY PASSIONATE ABOUT IT BECAUSE IT'S MY LIFE AND IT'S MY FAMILY'S LIFE.
IT'S THEIR BUSINESS, BUT IT'S MY LIFE.
I WOULD SAY AS SOMEONE WHO LOOKS AND ANALYZES NUMBERS, NOT DESTROYS COMMUNITIES FOR A LIVING, THAT YOU CAN MAKE NUMBERS, SAY WHATEVER YOU WANT.
AND I THINK THE SCHOOL INFORMATION, IT IS AN AVERAGE BASED UPON WHAT IS ALREADY PRESENT IN THE COMMUNITY.
I WOULD SAY YOU ASK NVR HOMES WHAT THEIR DEMOGRAPHIC, WHAT THEY'RE GONNA GO AFTER IN TERMS OF WHO'S GONNA LIVE INTO THIS COMMUNITY, BUY INTO THIS COMMUNITY.
AND IT'S GONNA BE PEOPLE WHO DON'T REPRESENT THE EXISTING MAKEUP OF THE COMMUNITY.
THEY'RE GONNA BE AT THE BEGINNING PART OF THEIR LIFE AND THEY'RE GONNA START THEIR FAMILY.
SO THE NUMBERS ARE GONNA BE HIGHER THAN WHAT YOU SEE CURRENTLY REFLECTED IN THE COMMUNITY TODAY.
MY CHILDREN GO TO SPRINGFIELD SCHOOLS.
I CAN TELL YOU NOT A LOT OF ROOM.
AND JUST BECAUSE THERE'S CAPACITY DOESN'T MEAN YOU WANT TO HAVE A CLASSROOM FILLED TO CAPACITY.
WHAT SALESPEOPLE ON SCHOOLS, THEIR STUDENT TO TEACHER RATIOS.
AND IF THEY'RE MAXED OUT, THAT'S NOT EXACTLY A SELLING POINT.
FINALLY, I LIKE TO SAY THIS IS OUR COMMUNITY.
EVERY MEETING I'VE BEEN TO, THERE'S BEEN NUMEROUS PEOPLE WHO DON'T WANT THIS.
WE'VE LAID OUT INTELLIGENT ARGUMENTS.
THESE GENTLEMEN ARE ONLY CONCERNED WITH MAKING MORE MONEY.
SO ALL OF IT COMES DOWN TO IS HOW MANY HOUSES CAN I FIT IN TO MAXIMIZE, IF THEY WANTED TO BE GOOD COMMUNITY MEMBERS, THEY WOULD MAKE A DEVELOPMENT THAT IS IN LINE WITH THE COMMUNITY THAT RESPONDS TO WHAT THE PEOPLE OF THIS COMMUNITY WANT TO SEE.
BUT THEY'RE INSISTENT ON BUILDING HIGHER BUILDINGS, INCREASING THE DENSITY BEYOND WHAT, FIVE TIMES AS OPPOSED TO FIVE HOUSES PER ACRE AS OPPOSED TO ONE AND A HALF, 15 FEET HIGHER THAN NORMAL HOUSING AROUND HERE IS.
THEY'RE GONNA MAKE IT AND LEAVE.
WE ARE THE COMMUNITY WE REPRESENT, YOU REPRESENT US.
WE ARE TELLING YOU WE DON'T WANT THIS.
IF THEY REALLY WANTED TO HELP US, THEY WOULD LISTEN TO THE FRIENDS OF PARKHOUSE.
THEY WOULD WORK WITH US AND DESIGN SOMETHING
[01:35:01]
THAT FITS IN WITH THE COMMUNITY SO WE COULD BE HAPPY.AND THEY CAN MAKE MONEY, BUT THEY WANNA MAKE MORE MONEY.
UM, ALBERT ZI, 1 28 PATRIOT DRIVE.
I WANT TO COMMEND THE BOARD HERE.
UM, YOU'VE DONE A GREAT JOB, MR. WRIGHT.
THE REST OF YOU HAVE CAN'T HEAR.
UM, MR. UH, GREG, YOU'RE DOING A GREAT JOB.
I DON'T KNOW IF HELLO, CAN YOU HEAR THAT? ALRIGHT.
UM, LOOK, THIS IS AN EMOTIONAL ISSUE.
UM, THE BOARD HAS A DIFFICULT DECISION TO MAKE.
UM, BUT THE FACT REMAINS, UM, THE PROPERTY OWNER HERE WANTS TO BUILD HOUSES ON A, ON A LAND THAT THEY OWN.
AND ACCORDING TO, UM, CASE LAWS AND THE LAWS ON THE BOOKS AND LEGAL OPINIONS FROM EXPERTS, THEY HAVE A RIGHT TO BUILD WHAT THEY CAN BUILD WHAT THEY WANT TO BUILD.
UM, THE 600 HOMES IS A RELIEF OUT FROM THE 1,203.
NOW YOU HAVE A DECISION TO MAKE.
CAN'T BE EMOTIONAL, JUST HAS TO BE BASED ON FACTS.
AND, UM, JUST A COUPLE THINGS THAT UM, I WANT TO POINT OUT.
FIRST OF ALL, WE ALL LIVE IN HOMES THAT, ESPECIALLY IN THIS COMMUNITY, WE'RE FARMS EVERY HOME WE'RE IN.
ALRIGHT, SO, UM, EVERYTHING'S GONNA BE OKAY.
LET'S JUST TALK ABOUT THE TRAFFIC WILL BE OKAY.
IT'LL BE FINE, BUT SAFETY IS GONNA BE FINE.
THE AMBULANCE IS GONNA SHOW UP.
UM, THE WATER RUN RUNOFFS GONNA BE GET, BE BETTER.
I DON'T SEE SPRING FORD SCHOOL DISTRICT BUILDING ANY SCHOOLS RIGHT NOW.
IF THERE WAS A PROBLEM, THEY THINK AHEAD, THEY'D BE DOING IT ALREADY.
LET'S TALK ABOUT THE ROUNDABOUT REAL QUICK.
MR. WRIGHT, YOU MADE A GREAT POINT AND I KNOW ANTHONY TALKED ABOUT IT AND RENNY TALKED ABOUT IT.
THE ROUNDABOUT SITS, AND THIS PROPERTY SITS IN A UNIQUE SPOT.
IT BORDERS TWO COUNTIES, MULTIPLE JURISDICTIONS, MULTIPLE LEGISLATIVE DISTRICTS.
AND WHAT THAT MEANS IS PRO PROJECTS LIKE THAT, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, ANTHONY, THERE'S A LOT OF SUPPORT FROM EVERYBODY, MULTIPLE COUNTIES.
AND WHEN THEY SEND THE LETTERS TO THE COUNTY, PENDO WILL LOOK AT THAT.
SO I HAVE NO DOUBT IN MY MIND THAT THIS ROUNDABOUT AND THESE ROAD IMPROVEMENTS WILL BE MADE IN TIME.
UM, STACK TOWNHOUSES, BUILDINGS STACK TOWNHOUSES PRODUCE LESS CHILDREN.
IT'S A FACT LESS CHILDREN THAN A REGULAR TOWNHOUSE.
SO THEY, SO THEY PUT IN STACK TOWNHOUSES THAT HAVE LESS IMPACT ON SCHOOLS.
THEY ARE, THEY PROVIDE FOR MORE OPEN SPACE, YES, THEY'RE HIGHER, BUT THAT'S THE, THAT'S WHAT YOU GET IN EXCHANGE.
YOU GET A HIGHER PROPERTY WITH MORE OPEN SPACE.
UM, AND IT'S NOT THE FIRST TIME THE TOWNSHIP'S DONE THAT.
THE TOWNSHIP, WE HAVE DONE THIS BEFORE.
WE HAVE, WE HAVE, UH, UH, CHANGED ZONING.
WE HAVE WORKED WITH DEVELOPERS WITH SPACE AND HEIGHT.
SO THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT WE HAVEN'T DONE BEFORE.
