Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Stacy. Oh, okay. We're almost there. Yeah, I see the Okay, live stream. I just have a little bit to do, but so I can shut the mic off so we're not getting bombarded with echoes. All right. Okay, there you go. Dr. Hoffman, you made it in time. So, sorry for the delay. I apologize as well. So, do you want me to share the agenda, Dave? Um, that'd be great, Jeff.

Okay, there we are. Stacy, are you able? Do you know everybody that's on the Yes, I've been tracking it through the little gallery. Thank you. All right, great.

Very patient. So, we never know how to start these first meetings of the year, but I'll still call it to order even though I I'm the previously seated chair. Uh we'll call the Franklin Township Planning Commission uh meeting to order, April 2nd, 2026 at 7:12. And then Stacy will uh indicate who's on the call with us. I guess we have um we'll start with any public comment for anything unrelated to tonight's agenda. Uh being none, let's go through our organization of the planning commission. Uh let's recognize our newly appointed members um which were appointed on January 5th by the board of supervisors and uh at the organization meeting the board unanimously voted to reappoint myself, John Gars and Paul Legosi uh to our new our terms will expire December 31st, 2029 at the January 21st, 2026 board of supervisors meeting. The board voted to appoint supervisor Consorto as well as planning commission board liaison member for the term expiring December 31st, 2029. For uh organization, uh I'll propose to take any nominations for chairperson.

I make a motion to nominate Dave Hoffman as chairperson. I'll second that. Okay. Any discussion on that nomination or any other nominations? Is there a mo motion to close nominations? We just vote. How about if we vote? Uh all in favor as uh for Dave Hoffman being chair for 2026 say I. I. I. Any opposed? All right. Thank you. Uh, nominations for vice chairperson.

I make a motion to nominate Mark Harris as vice chair. Do I have a second? Second. Stacy, you know who that was? That was probably Zack. James. Okay. No, it was Zach. No, it was Zach. All right. Any discussions on that nomination? Being none, uh, all in favor say I. I. I. Any opposed? Uh, being none, we'll move on to nominations for secretary. So, I nominate John Gar as secretary for 2026 term. And I second that.

Great. Any discussion or any further nominations? Uh being none, all in favor of John Godars for secretary say I. I. I. Any opposed? All right, we're just moving along now that we got started. Huh. Um approval of minutes. The last minutes we had were December 4th, 2025. Hopefully we all had a chance to go through them. give you a chance to make any comments or corrections, deletions. Oh, I'm assuming everyone can see my screen.

Yep. Anybody need any more time? Do I have a motion to approve the minutes from December 4th, 2025? I move to approve. Go ahead. Go ahead. Go ahead. I'll second it. All right. So, I move to approve the minutes from uh the December meeting. I'll second that.

Great. Any discussion? All in favor of December 4th uh minutes say I. I. Any opposed? Great. Uh, first order of business is um component 4A for the sewage planning module one spring house lane. Um, is Stan on? He is not. Okay.

He he he I I can't speak for Stan, but my strong impression was it this was this was kind of a no-brainer kind of a thing um to do it. It's a process that we need to go through. Of course, if the planning commission has any questions, that's important for us to hear, but um based on my memo and then um my discussions with Stan, uh he he's fine with us moving forward. This is for a garage conversion uh where the uh mother-in-law will will be uh will be living. So this does not alter any other requirements. They still have to come to the township for uh building permits, inspections, all of that. So this is just one part of the puzzle here.

The reason this was is required is because it's a separate uh additional dwelling unit even though it's in the same footprint of the old house. And then it requires a second septic on the

well I I can't say separate I can't say separate septic but this this is was clearly uh a requirement of the health department. So um they have to meet all of their uh rules and regulations as well as the building codes. I I don't understand why it's here. And it's it's not this particular one that I'm asking about. It's the future ones. I thought that we had said

that this is a building permit. As long as it as long as it doesn't as long as it fits our prescribed solution, then it wouldn't need to do this step. and and and Chuck, um it's here because the Chester County Health Department wants it here. So, uh th this this isn't and I know you know this, Chuck, but this isn't just something we felt we wanted to do just because.

Okay. So, um the the the residents I I don't know if they're on um the husband and wife, they're they're they've been extremely pleasant um easy to work with and um it it's again this is a health department thing. It's not a Franklin Township or a Jeffrey thing. Okay. No, that's fine. Then we'll cut the red tape for them. Right. I speak I'm just speaking for myself, but are the Strazinski's on this evening?

Okay. Um, that's fine. They they didn't have to be. I just wanted to give them a chance to talk if they were on.

I didn't have any issues with how it was prefilled out with the response to the questions. Um, I didn't have any further questions after reviewing what Stan completed for us to sign or approve. And if the the planning commission votes favor favorably tonight, I would just ask Mr. Hoffman if he could come in on Monday and sign the document. Please come tomorrow, but you're right. Monday. Yes, sir.

Uh, do I have a motion to approve it? Is anybody uh do you want me to read the motion and somebody can say so moved or Sure. Yeah, that'd be great. Um uh I make a motion to approve component 4A sewage planning module for uh Keith Strazinski project of one springhouse lane as reviewed and approved by Stan Corbett of ACOM. Second. Do I have a said motion? Do we need someone to say I make so motion? I think so. Good. Okay. I make so motion. Great. Second. And go ahead. Second.

Second. We'll get Mark in there for a second. Any discussion? All in favor say I. I. I. I. Any opposed? Motion carries. And Dave, what I'm going to do is I'm going to have Mr. Snider drive now for the Woods Edge. Great. So, um, you probably won't get as dizzy with him than as you do with me. What I would I'd ask I am thinking that we have public on that are interested in this part of the agenda.

I I would say so. I It looks like we have um the engineer for New London Township. It looks like we may or may not have the manager for New London Township resident, Charles Mark. Um, and it looks like we may have the one of the Vogue family members on here. Okay.

And it looks like we've got uh John Hour back too if I'm not mistaken. The the reason I ask is that it's been a few months and just because it is a public meeting to just give a brief background to Woods Edge and and then get into your presentation.

Dave, once we get started, can we jump right to that big item halfway down? Yeah. Well, I I wanted to get a background of Woods Edge and then ask the um the developer what their intentions are for what they want to achieve tonight. Okay. Uh because uh to be outright open, we typically don't do any uh approvals on 72 outstanding questions or issues. Right. You're on, Mr. Snider. Okay. So, can everyone see the screen? I have the site plan up on the screen. Is that showing through? Yes, sir. Yes. Thank you.

Okay. So, for for just a quick summary, this uh project is located at 204 Blair Road and it's a proposed 22 lot residential subdivision with proposed access coming off of Blair Road, which is actually in New London Township and terminates right around the township border. And then uh we also have London Grovetown to to the north. So this is right in the corner of of three municipalities here. The proposal is to have an internal sort of loop roadway system with an extended cold attack that serves a number of units coming off to the southwest of the project. And my thought was and and I don't know how you typically go through these, but I have sort of, you know, a handful of what I call the more um major issues that are still unresolved as as we would say in our review letter. Nate issued an updated review letter a week ago, March 26. And I thought I'd kind of start by touching on those issues and and walking through each one if that works for the group. Um Mike, if you don't mind just telling us what those what you consider to be the major issues.

One uh first is access and both emergency access and access from Blair Road coming in from New London Township both for emergency vehicles, uh school buses, uh you know, and really where this road's going to go and and how we have emergency access for the site as well. So, so access is kind of number one that I was going to go through. Number two is environmental impacts and impacts to the existing woodlands on site and what adjustments have been made from the developer through the comments to date. Another would be sidewalks and trails. Uh I know that was discussed at the last meeting and the plan's been updated for that. So we can go through what changes have been made for sidewalks and trails. Then I have lighting and then storm water management. Does that uh meet the rest of the planning commission's thoughts of what the major items are?