SO, UM, IN CLOSING, I JUST URGE THIS BOARD TO VOTE IN FAVOR OF MOVING THIS BACK TO THE TOWNSHIP SUPERVISORS, UH, WITH A, WITH A, UH, A VOTE IN THE AFFIRMATIVE TO APPROVE THIS PROJECT.
UH, 600 HOMES, WHICH IS FAR BETTER THAN THE 1200 THAT THEY CAN BUILD THERE NOW.
OKAY, WE GOT SOME OTHER PEOPLE.
LAKE WELLING 1 35 BENNINGTON ROAD.
DENY THE ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT.
THE CURRENT INSTITUTIONAL OVERLAY WILL BE SAFER.
SO I WANNA EXPAND ON SOME COMMENTS ABOUT SAFETY.
I COULD TALK ABOUT THE FACT THAT THE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS ARE ENTIRELY INCOMPATIBLE TO THE LEGISLATIVE INTENT IN THIS ZONING TAX AMENDMENT.
BUT THAT WAS COVERED BY MR. BERKOWITZ.
THE, UH, ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT AS IMPLEMENTED WITH THE VERY FIVE VERY HIGH FIVE UNITS FOR GROSS ACRE DENSITY
[01:40:01]
WILL CREATE UNSAFE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS IN THE AREAS THAT SURROUND PARKHOUSE.THE 600 UNIT DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL.
BUT LET'S REMEMBER, THE ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT ALLOWS UP TO 800 UNITS WOULD GENERATE, AS WE HEARD FROM A PROFESSIONAL 4,000 VEHICLE TRIPS PER DAY.
THAT'S 400 MORE OPPORTUNITIES FOR TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS ON NARROW ROADS WITH HAZARDOUS INTERSECTIONS.
LET'S REMEMBER THOSE HAZARDOUS INTERSECTIONS, SECOND AVENUE AND OLD STATE ROAD.
WHAT DID WE HEAR ABOUT WHAT THE DEVELOPER COULD DO ABOUT THAT? HE SAID WE WOULD DO WHAT WE CAN.
I'M CONCERNED ABOUT TRAFFIC SAFETY.
I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THE NUMBER OF ACCIDENTS WITH INJURIES THAT COULD LIKELY OCCUR AT THAT HAZARDOUS INTERSECTION AND MANY MORE WHERE THAT PROPOSAL IS NOW CURRENTLY CONCENTRATED.
SO WE, WE DO HAVE FEW SPECIFICS ON HOW THE SAFETY ISSUES WILL BE MITIGATED.
WE UNDERSTAND, YES, IT COMES UNDER THAT LAND DEVELOPMENT PROCESS, BUT LET'S REMEMBER WE HAVE A REAL CONCERN ABOUT THE DENSITY.
WHAT DOES THE DENSITY DO? IT LEADS TO MANY MORE TRIPS, 4,000 TRIPS PER DAY.
THE CURRENT INSTITUTIONAL OVERLAY WOULD ALLOW FOR UNDER A CONDITIONAL USE A RESIDENTIAL CARE FACILITY FOR SENIOR CITIZENS.
AND WE'RE THINKING THAT'S 62 AND ABOVE.
SO I CONTEND THAT'S MUCH SAFER.
AND THIS 1200 UNIT THING, I WISH FOLKS WOULD STOP TALKING ABOUT 1200 UNITS.
NOTHING HAS DEMONSTRATED THAT THAT 1200 UNIT THING IS EVEN POSSIBLE.
SO LET'S STOP THE COMPARISON BETWEEN 600 AND 1200 AND CALL THAT A COMPROMISE.
INSTITUTIONAL OVERLAY WILL LEAD TO MANY FEWER TRIPS PER DAY.
JUST BEFORE, IF YOU DON'T MIND, I'D JUST LIKE TO CLARIFY A COUPLE THINGS.
UM, WE, I THINK WE DID PROVIDE SOME SPECIFICS ON OLD STATE ROAD THEN WE WOULD WIDEN IT.
THERE WAS A REQUIREMENT WOULD BE A REQUIREMENT TO WIDEN IT BY A CERTAIN AMOUNT, WHICH WOULD OCCUR ON THE FRONTAGE OF THE PROPERTY.
SO IF, IF WE DIDN'T SAY WE'LL DO WHAT WE CAN, WE SAID WE WOULD WIDEN OLD STATE ROAD.
WHAT WE CAN'T DO WITHOUT, AGAIN, GETTING INTO THE PROCESS TO SAY WE WOULD GO BEYOND THE BOUNDARIES OF OUR PROPERTY TO DO THAT.
AND OBVIOUSLY AGAIN, THAT'S WHAT THE LAND DEVELOPMENT PROCESS IS FOR.
THAT'S WHAT THE TOWNSHIP STAFF AND PROFESSIONALS CAN DO, UM, ON THE 600 UNITS.
I UNDERSTAND YOU, YOU DON'T TRUST US THAT IT SAYS FIVE PER YOU FIVE PER ACRE AND IT'S GONNA END UP BEING 600.
I'M NOT ASKING YOU TO TRUST US.
I'M ASKING YOU TO TRUST THE TOWNSHIP STAFF, TOWNSHIP PROFESSOR PROFESSIONALS, THAT THEY WOULD NEVER PASS THIS WITHOUT MAKING SURE THERE WAS AN IRON PLA MECHANISM IN PLACE, A COVENANT ON THE PROPERTY THAT WOULD LIMIT IT TO 600 READINGS.
WE WILL ABSOLUTELY AGREE TO WHATEVER THAT, WHETHER IT'S A COVENANT DEED RESTRICTION, WHATEVER THAT MECHANISM IS.
BUT I'M NOT ASKING YOU TO TRUST US.
I'M ASKING YOU TO TRUST YOUR TOWNSHIP PROFESSIONALS, YOUR SOLICITOR PARTICULARLY TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S THANK YOU, RANDY.
SO I, I GET BACK TO THE INTERSECTION OF OLD STATE AND SECOND AVENUE.
I UNDERSTAND OLD STATE WOULD BE WHAT, BUT THAT INTERSECTION IS A REAL ISSUE.
NO, WE HAVE, WELL, AS OTHERS THE, UH, THE, THE JU HANDLE OR I FORGET THE TERM THAT WE USED FOR THAT, THAT UH, FULL STATE.
WAIT, WAIT, WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO GET YOU BACK ON THE MIC.
WE TRUST YOU THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
NICOLE, ROB, TOM, AJ, JERRY, WE TRUST YOU.
WHAT IS VERY CONCERNING IS THE ONLY TWO PEOPLE THAT CAME UP TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS PROJECT ARE PLANNER, FORMER SUPERVISOR, AND ONE THAT IS LIVING WITH ANOTHER SUPERVISOR.
SO WE TRUST YOU THAT YOU'RE GONNA HAVE THE BEST INTEREST OF US, THE COMMUNITY MEMBERS, THE TAXPAYERS, THE ONES THAT ARE GONNA BE MOSTLY IMPACTED BY THIS.
I REALLY APPRECIATE THE NEW PRESENTATION, THE INVOLVEMENT OF OLD STATE
[01:45:01]
ROAD.BUT MY BIGGEST CONCERN IS THE EMINENT DOMAIN ACTIONS, THE IMPACTS.
I'M NOT GONNA GO ON A TANGENT, RESPONDING OF OR, UH, REPEATING WHAT OTHERS SAID.
BUT THE STECCO RESIDENCE THAT'S ON THE CORNER OF OLD STATE AND SECOND AVENUE, IF YOU'RE WIDENING OLD STATE, THERE IS GONNA BE AN EMINENT DOMAIN ACTION TO FIX THAT INTERSECTION.
AND I KNOW, MATT, YOU ARE SHAKING YOUR HEAD THAT PENDOT DOESN'T RESULT IN ANY DOMAIN ACTIONS.
BUT I'VE BEEN IN A LAWSUIT WITH PHOENIXVILLE FOR THE PAST TWO YEARS BECAUSE OF AN EMINENT DOMAIN ACTION FOR DEVELOPMENT THAT WAS BEING APPROVED NEXT TO MY PROPERTY WITHOUT MY PERMISSION.
DO I ASK YOU AGAIN? IS THERE ANY ASSURANCE, IS THERE ANY PROTECTION FOR THE STECCO RESIDENCE? IS THERE ANY EMINENT DOMAIN ACTIONS ON THE TABLE HERE? 'CAUSE WITH WIDEN GOLD STATE ROAD, WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO DO SOMETHING WITH THAT PROPERTY.
SO, SO TO ANSWER THE QUESTION, THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO DISCUSSION ON EMINENT DOMAIN.
WE DON'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO THAT.
THAT IF AT ALL, THERE'S EMINENT DOMAIN EVER CONTEMPLATED.
THAT WOULD BE AN ACTION THAT WOULD NEED TO BE EITHER TAKEN BY PENDOT OR THE TOWNSHIP, A GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY.
UM, I'M NOT AWARE OF WHAT THE CURRENT RIGHT OF WAY WIDTHS ARE ON OLD STATE ROAD.
THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE GET INTO IN LAND VET.
IF THERE IS AVAILABLE RIGHT OF WAY ALONG THEIR RESIDENCE, IN OTHER WORDS AREA THAT THEY DON'T OWN BUT IS OWNED BY THE TOWNSHIP, THEN WE WILL TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THAT AREA.
UM, IF FOR WHATEVER REASON THERE IS THE NEED FOR ADDITIONAL LAND OR EASEMENTS OR THINGS OF THAT NATURE, THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT, UM, THE APPLICANT, THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT MVR WOULD DISCUSS WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER AS TO THE ABILITY TO ACQUIRE ADDITIONAL RIGHT OF WAY OR AN EASEMENT, WHETHER IT'S TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION OR PERMANENT EASEMENTS.
AND OBVIOUSLY THERE WOULD SORT OF, THERE WOULD BE SOME SORT OF COMPENSATION FOR THAT.
BUT THAT WOULD BE A DISCUSSION BETWEEN, UM, THE, THE APPLICANT AND THE PROPERTY OWNER IF ADDITIONAL PROPERTY WAS NECESSARY.
BUT I CAN'T SPEAK FOR THE TOWNSHIP AND WHAT THEY WOULD DO IN THE FUTURE IN TERMS OF AN EMINENT DOMAIN PROCEEDING.
I CAN TELL YOU IN MY 29 YEARS OF DOING THIS, I'VE BEEN INVOLVED IN ONE OF THOSE WHERE THE TOWNSHIP HAS, UM, ACQUIRED PROPERTY THROUGH EMINENT DOMAIN.
BUT IN THE THOUSAND PROJECTS I'VE WORKED ON, THAT'S BEEN THE ONLY INSTANCE I CAN THINK OF.
JUST ONE MORE QUESTION FOR YOU THEN.
IN REGARDS TO OLD STATE, YOU STATED ABOUT WIDENING OR SORRY, UM, STATED ABOUT WIDENING OLD STATE, BUT WHEN IT COMES TO SECOND AVENUE, YOU'RE LIMITED TO THAT EXPLORATION UNTIL WE HAVE PEN UP DIRECTIONS OR DID I NOT UNDERSTAND THAT CORRECTLY? UM, SECOND AVENUE IS ALSO CONSIDERABLY NARROWER, DOESN'T HAVE ANY INFRASTRUCTURE, STORMWATER MANAGEMENT, ET CETERA.
SO SECOND AVENUE IS THE PENDOT ROADWAY? CORRECT.
SO IT'S UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF PENDOT.
SO AS I HAD MENTIONED, IF WE'RE FORTUNE TO MOVE FORWARD, UH, THERE WILL BE FURTHER DISCUSSIONS THAT WILL OCCUR WITH THE TOWNSHIP, MR. VALENCIA, WITH THE STAFF CONSULTANTS AS WELL AS PENNDOT AS TO WHAT WE NEED TO DO, UH, TO MEET PENNDOT, UM, REQUIREMENTS IN ORDER TO RECEIVE ULTIMATELY WHAT'S CALLED A HIGHWAY OCCUPANCY PERMIT.
UM, IF PENNDOT REQUIRES US TO MAKE CERTAIN IMPROVEMENTS AS A RESULT OF THE DEVELOPMENT, THEN WE WILL BE REQUIRED TO MAKE THOSE IMPROVEMENTS OR WE WON'T BE ABLE TO RECEIVE A HIGHWAY OCCUPANCY PERMIT.
ONE QUICK QUESTION, HONOR, THANK YOU FOR SAYING YOU TRUST US.
I WOULD THINK THAT I DON'T, I'M NOT GIVING YOU ANY REASON NOT TO TRUST US.
I MEAN, WE'RE TAX PAYERS TOO, SO I'M NOT SURE WHY YOU, YOU HAD TO CLARIFY THAT YOU TRUST US BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, THIS IS NOT EASY AND WE'RE TAKING IT VERY SERIOUS.
AND I'M NOT SURE WHY YOU THINK WE'VE GIVEN DONE ANYTHING OR SAID ANYTHING THAT YOU WOULD FEEL THAT YOU DO.
YOU CAN TRUST US, BUT I'M NOT SURE WHAT THAT POINT WAS.
THAT WAS NOT A LOADED COMMENT.
WELL, I WAS, I'M NOT SURE IT WAS APPLICABLE, BUT OKAY.
HI, SUSAN DENBY, 1 3 5 BENNINGTON ROAD.
AND, AND I WANT TO JUST SAY THANK YOU FOR MEETING ON MONDAY.
CAN YOU HEAR ME? YEAH, KEEP IT CLOSE.
UH, MEETING ON MONDAY, IT WAS EYEOPENING AND UH, I THOUGHT IT WAS A GOOD CONVERSATION AND I HOPE AT THE START OF, OF MANY, UM, AND I WOULD HOPE THAT OUR NEGOTIATION CAN CONTINUE.
I, I KNOW I'M GOING TO SPEAK AGAIN ABOUT DENSITY.
UM, I DO AGREE THAT IT'S, IT'S A SAFETY ISSUE.
THE SAFETY, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT OLD STATE ROAD, BUT EVERY ROAD REALLY AROUND IT IS A PROBLEM EXCEPT FOR THE NORTHERN END.
ON SECOND AVENUE, THERE ARE NO SHOULDERS, THERE ARE BLIND SPOTS COMING DOWN.
ONE 13, YOU COME DOWN PAST PARKHOUSE, THERE ARE NO SHOULDERS AGAIN, IT'S, YOU COME DOWN, PEOPLE DON'T
[01:50:01]
KNOW WHICH WAY TO GO.AND NOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WHEN IS THE THE PENNDOT PROJECT GOING TO HAPPEN? AND WE DON'T KNOW.
UM, AND WHAT I KNOW ABOUT WHEN THINGS ARE SAID, THEY'RE GONNA START.
AND WHEN YOU GET A WINDOW OF THREE TO FIVE YEARS, IT'S MORE LIKE FIVE TO SEVEN.
AND I THINK THAT THIS PROJECT SHOULDN'T START UNTIL THOSE ROADS ARE FIXED.
HOW COULD WE, WE, THERE IS A COMMUNITY OF A HUNDRED PLUS HOUSES THAT COME OFF DRY PELVIS.
WHAT ARE WE GONNA DO? WHAT ARE WE GONNA DO? HOW ARE WE GONNA GET OUT OF OUR HOUSES? AND TO HAVE THAT CONSTRUCTION GOING ON AND HAVING 600 HOUSES, THAT IS JUST RIDICULOUS AMOUNT OF, UH, AMOUNT OF HOUSES IN SUCH A SMALL AREA.
YOU ARE AT, WE'RE AT THE LITTLE END OF OUR TOWNSHIP AND I FEEL LIKE IT'S THE WRONG PLACE.