It does for me. Does for me. All right. Great. So, go ahead and get started.

We'll start with access, which uh you know, that's that's a large item for this development. As I'm sure has been discussed at the previous planning commission meeting, access is proposed off of Blair Road, which is a a fairly narrow roadway, a township roadway coming out of New London Township, which terminates really kind of right here at the township border. And then there's an extension of a a gravel drive and what would appear to be a paper street or reserved rightway for maybe a future township road that's actually in Franklin Township that heads north towards uh London Grove Township. So uh really the issue is Blair Road in in our opinion would would need to be improved in some way shape or form. It's it's narrow. Uh it's the only way in or out for these 22 homes and uh we're going to need some coordination with New London. I believe New London's been given these plans to to review and comment on and we're going to have to work with New London on what improvements are required for Blair Road to be able to get access to this site. As it stands, the the real concern is any any issue that happens on Blair uh west of this site would really sort of lock in these homes. So, if we have a um a crash or major utility work or a down pole, a down tree, anything along Blair, there is no other way in and out of this site for these 22 homes. You can't get there and you can't get out. There's no emergency access from this neighborhood out to another public road. So, I think that's that's a concern of ours. I know it's been a concern in the letter and I know it's been concerned at previous meetings. I don't believe there's been any real resolution to this issue to date and it it hasn't really been addressed as part of the resubmission and I think it's an item that that certainly needs to be discussed further and coordinated with both uh New London Township and London Grove Township if there's going to be

some uh thought of extending a road further north in some way, shape or form to try and get out access out to another public roadway or to the east, you know. So, uh, I mean, when I look at it, that that was my biggest biggest concern when I looked at this plan was the the sort of one way in and out of this development from a roadway that's undersized.

Uh, would I think we'd all be in agreement that that's if not the biggest issue to be resolved. Do you have any proposals? So, I don't know if if uh Mike Joyce, if we want to have Mike Joyce in on the conversation as well as the design engineer, if if any other alternate access locations or even emergency access locations have been reviewed or or um pursued and what the results of that have been to date.

Thanks, Mike. Yeah, Mike Choice here. I'm with Chester Valley Engineers. Uh and John Bakish, he's the property owner and applicant. He's he's on the call as well. So, John, feel free to to jump in. Um uh so yeah, as far as the emergency access uh you know and and the right ofway paper street issue with with Blair Road, uh I think that setting aside the specific uh requirement for the secondary access just if if we're talking in practical terms a second access uh at this site would really have to be facilitated through that paper street. Uh which on various plans, you know, historical plans, uh is is denoted as a township road three township road T-360. Uh and it may never have been uh a paved road as far as I can tell. We have a plan for Chester Water Authority that they sent us as part of our PA1 call

and it's that's a plan from 1950 I believe and it it it identifies a rightaway in the township designation township road T360 designation but it does it does note it as uh not navigable and a dirt road and I think even if you look u so again it may never be paved and that's probably why it doesn't show up on pendot mapping because uh it's not paved. It's not going to be part of any liquid fuels programs conceivably. So, uh can I add something, Mike? Sure.

Um I I do know that for dirt and gravel roads, um we do get liquid fuel money for. So, this is not one of those even. So, we had gone back and done research and we weren't able to find this extension or paper street, whatever you want to call it, going north on any of our liquid fuel maps or or paperwork. So, to the best of staff's knowledge, um, we have never received liquid fuel monies for that area. We've never snowplowed it. We've never pothole patched it. We we've never cut branches or trees off of it. So, go ahead, Mike.

Right. So, that that leaves it as it would appear to be a paper street. Um, so then if that were to be pursued, um, it would need the cooperation of London Grove Township. And and frankly, I'm not familiar with the process of, uh, either condemning the land or or eminent domain or what whatever the appropriate terminology would be to uh, essentially exercise the township's uh, right to Yeah, provide some sort of a path within that rightway definition of a paper street.

It shows up on Chesco Views.

Yeah, that that was going to be another point. Chesco views clearly shows a a gap between the the properties in London Grove and Porter Road off of uh uh then street. Yeah, West Aenddale Road continues from West Aenddale south to a point and Blair Road on Chesco Views continues north into London Grove Township to a point and then there's a gap but that that at least it looks like a rightway on Chesco Views continues the whole the whole route and and John you you walked that area and it and it it appears I at one point it was a dirt road and it was cleared. Uh yes, Mike, this is John Beckish. It's um it looks like um again, as Mike said, it probably was never paved, but it certainly looks like a rightaway going between the properties on both sides. And there's about a thousand foot gap between Blair Road and Porter Road um that that just remains as as an opening that looks like it could be used as an emergency access and was probably some sort of a path way back when.

Has has that been discussed at all with London Grove? No, we haven't received comments um from either township regarding the development plans went out to both, but we're we're waiting uh for comments back from both. Okay. So, I I think those comments are really going to be key to to further this discussion and and figure out what the best path forward is. I agree. You know, this the same with the issue with Blair Road. We haven't received any comments and once we receive the comments we can review it and come up with a proposal for improving Blair Road.

Now the the other thing just to be open here too um I realize the developer may have given the townships those plans and documents but we've been very diligent when we get that stuff in. We send it to London Grove and we send it to New London. So, everyone's had the same information within 2 3 days of us getting it. Okay. So, from from an access standpoint, which again I I think is a key issue here, um it sounds like we need some more information to be able to to advance the discussion. Would would everyone agree with that?

Yes. Do we have any other discussion comments on that access in the meantime or or are we moving on because we need more information to be able to to really consider this issue? I think we can move on. Um even though that may be an option, it's not a known option at this time. So we really I don't know what more we could be discussing. I mean I I would like to voice that it's extremely important. I feel it's this piece of property with only one means of access is a significant safety problem as the fire department said.

Yeah, the fire department had comments on that that they they'd really want to see some sort of additional access to get out um in the case of emergency. So, all right. Well, and I'm not trying to call out New London Township, but I I want to hear from my planning commission, but does anyone from New London Township have any questions or statements or anything this evening while we're all here? Okay. There doesn't seem to be any from them, so go ahead, Mr. Snider.

All right. Next, we're going to go to sort of the environmental impacts of the the current site layout. And um I believe as I'll just flip to an existing conditions plan here to go through. Uh, as I understand it and talking to Nate, this issue really resolves around the fact that um, a good portion of the development is in the northern section of the site, which is the heavily wooded portion of the site and the southern section of the site is not as wooded. And it sounds like there's discussion is why why can't this be rearranged such that um there is less disturbance to the woodland in the northern portion of the site? And Mike, I know you had a response in that comment and maybe you could sort of um walk through that response and your thinking for the planning commission and then I'm assuming the planning commission is going to have some additional questions and comments as to why we couldn't modify this this site layout to limit the impact to the wooded area in the northern section and and kind of push things a little bit further to the south.

Thanks, Mike. And and just on that point, I for the sake of tonight's discussion, I put together some graphics, if you will, uh showing some different layouts against an aerial background of the site just to help uh illustrate the impact on the woods uh versus different layouts. So, Mike, is that something I could email to you now and you could pull it up? What your thoughts are? If you get it to me, I'll try and get those up for sure. Okay. All right. emailed you the PDF. So, um,

are are these are these options that you're you're considering right now and you want to review as a potential revision or are these options that that show why you you need it to look like this, I guess, is my question.