UH, YES, THERE'S GONNA BE DEVELOPMENT.
I GET IT, BUT 600 IS WAY TOO MANY.
I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THIS ORDINANCE.
UM, I ASK YOU TO DENY IT AS IT IS.
HAVE SOME SHARPENING OF THE PENCILS.
THERE'S THINGS IN HERE THAT DON'T SPEAK TO, UH, EGRESS INGRESS.
ADDING A SEPARATE TURNING LANE.
THESE ARE IMPORTANT THINGS FOR, FOR ZONING, I WOULD THINK.
I AM NOT A ZONING EXPERT BY ANY MEANS, BUT WHEN IT'S NOT THERE, I CAN TELL YOU THAT BASED ON EXPERIENCE OF OTHER THINGS I'M LEARNING HERE, IF IT'S NOT THERE, THERE'S A WAY TO LEGALLY GET AROUND IT.
IT'S NOT, THERE'S WHERE YOU'RE PROPOSING IT.
THIS IS, IT CAN BE BY WEGMANS.
WE DON'T NEED IT DOWN WHERE WE ARE.
IT'S GOTTA COME OUT OF THE ORDINANCE.
COULD SOMEBODY CLARIFY FOR ME, IS A FISCAL IMPACT STATEMENT, A COMMUNITY IMPACT STUDY? IT, IT'S PART, A FISCAL IMPACT STATEMENT IS PART OF A COMMUNITY IMPACT STUDY.
WELL, THAT COMMUNITY IMPACT STUDY WAS TAKEN OUT OF THE, UH, OSR TO THIS ONE.
THE NEXT THING THAT I'VE SEEN IN THIS ORDINANCE IS THAT IT'S NOT IN THE SURROUND CHARACTER OF THE SURROUNDING AREA.
AND THE DENSITY IS ABSOLUTELY TOO HIGH.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SPOT ZONING HERE.
I APPRECIATE THE EXTRA 15 MINUTES.
ANYBODY ELSE? OKAY, UM, I DON'T SEE ANYBODY ELSE COMING FORWARD.
SO, UM, I'M GOING TO ASK THE BOARD, UH, IF THEY WANT TO MAKE ANY COMMENTS OR, UM, ANY SUGGESTIONS BEFORE WE GET TO A, UM, PROPOSAL TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE OSR DASH TWO TO THE SUPERVISORS WITH A YAY OR NAY.
UM, I'M GOING TO LET THE BOARD MEMBERS START WITH YOU, JERRY, IF YOU DON'T MIND, UM, TO MAKE COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS OR, UM, ANYTHING YOU WANT TO SAY.
WELL, UM, CERTAINLY THANK THE PUBLIC FOR ALL THEIR, UH, COMMENTS AND DISCORD.
IT'S BEEN VERY HELPFUL TO KIND OF HEAR EVERYBODY'S FEELING ON THIS.
UM, AND YOU KNOW, JUST TO REPEAT THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN SAID, I MEAN, WE ALL RECOGNIZE DENSITIES AN ISSUE.
UM, BUT, UH, WE, YOU KNOW, I I, ME PERSONALLY, I MEAN, UH, I, I SEE THE 1200 UNITS ON THE TABLE AS A REAL POSSIBILITY.
UH, I THINK THE 600, UH, PLAN, UH, YOU KNOW, WOULD BE THE MOST REASONABLE ALTERNATIVE WE HAVE.
UH, I THINK, UH, THE POINTS MADE ABOUT DESIGN ISSUES ARE ALL VALID, THAT THINGS WILL COME UP DURING LAND DEVELOPMENT THAT WILL GET RESOLVED.
UH, THAT'S ALL PART OF THE NEXT STEP IF THIS, IF THIS GOES FORWARD.
UM, SO I, UH, APPRECIATE THE CONVERSATION.
UH, AND I THINK, UH, THINGS HAVE BEEN EXPLAINED AS WELL AS THEY CAN BE EXPLAINED.
UH, SO I THINK WE HAVE A DECISION TO MAKE.
[01:55:02]
UM, FIRST, UM, JEFF OR GREG, COULD YOU CLARIFY TO EVERYONE HERE, WHAT ARE THE REMAINING STEPS IN THIS PROCESS AFTER THIS MEETING? SURE.UM, AS FOR THE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT IN PARTICULAR, UM, THE NEXT STEP IS THE, UH, SCHEDULED ORDINANCE HEARING ON THE 29TH, UH, WHICH WILL TAKE PLACE AND THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS WILL CONSIDER THE AMENDMENT AND THE RECOMMENDATIONS, UH, EITHER WAY MADE BY THIS BODY, THE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF, AND, UH, AND ANOTHER HEARING PRESENTATION, UH, FROM THE APPLICANT ON THE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT IN PARTICULAR.
UH, SO THAT, THAT'S, THAT'S THE PROCESS LEFT IN THE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT.
UM, IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SHOULD THE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT BE ADOPTED AND ENACTED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, THEN THE APPLICANT, UM, UNDERNEATH THAT ORDINANCE AMENDMENT WOULD NEED TO GO FULLY THROUGH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT PROCESS.
UM, AND THE TOWNSHIP IS A THREE STEP PROCESS, STARTING WITH A TENTATIVE SKETCH PLAN, UM, WHICH WOULD BE SUBMITTED, REVIEWED, COME TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, UH, FOR COMMENT.
UH, AND THEN WE, YOU, THE WHOLE PROCESS WOULD START AGAIN THROUGH THE, UH, PRELIMINARY LAND DEVELOPMENT, UM, APPROVAL PROCESS.
COMES TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, GO TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FOR APPROVALS, AND THEN ONCE ANY COMMENTS OR FINAL ITEMS WERE WORKED OUT, THEY WOULD COME IN FOR FINAL APPROVAL, UH, WHICH AGAIN REVIEWED BY STAFF, REVIEWED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND GO TO DO THE, UH, UH, BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FOR FINAL APPROVAL.
THAT ALSO INCLUDES ALL STAFF REVIEWS, ENGINEERING, TRAFFIC, UH, UH, AND ANY OTHER SUBSETS OF OUR, ALL OF OUR ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS, AS WELL AS REVIEWS BY THE, UH, MONTGOMERY COUNTY CONSERVATION DISTRICT, UH, AND, AND, AND THEIR ARM IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECT RELATED TO STORMWATER.
SO JUST TO CLARIFY, THE TEXT AMENDMENT WILL BE DE DECIDED UPON ON THE 29TH.
Y THE HEARING IS SCHEDULED FOR THE 29TH? YES.
AND THEN FOR REGARDING THIS PROPERTY, ARE THERE ANY, THERE'S ALSO ANOTHER HEARING ON THE 30TH.
THERE IS CURRENTLY, THERE, THERE ARE TWO PARALLEL TRACKS RELATED TO THIS PROPERTY RIGHT NOW.
ONE IS THE, THE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT, WHICH WE'RE CONSIDERING TONIGHT.
THERE'LL BE A HEARING ON WEDNESDAY, MAY 29TH.
UH, THERE'S ALSO THE PENDING CONDITIONAL USE HEARING FOR DEVELOPMENT, UH, UNDER THE INSTITUTIONAL, UH, ZONING DISTRICT THAT IS CURRENTLY SCHEDULED TO COMMENCE ON THURSDAY, MAY 30TH.
UM, CAN I ASK ONE QUESTION? I'M I'M OKAY WITH THAT.
JUST TO CLARIFY, THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, IF YOU RECOMMEND APPROVAL, NEED TO APPROVE THE ZONING TAX CHANGE, BUT THIS ZONING STILL DOES NOT APPLY TO THIS PROPERTY.
SO AT SOME POINT THIS PROPERTY HAS BEEN REZONED TO THE OSR TWO, CORRECT? NO.
WHAT IS, WHAT IS PROPOSED? OSR TWO IS AN OVERLAY DISTRICT.
SO IF A, ANY PROPERTY WITHIN THE TOWNSHIP MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE OVERLAY DISTRICT, IT CAN BE DEVELOPED UNDER THESE STANDARDS.
SO NO MAP AMENDMENT IS REQUIRED.
THE, THE REST OF MY COMMENTS ARE ACTUALLY TO THE COMMISSION.
SO MANY RESIDENTS ACTUALLY THIS EVENING STATED CORRECTLY THAT OUR PURPOSE HERE TONIGHT IS TO MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE ZONING TAX.
THERE WERE SOME COMMENTS ABOUT 600 IS BETTER THAN 1200, BUT THAT'S NOT WHY WE'RE HERE.
IT'S IF X THEN Y IS WHAT THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING.
BUT WE'RE HERE TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS REGARDING THIS SPECIFIC TEXT.
MR. SINI NOTED IN HIS COMMENTS THAT DENSITY AND HOUSING TYPES IS NOT ZONING, IT'S LAND DEVELOPMENT.
SPECIFICALLY, IF YOU LOOK AT THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING, SECTION THREE 12 HAS SUBSECTIONS TITLED DENSITY AS WELL AS PROVISIONS, ALL STANDARDS AND TYPES OF DWELLING.
SO I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW WHERE THAT NOTION COMES FROM, BUT IT IS SPECIFICALLY IN THIS AMENDMENT.
SO WE'RE NOT PUTTING DENSITY AND HOUSING TYPES.
ON THE SIDE DISCUSSION, WE'RE MAKING A RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS WHAT WE BELIEVE THE TOWNSHIP SHOULD POTENTIALLY REVISE IN THE ZONING AMENDMENT, WHICH APPLIES TO NOT JUST THIS PROPERTY, AS THE SOLICITOR JUST MENTIONED, IT APPLIES TO OTHER OPEN SPACE PROPERTIES IN THE FUTURE.
NOW LOOK, I STOP TO THE CLAUSE.
I'M NOT STATING THAT THE PROPOSAL HERE IS NOT POTENTIALLY A VIABLE PROPOSAL.
I UNDERSTAND THE CONCERNS AND THE PASSION OF YOU ON THIS AS A RESIDENT THAT LIVES LESS THAN A MILE FROM THIS PROPERTY.
I HAVE MY OWN STRONG CONVICTIONS ON IT, BUT I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT MR. SINI ALSO THIS EVENING SAID, UH, QUOTE, I'M WILLING TO CONTINUE DISCUSSIONS IN THE FUTURE IF THE TEXT AMENDMENT IS PASSED.
NOW, HE WAS SPECIFICALLY TALKING ABOUT DENSITY AS
[02:00:01]
WELL AS HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS, AND HE ALSO SAID, QUOTE, WE COULD POSS IN, IN REGARDS TO THE HEIGHT OF SOME OF THE UNITS.IF YOU REMEMBER, HE TALKED ABOUT POTENTIALLY MOVING THEM.
HE ALSO SAID, QUOTE, WE COULD POSSIBLY REDUCE THE NUMBER OF UNITS.
SO IF YOU ARE WILLING TO HAVE FLEXIBILITY IN THE FUTURE, THEN WHAT? MY REC AND MY RECOMMENDATION TONIGHT, IF, IF WE HAVE A MOTION TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE, THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS IS, I'M NOT GONNA SUPPORT IT SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE I'M NOT GONNA SUPPORT A, A AMENDMENT TO THE ZONE TEXT AS WRITTEN.
WHAT NEEDS TO OCCUR, IN MY OPINION IS THAT THE APPLICANT, IF HE TRULY AND GENUINELY, IF THE GROUP GENUINELY AGREES IN SOME OF THESE COMMENTS OF WE'D BE WILLING TO HAVE FURTHER DISCUSSIONS, WE'D BE WILLING TO POTENTIALLY LOOK AT MOVING THEM.
WELL, IF YOU'RE WILLING TO DO THAT, THEN YOU SHOULD BE WILLING TO COME TO THE TABLE OVER THE NEXT TWO WEEKS AND MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THIS AMENDMENT WORDING.
AND I ASK THAT THE SUPERVISORS MAKE TIME IN THEIR SCHEDULE TO ALSO MEET IT.
AND LASTLY, I'VE ONLY, I'M ONE OF THE JUNIOR MEMBERS ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION, BUT ONE THING THAT'S AGGRAVATED ME THROUGHOUT MY TIME HERE IS THAT WE'RE CONTINUALLY PUT UP ON DEADLINES THAT I THINK ARE ARTIFICIAL AND HURRIED SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE IT'S ON THE AGENDA FOR THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS.
WE AS A COMMISSION NEED TO ENSURE THAT WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO SAY, THIS ISN'T READY FOR FINAL, THIS ISN'T READY FOR SHOW.
AND IF THAT MEANS THAT THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND THE APPLICANT AND THE SOLICITOR POSSIBLY HAVE TO GET TOGETHER AND SAY, IS THERE A POSSIBILITY TO MOVE HEARINGS BECAUSE THERE'S, THIS IS SUCH AN IMPORTANT IMPACT TO OUR COMMUNITY AND WE WILL SIT DOWN, TAKE TIME OUT OF OUR DAY OR OUT OF OUR WEEK AND ACTUALLY DO SOME HARD WORK, INSTEAD OF CONTINUE TO PUSH LAW THE SAME AMENDMENT CUT AND PASTE, THEN WE'RE NOT BEING GENUINE.
SO THAT, THAT HAS BEEN MY COMMENT FOR THE SUPERVISORS ONCE WE TAKE THE VOTE.
AND I THINK, GREG, YOU CAN ADDRESS THAT.
IF, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, WE ARE UNDER A DEADLINE BECAUSE OF THE APPLICATION HAS BEEN SUBMITTED, WE HAVE A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF TIME TO PUT A CONDITIONAL USE HEARING IN PLACE FOR THE CONDITIONAL USE.
YES, THERE ARE STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS.
IT'S UNFORTUNATE THAT WE'RE AT THIS POINT THAT WE NOW PUTTING OURSELVES IN A POSITION WHERE WE HAVE TO NOW ASK THE BOARD, AT LEAST FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, ASK THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TO DO A LITTLE BIT MORE WORK IN THE NEXT TWO WEEKS THEN.
I THINK EVERYTHING I WANTED TO SAY AJ JUST SAID.
WELL, I AGREE WITH AJ TO SOME EXTENT.
ON THE OTHER HAND, UM, A LOT OF THESE THINGS SHOULD BE RESOLVED IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT PROCESS.
IT WAS MENTIONED TONIGHT ABOUT THE SECOND AVENUE IN OLD STATE.
I DON'T THINK ANYBODY DISAGREED THAT THAT IS A TERRIBLE INTERSECTION.
SO WOULD WE APPROVE THIS TONIGHT KNOWING THAT THAT PROBLEM EXISTS? OKAY.
UM, BURNS, SETBACKS, LANDSCAPING, IF I LOOK AT THIS PLANT, IT COMES RIGHT UP TO THE ROAD OR VERY CLOSE TO THE ROADS.
I THINK IT COULD BE BURNED, SOME NICE PINES PUT ON THERE.
AND THEY CAN LOOK MUCH, MUCH BETTER.
IF YOU'RE GOING TO DO ANYTHING AT ALL.
THAT MIGHT MEAN TAKING SOME DENSITY DOWN A LITTLE BIT.
UM, WHICH IS ANOTHER BIG ISSUE THAT WAS TALKED ABOUT, UM, STACKED TOWNHOUSES.
UM, I THINK I HEARD YOU TALK TONIGHT ABOUT POSSIBLY RELOCATING THEM OR WORKING 'EM INTO THE CONTOURS.