Yeah, it's it's more the latter. I mean, and and there's there's some considerations with that, you know, why the layout we submitted is is the one to pursuing. Um so I would say uh just based on the one based on the topography of the site um you know the there's a drainage divide between north and south almost not quite in line with where the edge of the woods are but uh sort of in that vicinity almost it almost splits the property in half. Not quite. Uh so that you know when we're posing this many uh lots and new roads um it's obviously introducing a lot of impervious cover that we need to address for our storm water management. And uh you know in a in a perfect world we would split that coverage up evenly along that wershed uh divide so that to the different ultimate drainage points off the property. We're not, you know, sending more runoff one way or the other. I mean, there is going to be some of that, but we're trying to limit that as much as we can. So, uh, really, if you know, by the code, we're entitled to, uh, to to develop as as these 22 lots, uh, just based on the the density requirements and open space requirements. So, we're trying to achieve that to keep the project uh uh viable. And uh that said, I don't know if you received those exhibits yet, but you know, if if you shift things, if you shift the layout as it is, just shift it to the south, there is a there is a significant uh reduction in the woodlands disturbance. But in doing so, essentially you're

cutting off uh the southeast corner of the site in terms of any opportunity to have storm water management. those those bottom lots call it 17 13 14 15 16 you know those all move to the that southeast corner of the site whereas today that area of the site has a storm water basin because there is a drainage discharge uh point in that vicinity. So we're trying not to drastically alter the drainage patterns off of the site. So you know that's that's one thing to consider and uh you know coupled with that shifting the layout to the south again introduces a lot of impervious to essentially half of the site uh instead of as I discussed earlier trying to keep things evenly split um at this particular site having runoff uh sort of carrying the burden of the of the additional runoff between those two halves of the site. So, uh, so we we did look at a couple other, uh, scenarios, um, you know, not not just as simple as shifting everything to the south, but sort of rotating and and mirroring the layout, uh, to see, uh, you know, if we can minimize the woodlands disturbance, but also try to uh, keep those areas open for for the storm water management uh, facilities and all right yeah thanks so this is the option one we'll call it this is what I just discussed where we essentially take the layout as it is and shift it to the south um so as you can see the yellow area on this plan represents the the woodlands that are currently disturbed that would not be disturbed with this layout and the magenta areas are vice versa those areas are currently not

proposed to be disturbed they would be disturbed. So that those areas it's roughly a 2 acre savings if you will in woodlands. Um however, as I not noted that southeast corner of the site is now occupied by the lots and there's really no area for the storm water facility. So you're essentially having to direct all this runoff to one large facility at the southwest corner of the site. Um so that's you know, really the concern there. Um because that that open area between call it the loop road. Uh really you can't put anything in terms of storm water management in there because everything is pitching towards the south. So in a scenario where it's backto back storms and the worst happens, the outlet structure for the facility is clogged and you've got overflow go hitting your emergency spillway, then you know with this layout, you're sort of left with having runoff through these properties. So you know that's something we want to avoid. Um

what about Mike with this sort of a scenario? if if you don't have area to the southeast for a larger stormwater basing doing um some more smaller stormwater facilities maybe on some of the lots. I know that's been a bit of a shift in design to have instead of larger stormwater basins to have a number of smaller ones sometimes on individual lots to try and limit how big those larger basins need to be.

Yeah. And we are pursuing that uh with the with the design as it is for in more addressing the two-year storms just to trying to they're they almost act as uh seepage beds like if like you would have in a simplified method application where homeowners with an existing house is putting on a small amount of impervious and they're uh allowed to just put in a uh sort of a a seepage bed or a stone stone trench. Um a little more robust than that because you know these are you know new lots and new houses. So uh we do have pipe based small pipe basins on each of these lots. But um yeah, the fact that we're utilizing on lot septic as well uh creates an issue with the amount of uh you know footprint available on a lot on a per lot basis that we can devote to to storm water. Um, so we've we've kind of maximized as is by just having smaller facilities to to handle the two-year runoff and then uh the flow essentially bypasses to the to the larger facilities and the and the less frequent storms.

Can I ask a quick question with respect to look at what we're looking at right now? This is Paul Gassi. Can you give us a rough indication of where the watershed divide is on this Yeah, actually you can see um well, okay, the divide it almost follows the the road like kind of here. Yeah, at least on the east on the eastern half of the site, it's kind of Yeah, roughly there. But then when you hit say the third lot in from the west, it heads north towards the porter property kind of through here, Mike. Like this. Yeah, roughly

the one of your one of your sheets shows it. Yeah, the the drainage uh believe the the post construction plan or the certainly in the on the drainage drainage area plans. Yeah, I'm trying to figure out where it is. Um so you're you're trying to avoid getting too low on the site. Is that correct? or two north or south one way or the other. I mean the site essentially pitches we have a ridge line almost right smack dab in the middle going looking east west. So we're trying not to when I say low I don't mean down the page I mean elevation wise.

Exactly. Yeah. We want to keep everything as close to that ridge line as we can. It's on page 71 of the meeting book that helps you. That's the 71 storm water management. And then Mike, do you have other scenarios in here? Maybe we just flip through the three and then the planning commission can continue to ask questions.

Sure. Yeah. The next next page is a it loads is a mirrored version of of the layout. This takes the layout and yeah, it's just a mirrored version. So, we're flipping flipping everything along uh the east west access axis. Um and just want to give you the rough numbers uh for the that would definitely

doing that would would definitely preclude any sort of emergency access road coming in from the east

potentially. Why do you say that? I just don't know where depends on whether it's at the top or the bottom, I guess. Yeah. Mr. Yes. Go ahead. Mr. Joyce, um, have have you approached any of the owners to the east or the south for a secondary access? We have not. Um, I believe at the last meeting, uh, things I'm sorry. Let me pull it up. or the neighbor to the east. Yeah. Stated that you wouldn't get it. Yeah.

To the northeast northeast side. And Mr. Riley. Riley here.

And let me just peek at this third This one is a sort of flipping the whole layout. Um the culde-sac obviously wouldn't be there, but that would be the the new access. And then we're just instead of having a culde-sac, it's just a loop road. I sketched in just as placeholders the the four lots on the southeast corner. Uh again, this is almost a wash in the woodland savings. I think it's around 20,000 square ft of a of a savings, if you will. Um but again, um really cutting off that southeast corner for uh a storm facility.

Just just looking at these, Mike, is is there I mean, it seems you're it seems like different flips and locations of the same sort of general road layout. Is there any other road layouts you looked at a different sort of circulation to try and save more of the wooded areas and use more of the south?

Uh not specifically in so far as just trying to maintain that 22 lot uh number. Um, and again, so there's a few things to consider. Obviously, the storm water, there's the woodlands disturbance allowance, and then there's the open space requirements. So uh just in juggling all those this this layout you know where we have sort of maximize the straight segments of roadway as opposed to having a lot of uh loops and curves and we're providing that but to the minimum extent that we can just to maximize the uh the lot density. Just going back to the first one which seemed to be the best with regard to limits to the woodland disturbance. I I would

I would say looking at it I I don't I don't know that stormwater management would be impossible for this this layout. I don't know. It may be something worth pursuing, I guess, is is my initial reaction looking at this plan. And I don't know if the planning commission members have any thoughts on this as well. if there's anything they see that they like or don't like or or want to see something else, try and attempt it here to try and limit that impact of the woodlands. Um, anybody? I Yeah. So, I um the magenta area on this particular one is supposed to be in the middle uh of the original. Yes. On the original.

I don't think it has much value in the middle. um e either for you um when they're trying to sell the homes or um as any sort of habitat cuz it's isolated in the middle of the roads. And we are maintaining more of uh the wooded area in this option than we are in the first option. So, I I kind of like this one, assuming that that middle is going to be left open. It's probably going to be for storm water for everything on the top. I think that's more natural in in a loop road than having a a wooded area inside of the loop, which I think would be a little bit I I don't know how sustainable it is. I don't know. Um I don't know how desirable it would be to be honest.