AND YES, IF I COULD JUST CLARIFY THE, THE COMMENTS FROM MR. KRUPA, AND IF I MISSPOKE, I APOLOGIZE, BUT I CERTAINLY, WHAT I THOUGHT I SAID WAS WE WERE WILLING TO HAVE FURTHER CONVERSATIONS ON THE ITEMS THAT WE DISCUSSED, WHICH ARE INHERENTLY PART OF LAND DEVELOPMENT.
AND BOTH OF THOSE ARE THINGS THAT WE'VE SAID.
WE WERE NOT WILLING TO ENTERTAIN FURTHER DISCUSSIONS OUTSIDE.
I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT THE, THE INTENT OF THAT WAS THE, THE ITEMS LIKE THE LAYOUT OF THE PLAN, THE LOCATION OF CERTAIN TYPES OF UNITS, THOSE ARE ALL, AND AND INCLUDING BIRMINGHAM LANDSCAPING ARE REALLY LAND DEVELOPMENT ITEMS. THEY, THEY ARE NOT INHERENTLY ZONING SAID IN THE BEGINNING.
SO YOU, YOU ARE MORE CLEAR ON MY POINT IS IN THE TEXT AND NOT NECESSARILY ON ON YOUR RESPONSE, BUT THE TEXT I'M LOOKING AT TALKS ABOUT FIVE UNITS PER GROSS ACRE.
IT TALKS ABOUT, UH, MAX BUILDING HEIGHT OF UP TO 50 FEET.
UH, WE HAD HEARD A CONVERSATION OF THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN 186 ACRES VERSUS 179 AND HOW IT'S CALCULATED, ET CETERA.
ALL OF THOSE SPECIFICS, WHICH THE APPLICANT SEEMS TO THINK IT COULD ALL BE DISCUSSED LATER ARE IN THE TEXT.
SO BY MAKING THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS BELIEVE THAT, JUST TO PROVE IT AS IS, THEN WE'RE, WE'RE BASICALLY SETTING A STANDARD.
I UNDERSTAND SPOT ZONING, BUT I'M NOT COMFORTABLE WITH THAT, ESPECIALLY WHEN IT HAS IMPACTS ON OTHER OPEN SPACE.
SO, HATE TO TAKE YOUR TIME, BUT I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE I WAS CLEAR.
[02:05:01]
OKAY.ANYTHING ELSE, PAUL? THAT COVERS IT PRETTY MUCH.
WELL I'M GONNA GIVE MY COMMENTS AND UM, I THINK I'VE MADE A LOT OF COMMENTS, BUT, UM, I THINK THE GENTLEMAN HAD SAID, WE GOTTA TRUST, I THINK WE HAVE TO TRUST OUR ATTORNEY.
HE'S BEEN WORKING ON THIS AMENDMENT.
I'M NOT PARTICULARLY FOND OF IT EITHER, AND I ONLY ALSO ONLY LIVE ABOUT A MILE AWAY FROM THIS.
UM, BUT I THINK WE GOTTA TRUST THAT GREG AND HIS TEAM, ALONG WITH JEFF HAVE WORKED ON THIS.
THEY FEEL THAT IT IS ONE OF THE BEST DEALS WE CAN GET.
MY CONCERN IS IF WE KEEP SAYING NO TO THIS, IT'S GONNA LEAD TO A SITUATION THAT WE ARE NOT GOING TO WIN.
AND UH, I THINK WE'VE GOT A BETTER CHANCE OF LOOKING AT THIS AND THEN TRYING TO MANAGE THE DEVELOPMENT AND, AND WORK ON THE ISSUES LIKE STATE ROAD AND SOME OF THE OTHER ISSUES.
UM, AND YOU KNOW, THE WHOLE SCHOOL THING BOTHERS ME.
I'M, I'M TOTALLY AGAINST THAT.
I, I DON'T THINK THE NUMBERS ARE RIGHT.
I DON'T BELIEVE THE NUMBERS, BUT THEY ARE WHAT THEY ARE.
UM, SO I, YOU KNOW, RIGHT AT THIS POINT I'M, I WOULD, UH, I WOULD TAKE A MOTION FROM WHOEVER WANTS TO MAKE IT TO, UH, TO, UH, YOU KNOW, I I, I'LL MAKE IT IF NO ONE ELSE WANTS TO, BUT, UH, I'LL TAKE A MOTION TO, UH, TO LOOK AT WHAT WE'RE HERE FOR TONIGHT, WHICH AGAIN, WHAT WE'RE HERE FOR TONIGHT IS TO LOOK AT OSR TWO.
WE'RE NOT HERE TO, UH, I THOUGHT I MADE THAT CLEAR.
WE'RE NOT HERE TO DISCUSS DENSITY, YOU KNOW, THAT THOSE THINGS ARE JUST NOT SOMETHING THAT WE'RE GOING TO, I THINK GREG HAS NEGOTIATED THAT TO THE BEST OF HIS ABILITY.
I THINK JEFF HAS NEGOTIATED THAT TO THE BEST OF HIS ABILITY AND I FEEL CONFIDENT THEY BOTH HAVE THE BEST INTEREST OF ALL OF US INVOLVED.
UM, AND UM, SO I'LL TAKE THAT MOTION IF ANYBODY WOULD LIKE TO MAKE IT.
NOBODY WANTS TO BE THE GUY ON RECORD.
HUH? THE CHAIR CAN MAKE THE MOTION.
I CAN MAKE IT, I CAN STEP OUT OF THE CHAIR, BUT CHAIR RIGHT JEFF AND MAKE THE MOTION THE, THE CHAIR CAN MAKE THE MOTION.
BOB, YOU WANNA MAKE IT? I'LL, I'LL, UH, I DON'T LIKE DOING THIS, BE HONEST WITH YOU.
UM, I WAS KIND OF SICK IN THE STOMACH.
BUT THERE'S CERTAIN THINGS, IF WE DON'T DO IT, WE'RE GOING TO END UP IN COURT.
HE, HE A PIECE OF PAPER THAT SAYS HE'S AN ATTORNEY.
SORRY, HE ALREADY MADE A MOTION.
I MAKE MAKE I DON'T WANT THE PUBLIC TO, TO DERAIL THIS PROCESS HERE.
SO BOB, YOU WERE IN THE MIDDLE OF MAKING YOUR COMMENTS IN ADVANCE OF YOUR, OF YOUR MOTION.
YOU HAVE THE FLOOR, WHATEVER YOU WANT TO SAY.
BOTTOM LINE IS WHAT IF WE DON'T THAT THAT'S THE BOTTOM LINE.
SO, UM, I WOULD MAKE THE MOTION THAT WE PROCEED ON THE OS OR TO TWO, JUST TO CLARIFY THE MOTION.
AND THE SECOND IS JUST SO WE CAN PUT TO VOTE.
SO WE'VE GOT A MOTION TO APPROVE OSR TWO TO SEND IT TO THE SUPERVISORS FOR THE 29TH OR 30TH, WHENEVER THE, IT'S ON THEIR, WHEN IS THAT, JEFF? 29TH.
THEY'LL BE ON THEIR AGENDA ON THE 29TH.
UM, AND UH, SO I WILL PULL, UH, THE MEMBERS, UH, FOR THEIR VOTE, UM, BECAUSE AJ ASKED THAT ME TO DO THAT.
SO, UM, JERRY, I'LL START WITH YOU AGAIN.
SO WE HAVE A THREE TWO VOTE TO NOT SEND IT TO THE SUPERVISORS FOR APPROVAL ON A THREE TWO VOTE.
UM, AND CAN YOU, MR. CHAIR, I'M JUST GONNA CLARIFY FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE PUBLIC, THE VOTE IS TO NOT RECOMMEND APPROVAL BY SUPER SUPERVISORS.
[02:10:01]
THE, THE ORDINANCE HEARING STILL GOES FORWARD AND THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS STILL HAVE THE ABILITY TO CONSIDER THE AMENDMENT, CORRECT? YES.ALL RIGHT, SO THE NEXT NEXT THING ON THE AGENDA
[DISCUSSION: FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS]
IS, UH, FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS. JEFF, WE'RE STILL HOLDING A MEETING.WE'RE STILL, WE HAD A MEETING.
WE'RE STILL HOLDING A MEETING.
CAN YOU PLEASE EXIT QUIETLY? ALRIGHT, WE'RE GOING TO ASK AGAIN THAT IF YOU HAVE ANY CONVERSATIONS, PLEASE TAKE THEM OUT TO THE LOBBY.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS NOT ADJOURNED.
JUNE 5TH, PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING.
WE WILL BE HAVING A DISCUSSION WITH HIGH TOPIC AND QUEST ABOUT THE ZONING TAX AMENDMENT.
PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE KEEP IT DOWN.
JUNE 5TH, 2024, TWO WEEKS FROM TODAY, TWO-ISH WEEKS FROM TODAY.
UM, WE'LL BE HAVING A MEETING AND IT'LL BE HIGH TOP QUEST ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT.
YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH THE PROJECT? THEY HAVE PUT IN A FORMAL APPLICATION FOR A TEXT AMENDMENT AND A ZONING MAP AMENDMENT, UM, THAT'S GOING TO OFFICIALLY GO TO THE COUNTY TOMORROW.
UH, YOU KNOW, SO THAT'LL BE IN THEIR 30 DAY REVIEW WINDOW.
THE APPLICANT IS HOPING TO HAVE A HEARING IN JUNE.
UH, WE'LL SEE, YOU KNOW, WITH THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, BUT FIRST WE HAVE TO COME TO LIKE THIS PROCESS, COME HERE AND, AND TALK TO US ABOUT IT.
UM, SO THAT'LL BE PART OF THE DISCUSSION THAT NIGHT.
UM, WE'LL ALSO BE TALKING ABOUT THE LEWIS POINT WAIVER REQUEST.
THERE WAS A UTILITY COMPANY THAT OWNS AN EASEMENT ACROSS THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY THAT CHANGED THE PLAN SLIGHTLY AND THEY NEED A WAIVER.
WE REALIZE THAT THEY'VE GONE THROUGH FULL FINAL, BUT NOW THEY HAVE TO COME BACK TO THIS WAIVER REQUEST.
SO MINOR THING, BUT, WE'LL, I THINK ANTHONY ISSUED HIS REVIEW LETTER ON IT TODAY AND, UH, WE'LL GET SOME MORE REVIEWS OUT THERE AND, AND HAVE THAT IN FRONT OF YOU.
HIGH TOP QUEST IS ONLY TEXT AMENDMENT LEWIS POINT.
WHAT, WHAT IS HIGH TOP? QUEST IS THE QUEST BUILDING HERE IN 29.
AND LEWIS POINT IS, ARE THE TOWN HOMES AT THE YEAGER AND VAUGHN? NO, VAUGHN AND LEWIS ROAD.
SO THAT'S WHY I WAS GETTING CONFUSED.
AND YOU KNOW, I PROBABLY SHOULDN'T HAVE, IT PROBABLY SHOULD HAVE GONE AS LEWIS ROAD TOWN HOMES.
THAT WOULD'VE MADE MORE SENSE.
BUT NOW THEY'RE TRANSITIONING TO THE DEVELOPMENT NAME, SO.
AND WHO'S THE, WHO'S THE OWNER OF THAT? UM, RIGHT NOW IT IS, IT'S STILL THE GENTLEMAN, I'M DRAWING A BLANK ON HIS NAME, BUT IT'S THE DEV SAME DEVELOPER THAT WAS WITH IT.
HE HAS EXPRESSED WHO HE MIGHT BE SELLING IT TO, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT'S THAT LIST FINAL.
SO I MEAN, HE WILL NOT BE BUILDING IT.
UM, JUNE 14TH, YOU'VE ALL RECEIVED THE WORD FOR BAPTIST PROPOSAL FOR SOME APARTMENTS BEHIND THEIR EXISTING BUILDING.
UM, IT'S REALLY JUST A PROPOSAL.
THEY'RE KIND OF COMING IN TO SEE WHERE THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S TEMPERATURE IS.
THEY HAVEN'T WRITTEN THE ZONING.
THEY HAVE SOME ZONING NOTES ON, ON WHAT MAY NEED TO CHANGE.
UM, SO THAT'S JUST FOR AN INTRODUCTION AND WE'LL, WE'LL HAVE A DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT.
THAT'S AFFORDABLE HOUSING? THAT'S AFFORDABLE HOUSING? YES.
WHERE'S THAT AT? BEHIND THE R FOR BAPTIST CHURCH.
AND THEN THERE'S A DETENTION BASIN TOO, IS GOING SOMEWHAT APPROACH.
AND THAT SALE HASN'T GONE THROUGH YET THOUGH, RIGHT? NO, NO.
THIS IS JUST A PRELIMINARY DISCUSSION.
THEY'RE NOT EVEN A FULL APPLICATION AT THIS POINT.
THEY'RE, THEY'RE OPERATING UNDER A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT TO JUST COME IN AND SPEAK WITH US, TO INTRODUCE THEMSELVES TO EXPLAIN WHAT THE CONCEPT IS.
THEY HAVEN'T WRITTEN THE ZONING.
THE APPLICATION IS NOT A NO APPLICATION AT THIS POINT.
SO, YOU KNOW, WE WILL SEE WHERE THEY ARE AND SEE WHAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION THINKS AND MAYBE WHAT THE BOARD THINKS IF THEY WANNA MOVE TO THAT LEVEL.
AND THEN MAYBE THEY COME BACK WITH THE ZONING TAX AMENDMENT.
'CAUSE THAT'S WHAT'S GONNA REQUIRE FOR, FOR THEM TO DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
IS, IS A TEXT AMENDMENT TO PROBABLY THE INSTITUTIONAL DISTRICT.
AGAIN, LOVELY INSTITUTIONAL MISDIRECT.
UM, JUNE 19TH IS A FEDERAL HOLIDAY AND ALL MOST SCHOOLS ARE CLOSED.
IS THE TOWNSHIP OPEN THAT DAY? I TEND TO THINK SO, BUT NOW THAT YOU POINT THAT OUT, I HAVE TO CHECK THE CALENDAR.
I DON'T THINK THAT THAT'S A HOLIDAY THAT'S ON OUR CALENDAR.
UM, AND THEN FOR THE, FOR THE COMMISSION, I, I WILL BE ATTENDING JUNE 5TH.
THAT'S SPRING FOR GRADUATION DATE.
UM, ALSO ON THAT JUNE 19TH AGENDA, IT, ON THE ASSUMPTION WE HAVE IT NOW, UM, I HAVE TO LOOK INTO THAT, BUT THE SOUTH COLLEGEVILLE ROAD
[02:15:02]
IS, HAS COME BACK IN AS WHAT WE USED TO KNOW IS LOVER'S LANE.THEY'RE GOING UNDER THIS ADDRESS NOW.
IT'S 11 PROPER, 11 HOUSES SUBDIVISION, NOT WITHOUT CONTROVERSY, HAS GONE TO THE ZONING HEARING BOARD.
UM, SO THAT, THAT PLAN HAS BEEN BACK IN AND THEY'VE COME BACK AND REVISED IT AND WE'RE IN THE PROCESS OF REVIEWING IT.
I THINK THEY'LL BE ON THAT APPLICATION.
AND THEN TOM, YOU HAD MENTIONED, YOU KNOW, THE 4 25 SOUTH MENNONITE ROAD DEVELOPMENT THAT HAS JUST COME IN.
I THINK THAT WILL LIKELY BE READY.
IT JUST, IT DEPENDS ON WORKLOAD AND WHAT REVIEWS GET DONE BY WHEN.
AND HOW MANY HOUSES WAS THAT PROPOSED? NINE.
UM, AGAIN, WE DON'T HAVE TO DECIDE TONIGHT.