How how much wood is on the next property on to the north? So are we maintaining a fairly large with this scenario that's on the screen right now? Are we maintaining a fairly significant amount of wood contiguous woodlands? Let me just I'm just going to bring in larger aerial so we can look kind of So, um this is essentially the site through here. So, it doesn't continue, you know, it kind of connects in through this woodland area here um and a little bit like up here, but it does open up again once you get just north of that woodland area up to the top.

Thanks, But from a from a an environmental impact standpoint in kind of the woodlands, I I think I think showing these different scenarios, Mike, looks at, you know, attempts to to try and limit the impacts to those. And I don't know what the feeling from the planning commission fully is, but it sounds like there may be some interest in trying to see if if something like this could work. Would that be accurate uh from the planning commission? Any other comments other than Chuck?

It's a good comment. I'm not criticizing the comment, Chuck. I'm sure Mike just wants to hear more than from you or I. Well,

I mean, I'm not voting on this, but I would like just to elaborate on what Chuck is saying, and that's that um the whole point of preserving woodlands is to avoid fragmentation. And what Chuck is talking about is the woodlands that are going to be preserved in the center of that loop are essentially going to be fragmented and isolated by virtue of the lots. And this is a I think this is a really important point that in effect those are not preserved woodlands from the point of view of uh wildlife.

It's like an island of trees. I mean it it would present itself as a natural sort of visual barrier between the northern and southern tier of houses, but that's about it. Yeah. This is I think you're getting the sense, Mike, that the planning commission does kind of like this one that's on the screen more than the current.

This is James Gillson. Uh that open space there in the uh loop road. Is there any reason why that couldn't also be used to achieve your 22 houses to help minimize the downhill houses in this arrangement? I think you you'd be creating flag lots. I don't I don't know what particular Well, I think it's kind of coming off here perhaps or one side or the other at least a couple in that middle area.

Mhm. I I mean speaking from just for myself, I I would be much happier not having something there only because it as it's currently laid out, you actually at least have some sort of sense of space in between your neighbors. You had houses in the middle. It' basically just be two houses on either side of the street. And you'd almost have rear and and frontage, right? You'd almost be fronting on two roads, but the back of the house and or the back of the lot, the front of the lot. Yeah. Well, you could make the loop larger. Yeah. And have two properties back to back.

Yeah. That kind of um you know, j with my comment of instead of sticking with this exact road layout, trying some some other modified road layouts to see how we can fit the same 22 lots. I'm not recommending that as an attempt to reduce lots. I I don't I don't know. the 22 lots is is a high amount of lots for the size of a property. But if if the roads can be laid out a little bit differently, you might get those 22 lots in a way that that um pushes some of this open area more to the outside and not so much on the inside here. I mean, one thing also to consider and it just from my own just design what preference with Blair Road coming in where it is, at least it's a straight shot across from Blair Road to uh Jillian or Rachel, whichever that is, if you move the the road structure further north or south from where it is, then you're going to have to uh do like a a a chicane or whatever to go off up there into the community. All right. So, I I think on this Mike, I'm I'm hearing that the planning commission would like this pursued a bit further uh as far as an alternative layout for the site.

Okay, you're correct, Michael. All right, I'm going to move on to to sidewalk and trails. And um I did not review the previous plan, but it sound like the previous plan included sidewalk along the proposed township streets. And in lie of that per discussion, the last planning commission meeting um the sidewalk has been removed for the most part and then a trail system through sort of the open space and around areas has been proposed. Is that's accurate, Mike? Correct. Can you um enlarge that around lots 11, 12, and 13, Mike?

Yeah. So, well, let me just kind of walk through it. So, it looks like there's a bit of sidewalk here. And and Mike, we had a question in our letter about the sidewalk where there's sidewalk here and there's some sidewalk here. Was that maybe thinking of bus stops maybe or or or standing areas or something to get at least to the intersections or the end point to the roadway network? Is that why that sidewalk's proposed? Yeah. And to provide some connection uh for the trail uh to terminate. All right. And you know, pos possibly that sidewalk could continue along the north south portion of Blair Road just to create a loop,

right? Kind of come through here. So, um, and then for for the planning commission's benefit, the proposed trail now comes off of this piece of sidewalk here by where Blair comes into Julian and then kind of circles down around the southern portion of the site with a little walking loop here. Uh, continues around along the back here with these, I'm assuming, Mike, are just proposed potential connection locations if there's ever trails or walking areas on adjacent sites. Right. Right. See, that that's that's my question.

Mine, too. you you have those there and I know I think differently than some of our planning commission members which is fine but it you know ha have have you or the land owner gone to the voke fan family because once you put something on paper 10 15 20 years from now whether they own it or not it it it somewhat becomes gospel. So I get concerned with things like that and then you have that to the north too uh going into London Grove. So my my question is have you talked to the porters about that?

No. And I would my comment on those called stubs or connections would be uh sort of touching on the the requirement at least in the in the comment that these be considered these trails that we're showing are laid out in consideration of future you know county trail networks or what have you. and it's sort of taking a lead from the the previous uh plans for the property and and what was approved at least showing potential connections. I mean, and those those could just as easily be removed and shown as dash dash lines as potential connect future connections. Yeah, I I think I assume Mike you were kind of demonstrating with the plan that from a you know a grading and location standpoint there are areas where this trail could be extended onto the adjacent properties, right? Is that kind of the

Yeah. there. Yeah. Mhm. I will say that one uh one comment we had on this trail network was um you know this being the the sole sort of formal access to get onto the trail. Um it may make sense to try in this area to get a connection off of here as well because I don't know if everyone's going to walk, you know, in the road around to get to the starting point. I think people may be cutting through yards anyway, at least their own yards to get back to it. So maybe maybe a secondary um trail connection between some of the homes in this area or so would be beneficial to provide sort of um two different access points to sort of loop through and then come back into the neighborhood at a couple different points.

Sure. I would like to see it be a full loop, right? So one, two, three, four, and five. It should go behind. Maybe even come out around here and loop in. Yeah. Continue. Sure. Yeah, I think the alternative um plan that we were looking at would facilitate that by running it through the woodlands. Yeah.

Yeah. Kind of even behind here. You can loop around this whole thing as well. Yeah. I think either way with with either plan, I think you could get a a a road that does or a a walking path that does loop around the whole site and come in at two different points. I would encourage you going as close to your property line as you feel comfortable. That way if there are future connections, they're very small.

All right. So, that's sort of the sidewalk walking trail issue. I I don't know that that is uh um too far away from being in a good spot. It sounds like, you know, I'm talking with I think it needs some adjustment. Maybe a little bit more um full loop around the whole neighborhood. And it sounds like everyone's fairly on board with the the layout of a full looping walking trail around the site. Yes. Yes.

All right. Moving on to lighting. Lighting uh in our comments is is kind of left to the township of what the township wants to see from a lighting standpoint. No lighting, some lighting. Um I don't know if you really need street lights for the entire neighborhood. I don't know if you want some street lights at the intersection locations where there would be bus stops once we find out where those bus stops would be in coordination with the school district. uh if there's going to be a a a community type mailbox situation, if coordination with USPS is where that's going to be. So, I I don't know what the planning commission's thoughts are on lighting in general if we want to discuss that or no lighting. You know, I mean that there's there's plenty of neighborhoods in this area that don't have any lighting at all. Well, I mean, similar to what you're saying, Michael, it's a balance between safety and keeping the rural character.

Yeah. No one wants this lit up like a stadium and and a really bright urban type uh area because it really is rural. You want to you want to maintain that. But if you're going to have any any pedestrian gathering type locations, uh maybe even if it's pedestrian level lighting, you know, not not large street lights, there there could be more like a um post and lantern type lighting in those areas to try and provide some safety and lighting for that. So, there are a lot of different options for lighting for here. Any thoughts, planning commission?

Generally, we do very minimal lights in these kind of developments, if at all. Yeah, I agree. We Yeah, lighting is not something we have in this area. Less lighting is better. I don't know. Do we have any uh developments that had community mailbox locations? Is that something new or why do you bring it up, Michael?

You know, it it's something the post office has requested on certain developments. Uh I I don't know what they would rule on this if they're good with just individual mailboxes or coming through, but we have seen that on some developments. And and Mike, I don't know if there's been any discussion or any thought. Was the the intent just individual mailboxes for the development to to propose Uh that yeah that's that's an open-ended item. You know I think this layout assume would assume that. Yeah. And and right now we do not have any community located mailboxes and developments. It's basically at the end of everyone's driveway. Okay.

Unless it unless it's a private drive. Correct. Well, we we can see what shakes out from our our road network, our access and our school bus uh pickup locations if they can be determined and and maybe the planning commission decide if they want any lighting there. Um you know, school bus pickup drop off is usually done when it's light out anyway. It's not often done in the dark for that sort of a um scenario. So, you may be fine with no lighting at all in this plan. Um, Mike, is it safe to say that you're um, you know, just looking for guidance and we'll provide whatever is requested from a lighting standpoint? Exactly. Yeah.

All right. So, it doesn't sound like anyone wants a lot of lightings. That's what I'm hearing. Sound like much lighting at all. For me, it comes down to where the school bus stops are. And yeah, I that's a good point. Well, I think once we determine that, uh, maybe it can be revisited shortly and just determine if we want to put a light or two in

there. There is a letter from Avangrove in the package. They said they're going to once the roads are dedicated, um, they're going to do a loop through from Rachel and then have Jillian with a stop at the intersection of Rachel and Jillian. And so if there was going to be lighting, that corner there seems like it'd be a natural, you know, a focal point for that cuz that's going to be where I would imagine the folks from down Culcian would walk to. So

yeah, I do I do know that that's contingent upon the township taking dedication of these roadways and I don't if that's been fully decided yet if these going to remain private or if the township's going to take dedication. If the township doesn't take dedication, I don't believe the school bus would come into the development at all. I think Yeah, that's that's what it says in the the the book. They'll they'll stop at both entrances. So, children,

although it also kind of begs the question, then what, right? Like, how are they, you know, I I don't know. This is essentially transitioning to a a gravel driveway once you get to this point. So, if a school bus isn't going to enter and loop around, I don't know how it's going to get here and and then get back out Blair Road. So, again, it's it's contingent on this access issue getting settled. So, a lot of this comes from access and how how we're going to access the site and if there's going to be a continuation of a road um in some fashion to another public roadway. I can tell you in my development they actually back up and do

Wow. I haven't seen that. I know. I mentioned that because I was I did a triple take when I saw it, but it's what they do. Well, something tells me they won't tell us that they're okay with that and that they will back up. Not to say Exactly. Just Exactly. I I think that's driver I think that's driver choice. All right. So, the lighting issue sounds like minimal lighting uh if any and we'll determine that once we understand where the bus pickup locations will be. Is that accurate for everyone? Yes. Yes.

Next thing I had was stormwater management. Let me try and get to stormwater plan. We can work off this. So, um, two things I wanted to bring up here. One is some level spreaders have been added to the design coming out of the basins to to try and dissipate the flow as they come out. We've asked for a little bit more study on that to make sure you know between the level spreader and the receiving uh stream which is right down through here that this can be accommodated without eroding any of the areas through here causing any damage coming off of the lever level spreader especially for this basin here which is basin two both basins actually. So, I think Mike, you're going to look at that a little bit closer.

Yeah. And I think uh the comment also mentioned that essentially the basins are up the slope and we can look at pushing them uh closer to the the low end of the site. Yeah. And then yeah, couple that with uh looking at accommodating the the bigger storms with the level spreaders.

Can you tell us where the level spreader is? Sure. So in uh in the version you see here, it's uh it's a perforated uh plastic pipe uh in a stone bed and that stone uh it's backfilled to the surface of the ground. So it's not typical buried pipe where it's just you wouldn't you don't know it's there unless you see an inlet or a manhole nearby. Uh it's a stone trench all the way to the surface. Uh and the idea being that uh discharge from your facility enters at the bottom of that trench and basically the hydrostatic pressure from the volume of water in the basin sort of pushes down creates pressure into the pipe and eventually that that that flow bubbles up to the top of that stone. And uh with any outlet uh uh or rather discharge uh sort of feature the the intent is to uh dissipate the energy of that runoff uh to spread it out as much as you can and really to prevent the erosive conditions as Mike alluded to.

Yeah. So essentially the overflow. Yeah. So instead of a single pipe discharge here, if you think of all this water sort of shooting out of a, you know, I don't know the size if it's if it's a 12 inch pipe or so, you know, that that would have the concern of erosion right in that sort of, you know, shooting down there with a a concentrated channel and flow. So the level spreader just just like Mike said, it kind of comes up and and um more gently flows off of all parts of this wider area. So it just dissipates that force so you're not eroding directly downstream from that uh pipe discharge. Would the HOA be responsible for the maintenance of that structure? Yes.

Right. I mean these these are in the open space. I think the larger B HOA maintained. Correct.

And and maintenance is a good segue to the next basin. So, um, one comment we had is the the basin on the the northeast portion of the site here, um, access for maintenance is a little bit of a concern is, you know, how do you get, uh, this is going to be h have to be maintained. You're going to need, um, some construction equipment to get out to maintain it. And, um, even just landscaping and general maintenance and, um, we don't know where that's going to come through. So, I think an area should be established to get back to this basin to be able to maintain it. Mhm.

Yeah. And just on that point, I if it's I think just with the layout as it is, understanding that this may go through some changes. Uh on the culdeac, we currently have that uh easement for emergency vehicles. So conceivably that is one option. um something to come around or yeah, depending on the on if the layout changes and you know that that could change, but just some sort of easement area that's that's improved enough to be able to get maintenance vehicles back to the basin. How often are they maintained?

Should be annual checks if I remember the book correctly. Yeah, if you look Go ahead, Mike. Sorry. Yeah, I was going to say there is a prescribed frequency uh it's part of the operation and maintenance uh agreement and that's ultimately dictated by the D requirements. So I think yeah it's it's at least once a year and after certain storm events and all of the storm water management is going to be the responsibility of the HOA to fund, maintain, repair. Is that a true statement

for the for the facilities within the open space? And I I believe in this scenario there's some conveyance uh through some of the lots that would need to be uh within easements that would be also you know within the HOA's jurisdiction if you will. So, so for instance here we have um inlets collecting um runoff from the roadway and they come back to the basement. So, so this pipeline here would need an easement associated with it so that the HOA can maintain it enter these prop between these properties as needed. They can't put things on top of it, you know, like that sort of thing for the easement. So, this pipe is protected and can be maintained.

Yeah. Yeah, I guess what I'm getting at is at no point in time will it be the responsibility of the township to maintain, repair, or replace any of the storm water management uh infrastructure to stay in compliance with the applicable rules and regulations. Is that a true statement?

I would say that's a true statement. um fully if these roads are private. If these roads are public, often times sort of the inlets and the systems within the roadway would fall to the township as part of the roadway maintenance. But if the roads are private, then then everything would be the responsibility of the HOA and the and there are some Mike there are some um stormwater beds as you mentioned on the individual lots. Those would be the responsibility of the individual lot owners. But then everything else in the open space is HOA. So if these roads are private, the township has no maintenance responsibilities for any of the storm water collection, conveyance or treatment on this site. If the roads are public, then typically the the inlets and piping associated with the roadway collection system would fall under maintenance of the roadways as part of the the public road ownership of the township. So who makes that who makes that decision or who makes the request for whether these are private roads or public roads?