I'D LIKE TO DECIDE ON JUNE 5TH, BUT WE SHOULD DECIDE IF WE'RE GONNA HOLD THE JULY 3RD MEETING, BECAUSE THAT IS THE DAY BEFORE.
I, I WOULD SAY WE CANCELED THAT MEETING IF THAT'S A MOTION.
YEAH, THAT I'LL MAKE THAT MOTION THAT WE CANCELED THE JULY 3RD MEETING FOR THAT HOLIDAY WEEK.
DO I HAVE A SECOND? SECOND ASK
DO I NEED TO TAKE A VOTE OFFICIALLY? YES, BUT ALL IN FAVOR.
THEY ALL, AYE,
THAT MEANS THAT WE WILL HAVE THE, THE SECOND MEETING IN JULY AND I'LL GET A WORD ON THAT AGENDA.
WE ARE, AS I EXPLAINED TO YOU PREVIOUSLY, THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS MOVING FORWARD.
WE HAD A MEETING LAST NIGHT WITH THE BOARD.
THEY'RE IN GENERAL AGREEMENT WITH WHAT YOUR GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS WERE FROM OUR PREVIOUS MEETING, YOU KNOW, ABOUT A MONTH AGO.
SO I'M GONNA START WRITING THAT UP AND START GETTING THAT LANGUAGE SORT OF OUT THERE.
MY HOPE IS TO PRESENT YOU WITH ALMOST A FULL DOCUMENT BY THAT JULY MEETING.
AND I'M NOT SURE WHERE ANTHONY'S SITUATION STANDS WITH HIS, BUT AT LEAST FROM THE PLANNING SIDE OF IT TO GET THAT DOCUMENT, TO GET THAT MOVING.
BECAUSE I THINK THE HOPE IS THAT WE GET TO AN APPROVAL BY SEPTEMBER.
AND THAT DEPENDS ON THE CALENDAR AND HOW THAT WORKS OUT WITH NOTIFYING AND ALL THE OTHER STUFF.
BUT WE'RE SORT OF HOPING THAT THAT'S WHEN WE CAN APPROVE THAT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
AND THEN THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE, THE EAC MEETING ON THE 17TH, WE HAVE PLASTIC BAGGING, GRASS CLEANING ORDINANCE TO SHOW IS DILIGENTLY LOOKING AT THOSE.
AND BILL HAS CONTACTED, I DON'T REMEMBER HER NAME, BUT THE REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE LOCAL CLIMATE ACTION PLAN.
SO SHE'S GONNA JOIN US AND WE'RE GONNA DISCUSS WHAT THE STEPS ARE TO CREATE THAT PLAN FOR OUR TOWNSHIP.
AND, AND BECAUSE OF, IT'S A LOT BECAUSE OF PARKHOUSE.
WE'RE SORT OF A LITTLE TRUNCATED ON SOME OTHER THINGS AND I, AND AJ I UNDERSTAND YOUR, YOU KNOW, YOUR ISSUE WITH TIMING AND ALL THAT OTHER STUFF.
AND I OPERATE UNDER TWO CLOCKS AND TRY TO GET EVERYTHING IN THERE WITH AS MUCH ROOM AS I CAN.
BUT BECAUSE THERE IS TIMING, I MEAN THERE IS LEGAL RIGHT.
RAMIFICATIONS, YOU KNOW, IT WE'LL WORK THROUGH THAT PROCESS AND THE NEXT COUPLE MEETINGS MIGHT BE A LITTLE HEAVY, BUT I'D RATHER HAVE A COUPLE MEETINGS THAT ARE HEAVY THAN, YOU KNOW, HAVE TO HAVE YOU HERE ON THE THIRD AND HAVE TO HAVE YOU HERE IN AUGUST.
AND I, I AGREE, JJ I MEAN IT'S TOO BAD, BUT THAT'S JUST THE WAY THESE KIND OF THINGS HAPPEN.
THEY JUST LIKE ANYTHING, YOU KNOW, EVERYBODY WAITS TILL THE LAST 2, 3, 4 WEEKS, WHATEVER IT IS.
AND THEN EVERY STATION'S, IT'S TOO BAD TO THINK TWO YEARS WE COULDN'T COME UP WITH SOMETHING.
BUT I THOUGHT THEY WAIVED THE, YOU KNOW, THE MINIMAL TIME PERIOD IN JAN.
WELL THEY DID UP UNTIL JANUARY.
IN JANUARY I RECEIVED A LETTER FROM MR. MULLIN SAYING THAT IT WAS WAIVED.
AND THEN WHEN THAT 60 DAYS GOT CLOSE, BECAUSE THE TOWNSHIP WAS STILL APPOINTING ATTORNEYS AND WORKING OUT WHAT THAT PROCESS WAS, I THINK THEY GAVE US ANOTHER, WE, WE NEGOTIATED AN EXTENSION TOOL TO ALLOW TO SEE IF THERE WERE ANY OTHER OPTIONS OTHER THAN THE 1203 PLAN.
SO BY THE TIME THAT WAS DEVELOPED AND SUBMITTED OFFICIALLY THAT THERE WAS AN EXTENSION TILL MAY, MAY 31ST.
AND JUST TO CLARIFY, MY COMMENTS ARE MEANT DIRECTLY TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TO ENSURE THAT THEY TAKE THEIR PRIORITIES ON WHAT THEIR DIRECTION IS TO THE PLANNING STAFF AND AS WELL AS THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
IT WASN'T DIRECTED TO ANYONE INDIVIDUAL.
UM, WELL TYPICALLY WE DO ONLY HAVE ONE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING IN AUGUST DUE TO VACATIONS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
NOT SAYING WE HAVE TO MAKE THAT DECISION TODAY.
AND I'M HOPING TO SORT OF PUSH EVERYTHING THROUGH THE NEXT THREE MEETINGS IN JUNE, ONE IN JULY SO THAT WE CAN DO THAT AGAIN.
BUT WE'LL HAVE TO TACKLE THAT WHEN WE GET CLOSER.
OKAY, I'LL TAKE A MOTION TO ADJOURN.
UH, ANYTHING ELSE BEFORE YOU SAY ANYTHING ELSE? ANY OTHER COMMENTS, QUESTIONS? I, I JUST HAD A QUESTION, TOM, WHEN, WHEN YOU TOOK THE VOTE AND THEN MR. COAC CLARIFIED WHAT YOU VOTED ON, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE 'CAUSE THEN EVERYBODY STARTED TALKING AND WE YEAH.
THAT, THAT, UH, THE PLANNING COMMISSION VOTED TO RECOMMEND DENIAL OF THE ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT.
IS THAT ESSENTIALLY YES, THAT'S A WAY OF SAYING IT, YES.
BASICALLY WE'RE TELLING THE, THE, WE ARE TELLING THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS THAT WE DON'T APPROVE THIS CHANGE
[02:20:01]
OF ZONING THREE TO TWO AND PAY STATUTORILY.THE PLANNING COMMISSION MAKES RECOMMENDATIONS, ONE ACCORDANCE AMENDMENTS.
SO THAT'S WHAT IT'S, IT'S A RECOMMENDATION NOW.
THEY COULD, THEY COULD DISREGARD IT, WHICH THEY'VE DONE BEFORE.
WE MADE A RECOMMENDATION A FEW MONTHS AGO ABOUT NOT BUILDING THAT NEW, UH, ADDING THAT ANOTHER APARTMENT BUILDING DOWN AT THE, AND THEY OVER THE HOTEL RIGHT.
THEY VOTED AGAINST THAT SO THEY COULD CHANGE.
THEY DON'T HAVE TO DO ANYTHING WE'RE SAYING HERE.
IT'S JUST A RECOMMENDATION IN THE CONVERSATION.
AND THANKS TO, YOU KNOW, EVERYBODY PAID.
AND I'LL TAKE, I'LL TAKE A MOTION TO, TO I'LL ALL SECOND, SECOND, NICOLE.
ADJOURN? NO, NO HESITATION ON THE, UH, SECONDING FOR THE ADJOURN.