Our current recommendation is it's up to the township whether or not they want to accept these roads for dedication or if they want them to remain private roads. Really, that's typically how it goes from a discussion standpoint. With this neighborhood sort of being isolated from any other Franklin Township public roadways at this point, uh our recommendation was that they be private roads. Um just, you know, from from plowing and maintenance, even even getting here for township facility that they'd be going into a different township, you know, coming up Blair Road to be able to get here. So, um, without any any real Franklin Township roads or state roads accessing this site, um, our current recommendation is that the roadways remain private, but that is still a point that could be discussed both between the planning commission and the board.

Does anybody know if we have other count other developments that have private roads of this size? I I'm sorry. Yes, Sean Arbach. um that one up in the northern part, Twin Bridges, they're all private roads and those residents maintain the roads and also do all the snow plowing. So that's one I know of. There could be others,

Chuck, to give you to give you an example of of even a township own road would be Thompson Estates across from the park. So even though that they are township owned roads, the the bus company will not go in there. They stop on Parson's Road and make the kids come out uh to Parson's Road. Okay, John.

Do you think it's a positive thing? You think that uh Trend Bridges has been positive over the years? You I know you have a lot of experience with the township. um they they've been able to manage it. The reason that they're not um public roads is they the roadways are narrow and it just didn't meet the township standards to be a pro to be a public road. So the developer chose that just by the way he configured the roads that there there's no they're very narrow roads are only oneway roads and you can't park on them.

Yeah. I'll just add that these roads are being designed um to public road standards. So if the township were to to take dedication to these roadways, they they would meet township requirements.

Dave, do you feel like this is something we need to know for the approval of ultimate approval of this plan? I think we need to get a sense. I mean, I I appreciate the manager's uh viewpoint. Um but um hearing that the supervisor's opinion would probably guide us. I I I think the because our comments are to when the plan's approved, but the supervisors and the manager have to manage after the project's in there.

Yeah. I I my feeling is that I don't know if we've ever asked the question before, but it's part of the package. Right.

Right. Yes. All right. So, um, you know, the the rest of my or our stormwater comments are really design items to work out between the engineers. I don't think they're too exciting to go through unless anyone has any specific questions about stormwater management. So, um, that that sort of sums up what I had on my list for for the major points of discussion, but happy to go through any other elements of this if anyone else has any questions on it. We'll start with any questions from the planning commission first if there's any more.

This is James Gilson. I just got a question. Is there a known TMDL impact for the middle branch of the White Clay Creek or the West Branch of the White Clay Creek that has to be accounted for? That's a good question. Um, you know, one typically, you know, we'll investigate it investigate that as we get into the MPDS permit. uh phase. So offhand, I do not have an answer to that. Okay. We just know there's some ordinances that are going to be tied to it. Can you expand on that so that uh lay people like myself understand it? Uh uh TMDL, Jeff, help me out. Uh total

total mean discharge limit. There you go. Thank you. Uh it's part of uh the MS4 storm water management making sure uh sediment runoff and all that good stuff. Okay. Thank you.

I I would say I would think that based on the way this is being designed in accordance with with our storm water management ordinance and it's going to have to go through the review of DP and the conservation district that uh anything that would be pro be proposed here should not be a negative impact to to that stream. In fact, that's the what our the goal of the design should be so that we're not impacting um the West Branch tributary because it it does sort of pick up right down in through here. So, um we'll we'll know more once we get comments from uh the conservation district on the MPDS permit. Mike, where's that stand? I'm not aware. Uh well, yeah, since we're at going through preliminary, going through the two-step process with the township uh preliminary first and then final, we wanted to, you know, at least be able to see the finish line with the preliminary approval before we we start uh moving ahead with the MPDS permit application.

That makes sense. Especially if if anything could move around or change a little bit, you kind of want to get that set and and then submit to them. So, so more information on that to come once we once this eventually gets to the conservation district. Correct. Any other questions or comments? Uh, from Stormwater. No.

Sean, this John Arbach. I think um this area is not in the MS4 area, so I'm not sure how that's going to affect some of the storm water calculations, but it could. I guess the conservation district would pick that up. Uh the other issue related to private roads versus public roads, I think you ought to get a indication from the board where they might stand before you get too far down the road. On either way,

that's good advice. I do have a question on uh Michael, are you sharing uh the overall existing conditions and demolition p plan sheet and our planning commission package? It's uh big page number two uh 55 of the uh package. Yeah, if you can zoom in on that top left corner, it looks like per the line indicator, uh, this project's going to propose demoing Blair Road as it goes up towards the Porter property. Um, my understanding is that's kind of how they access their property today. Okay. So, what would be the game plan

to residents up there? So, we we updated this from the the original layout where essentially we had a stub road all the way to the property boundary. And so, what this plan actually shows, it's a little little difficult to make out, but there there's two uh hatches along the driveway. So the the crosshatch indicates where we're going to remove the the gravel driveway and and pave the new Blair Road. And then the the hatch to the north of that is the existing gravel driveway. So that would all remain. So essentially the gravel driveway would transition to the uh the new road at least on the current layout.

Just trying to get to the plan to show that. I think you have it on there. Yep. So this is that gravel drive, right, Mike? Correct. So this is the this is the gravel drive, I guess, to remain. And then here is where it would would transition into um the roadway, the the extension of Blair Road, I guess, for lack of a better term, at this point.

Right. Gotcha. Thank you. Any other questions? Uh, Mike Joyce, do you have your questions answered from us? Uh, yeah, I'll defer to to Mr. Backish if he has any additional questions, but um think this helpful.

Yeah, thank you. I I think we're good. I think uh uh we have some issues that we Mike and I will take a look at to see if if we can make some changes if possible um and also pursue the emergency access with the other townships to see if we can get that resolved for the next meeting. Great. Doc Dr. Hoffman, when when you feel it's appropriate, can you can you open it up to any resident questions, please?

Any questions from uh the rest of the uh township? None. We'll open it up for any uh comments or questions from uh the community. Mr. Mr. Vote, Mr. Mark, any anybody have any questions? Please bring them up.

Uh, yeah. This is Charles Mark. I had a question. So, we're implying that Bale Blair Road turned left and went up and it's not a former Porter Road that was closed like Jeff said back in the 1950s. The question I'm hearing is no. I I don't know that we know that's the case. Uh it seemed to me because the documentation that I saw actually had I mean even though this is being called Blair Road here, it looked like it was a different township road number than Blair Road. I don't know I don't know what the intent was previously as far as this going north. Um, is your thought that uh this through here would all have been Porter Road?

That was my understanding. I mean, I live here where my grandfather lived on the Mark family side to the west of this property. And if you continue up Blair Road to where it ends at the township line, you can see through the woods where it used to continue straight on to Gernzie Road. I mean, a long long time ago, but there's an old roaded there that follows that wood line. Yeah, correct. I don't know if it tied into that road at Gernzie just north of where you're cutting across like

But I feel like from what I learned from my grandfather and stuff, that road continued on straight. and Porter Road that was closed before my family bought here in the late 50s was what connected to Blair Road. That's interesting. So, yeah, thinking Blair would come across here and then tee off up with Porter coming through. That's what you're that's what you kind of remember what you've been told.

That's what I've always known it as. And I mean, I'm 40 years old this year and that's always been Mr. Porter's driveway and blocked off in my lifetime. And it's always been gravel from Blair Road clean past his house. There's a couple loads of stone dumped in there that they when they closed the road, they blocked it off, I believe. Yeah, I think I think we definitely need to do a little bit more research on on what this was. I haven't seen anything yet um to show a Blair Road extension through. That's interesting, though. I mean, it almost seems like it could, right? But I don't know that we've we've found that documentation yet. I think it was

I think it was a farm path across the property. Okay, that's possible, too. It's going it's going through properties. It's going through multiple properties. And I I think that originally that was one property and then when as it was divided it still goes through multiple properties.

That would make sense. I also had one other question. The swailes that were installed there on the lefthand side of the property, I know there was one also that dumps on Mr. Patones where you were pointing. Do you think that storm water management is going to control the water that those have dumped on us in the last 10 years since they were installed and we're not going to have to deal with the runoff from that? because we've got some serious ruts through the woods over there, probably 3 ft deep that have washed from big storms and stuff like that.

Yeah. One of one of our current storm water comments and and Mike's going to have to work through it, we talked about a little bit before, is where the storm water is now going to be collected and discharged. He's got to follow that a little bit, see where it goes and gets into um you know the waterway and and make sure that where that where those discharge locations are happening that um it stabilized and we don't get the rudding that you've been getting I guess with these swailes that were just sort of put in drain more in a direct discharge way it looks like based on these just to get it I guess collected in off the property. Um, so the design engineer is going to look at that a little bit closer and we'll review it to try and prevent uh what you're talking about from happening again.

All right. Thank you. Any other questions from the public? Um, Mark, I'm sorry. Um, Dave, I have a quick comment about the old road issue. So, I just happened to go and look at my historical maps of the township. And in the late 1800s, there was a road up there going across up up crossing here somewhere.

Yeah. Crossing at the very north edge of the township. Uh not exactly at the wood line. Uh but um there was a road going across from uh about where uh Blair Road comes in and zigzagging, but sort of as you're getting toward Gernzie, maybe going a little um more toward the north uh than going straight across. Yeah. But we're talking we're talking 1870s, the 1880s. That's interesting. This is um Rob Porter. Can you hear me? Yes. Yes.

Um yeah, that that road that you're talking about, it did drop down there and it met up with Chambers Road at one point in time years and years and years ago. It came off here some where it turned. Yeah. But something between these points, right? I guess something between these points it flowed through. Um, yeah, I believe it was down more towards the house, more towards Garny Road on Vokes property, right around that wood line, down around that swale. All right, that's interesting.

And also on the north side of the property you're talking about that that does run downhill into my property, so I'm concerned about the drainage. Also, there's a there's a small stream that runs down through there that runs down just on the north side of Chambers Road that crosses Gernzy and that would be the collected basin that's up in here. Um, that's proposed that discharges out through that way. Yes. Yeah. Same same thing as the previous comment. We're we're looking at that a little bit closer to make sure we don't cause any additional erosion as it gets to where it needs to go.

Okay. Yeah, I think you can see that stream on Tesco views if you zoom in just north of this property. Yeah, it's all wooded here. It's tough to see where where it flows through here. Yep. through the north. Yeah. Okay.

And then yes, for access, if you're going to disturb our current access coming in, we have always had access this way out coming out the gravel to what is Blair Road is being called Blair Road now. We've always had access back in through there and we do have to get farm equipment back in there. Okay. And um yeah, and Mark's also own a partial back in there, too. I know it joins their other parts, but they do have a partial back in there also. You know what this line is that shows up on the on the map? I don't know what it almost seems like it's an access road. I don't know if it's just I'm not sure.

Google Maps. autogenerating. It's a Google's maps mess that they actually tried to send the fire company up and it is a swale between a corn field. Right. So if that's given directions on on Google Maps, you don't want to follow. Correct. Mr. Porter, do you have difficulty with your farm equipment with the current access or is it adequate?

Um, no. What we have now seems to be adequate, but they are coming through where they propose to develop. So, I'm not sure how that's going to work out, of course. Yeah. So, this is your this is your current gravel coming down through here, right? You come all the way down. So, um the the the thought here is that um this would this would be maintained as it is today for you and then um transfer into a roadway to get down to Blair. It's wide enough. That's fine.

Would that affect the trees on the mark side of the property along that driveway? There's a tree line there on the left side because reporters I'm sorry. Was there another drawing too that had X's on the trees they were going? Yeah, I'm going to go back to that.

It's a lot of trees. So, it looks like there are, you know, one, two, three, four, five or so trees in this area between the existing um with the existing gravel driveway. That's I'm assuming once we get down, this is the gravel maintained. And then once we get down to what would be um the new roadway, I guess, kind of widened out since it widens out a bit. It looks like some tree loss along this property border. Um we could pull up the landscaping plan, Mike. Is there supplemental landscaping in this area for that removal? But they're going to change this anyways.

It may change. Yeah. Yeah. But it's it's a good it's a good uh point to note though that if you know for this property, we don't want to lose any buffering and any buffering here would have to be um replaced so they're not losing their trees along the the edge of the property here. I would appreciate buffering up against our side also. Yep. Up through here. Yes. Well, hopefully we won't need to add anything there. That's Yeah, that part of our comment. Hopefully these trays stay or these trees stay, right? We'll see. We'll see what can be worked out. Yeah.

I was also wondering, do they do any wildlife study? I mean out here on our farm and over towards Porters in one night we can count 75 to 100 deer in two or three groups. Do they take into effect how that's going to affect the deer and the population? I mean we have a huge deer population here.

You know, sorry. It really factors into the overall um limiting the impacts to existing woodlands comment, right? like that that that's all part of that is one of the reasons why we want to try and maintain these large woodland groupings and and why they're considered environmentally sensitive areas. Part of that is wildlife. So, as we've been discussing tonight, we're we're trying to get to a point where we we limit to the um to the best of the ability of the project to to not remove the larger woodland areas.

All right. Yeah, I was just wondering. I mean, I kind of take pride and I feed more deer than cows, so it's kind of nice to see them all around. You don't see big groups like that around here very often. Yeah. Okay. Um, if there's not anything more on um Wood's Edge, u, we'll move on to the next agenda item. Actually, if u if I could ask one question. This is Mike Corkran from New London Township. Sure.

I wanted to see if uh Beaver Hill changed their position on uh improvements to New London's portion of Blair Road or if their position is still that they will just make repairs as necessary.

Yeah, this is John Bankish. We're waiting for comments from uh uh both townships as to what they'd like. you you guys didn't want to go through a subdivision review with us, so we don't really have comments to offer you. You sent us a letter saying that you provide us three copies. That's all that Franklin Townships ordinance required, and that's all that you were willing to send us. So, you will not get comments from us because we're not given any escrow to do a review. I mean, you're, as I said, you're free to make comments, but uh I don't think we're required to submit for a full subdivision review to your township. Okay, that answers my question.

Okay. Um Okay, going once, going twice. I appreciate everybody's input, everybody's comments. Um hopefully we can make some headway before uh too long. Thank you, Michael. All right. Thank you all. It was nice meeting everybody and you'll have Nate back soon enough here um and and he'll continue on this one and and and get this moved along hopefully in a way that works for everybody. All right. Thank you. Michael, are you involved with the next agenda item at all?

Uh if I am, I'm going to be poorly prepared because I don't even know what it is. So, I think I was only that one. No, you then you're not and that's good for you and it's all right by us. All right. Well, have a good evening everyone. All right. All right. Thank you. Thank you. See you. Thank you. Um Stacy, when you're working with the notes, can you make sure that it's uh highlighted that uh when we present to the supervisors, we want to ask their viewpoint on road dedication. Yes, we'll do

that. It's kind of maybe boldfacing your notes for John. And then and then so going forward then the next agenda item is uh data center model ordinance and uh I don't know what how much you wanted us to discuss tonight Jeff because uh in communications between a few of us you said you know once we discuss a little bit tonight we want to get the direction of the board correct that they want us to pursue a data center ordinance.

Correct. I know on the manager consortium email exchange this has been a hot topic. So, um, between all the townships. So, I was able to get some ordinances as an example for you. I'm not saying they're the best in the world. Now, late yesterday, I had forwarded to you a sample ordinance from Chester County for you to look at and review. I know you're not going to make any decisions tonight. I just wanted to bring the topic up and um suggest whoever comes to the board meeting on the 15th ask the board this question. Um Guy Donatelli thought it was important for us to to at least talk about doesn't mean we have to implement but just to be prepared. I can tell you I went through about half of the material that you sent for this data center. Um I think it is something we have to discuss. My opinion I think probably I would be in favor of an ordinance. I don't know how likely it is that anybody would be interested. But what I did come away from the information that you sent to us is that not every data center is big, huge, and uh needs to be, you know, a million square feet.

Correct. I mean, yeah, the hyperscalers would never come here. We don't have the power or the water necessary for them to even begin to make something of that scale. So, but wasn't wasn't that what the uh ordinance was written for the hypers scale? Yeah, it seems like it. Yeah. Yeah. So, I mean, it's it can't hurt to have the ordinance, but the likelihood of it ever happening around here seems minuscule. I agree. I agree. Doesn't mean it has to be hypers scale. Anything that

functions as a data processing center would potentially fall under the requirements of this ordinance, right?

Well, I mean, I imagine it would depend on its scale, right? I mean, uh uh a co a colo um in a commercial zone would, you know, not look any different necessarily than regular like office building or something. But yeah, anything above that. But at that scale, I don't know that it would matter much. But yeah, again, it it seems like the the difference is we expose ourselves to uh you know, lawsuit essentially or risk if we don't have an ordinance in place. So better to have one and not need it than the alternative

with it does cost money. as simple as what we list to be included in light industrial as long as we provide and I it's without I I think we would even want have Guy or somebody review our ordinance maybe we already limit it to it's included in one of the descriptions of what light industrial or special use districts have and then just tighten up those sections a little bit. Looking through some of the examples, it seemed like some of the other townships and counties specifically added that definition to into like their special use zones or um commercial or light industrial to define what a data center was within their ordinances. Um and also define whether it's conditional use or special exemption requirements. I think that would be a good thing that we would at the very least want to try to put in there is to define what's the requirement to get the blessing if you will.

I think it also might be good to define uh or delineate maybe is a better word uh the difference between a facility that would qualify as light industrial versus commercial because they're not the same scale. And I don't know, you know, you'd have to spell it out in terms of square footage or power draw or something something objective, but there should be a a a differentiation between those two zoning. they hear enough from us that we think um we one want to ask the board's direction on this and that we feel it would be best to at least review our coordin current ordinances or add an ordinance for data centers.

Okay, just while I have I'm sorry, sir. Go ahead, Jeff. Just while I have you all in one group here, um, who who's volunteering to come to the board meeting?

Have we not represented ourselves recently or No, you you have. It's just that because it's a new year because it's a new year and and this is an important topic. So John Gars has always represented you you very well. I just don't know what his schedule is. So that's why I want to kind of to try and work that out this evening. If it's John, great. If it's Chuck, great. It doesn't matter. Mr. Gars, can you hear us? It would be April 15th. Hello, Mr. Gars.

At least this 15th I'm busy. Here he is. I think he's going to talk. Go ahead, John. You took yourself off of mute, John. Stra. Okay. Well, again, whether whether it's John or Chuck or Zach, you know, as long as someone can make a decision by Monday, Tuesday, next week, just talks talk or email amongst yourselves and just tell me so we know who's coming.

Can you um put us all on a group email, Jeff? That would be fantastic. I can. Great. Yeah. Well, I mean, we'll cover it somehow. Okay. No, just just one of you, please. U you're all great. Whoever it is, just somebody

I was interested in in the portion that talked about um especially with the large ones, the ability for different townships to work together and do we need to codify something in order to be able to do that? Because the reality is is if one of these goes into any of our neighboring townships, it will affect us for sure, especially the groundwater situation and the the power. Those two things are going to affect us even though it's not in our township. Can we codify that? Is that something I I guess that we have to ask Guy that or is Guy even our lawyer and we have a different lawyer?

Guy Guy will be at that April 15th meeting. Is he our lawyer or is he the supervisor's lawyer? Well, he's the town. He's both. Right. Right. So that that so I mean that's an that's kind of the more important question for these megas because well I don't know if it's more important but I I I agree with Zach that it's pretty it doesn't look like anybody's zoning in on Franklin Township to put a a mega

here's what's important to me Chuck and this goes for any planning commission member if you think have any questions that you want Guy Donatella to be prepared for for April 15th, send them to me. Okay? I will pass them along. Just don't wait and ask him the night of the meeting. Let let him be able to do some research and be prepared. Um, for what it's worth, I just looked at my calendar. Unless someone has a better desire to do it, I will represent the board on the 15th. As long as you're all okay with that. Yeah. Thank you, Zach. I I wasn't joking. I I do have a commitment that night. Can Can you hear me?

Now we can. Now we can. Okay. I was trying to get in. You know, one of the things about these data centers, does the ordinance that's in front of you, which I haven't looked at, include a battery energy storage facility? It does.

It does. because what I'm seeing about that is that there's more concern about those than they are the data centers. And so you almost have to roll that into the thinking process is that particularly for an area like us where where you know our groundwater is our resource for most of the homes having that in place as a potential spill point is is a big issue. So, I think that's kind of important for this area for what it's worth. Okay. Um, I've done some research on that and I'd be glad, you know, Zach and I could could talk on it. I was trying to talk and I don't know why this thing wasn't working, but I've looked into this a bit. So, for what it's worth. Okay.

John, were you talking to yourself? I sometimes got in the closet. I was thinking the same thing, John, especially when it comes to the emergency management of planned chemicals and materials that be on site and potential response plans and how that's handled.

Okay.

Yeah, this is John Arbach. I got a comment related to the data center. I think I think you to look into that to the point you could find out what kind of facilities may be employed. There could be something smaller that could come in your way. We had something many years ago, a new facility just like these data centers. It was related to electronic signs. They were becoming quite an issue and we eventually engaged that thing and developed an ordinance for it because the reality is that could come to the township. But this data center kind of falls under the same area just because you don't know much about it. you might want to find out what what could possibly come in here and whether it's small enough that you have to worry about.

Well, maybe we can find Well, I mean, I'm glancingly familiar with data centers only because I've done um some uh of the infrastructure work around them. So I I kind of have an idea. I'm not I'm not saying I've worked in an Amazon hypers scale or whatever, but I have a general idea about the uh the footprint of these places and uh yeah I I mean and I'm happy to talk about it with anybody and if John if you want to have a a side chat about it, I'm I'm happy to do that as well. And I'm as far as the meeting goes, I don't know if you want to represent us or or not. I'm happy to do it if you're if you're not able. No, you're I'm happy with you, Chuck. Good job.

Okay. So, I'll we'll chat and we'll get resolve it. All right. Sure. I I had a difficult time hearing, John, but you, Zach, and John are going to talk and before the 15th. Yeah. And decide. It was working fine. I'll go down and fix your printer and we'll talk about it.

Um, actually I I had a question for you. Look, looking at our agenda, there was supposed to be there was a line item there about uh a conversation about the the extension review expiration. Did we discuss that, Zach? That was a reminder for me. Sorry, I missed it. But that's just to let the planning commission know that we have a review clock currently until June 30th of this year. Okay. So, it's not we act we don't have it's the board that approves the extension request. We we just have the time.

No, understood. I just it was there as a line item. So, I wasn't sure if if it needed a discussion. No, just one I wanted to alert you guys so it's better than one person trying to remember it so we all know it now. Okay. Anything else on data centers? Public comment. Do I have a motion to adjurnn? So moved. Great. Thank you, Zach. Thank you, everybody. It's good meeting. Thank you. I'm gonna uh come with Mark from now on. Yeah.

Where'd Mark go? He he ran out on me. Oh, he's he's hiding off here. I'm over here. Okay. I'm present. Okay. Just checking. Yeah. No, I'm here. I didn't go to sleep. Okay.