Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

okay go ahead gary okay good afternoon all on this easter monday april the 6th meeting of the dolphin county planning commission we'll call the meeting officially to order and we'll have the roll call all right chris deeds here uh josh first no mary gayski here

John Kirshner? Here. Gary Lenker?

Here.

Brian Pomeroy?

Here.

Joe Robinson? Yeah. Lisa Schaefer?

Here.

And Bob Spandler? Here. Okay, so we do have a quorum.

and welcome to and welcome to Lisa I guess she is a newest member of the commission so thank you for joining Lisa you all received the minutes of the March 2nd 2026 meeting are there any questions comments additions or corrections that need to be made if hearing none do we have a motion to approve motion Chris Dietz second Mary Geiske okay thank you both And any questions on the motion? Hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Aye. Those opposed, motion carries. Moving into the Treasurer's Report.

Yes, as we have every month, this is funds that we... get the four applications and other activities and the checks are made to dauphin county uh planning commission however under our arrangement for the planning services we uh um we have the money go to tri-county regional planning commission which is actually runs the operations so in that case we have a need of formal action to uh approve the moving of the money and uh recognizing the uh the auditing that goes with it okay thank you jerry do we have uh a motion to prove the treasurer's report is presented that person or so moves bob spandler i'll second that okay from the beachy seconds thank you uh-huh

Any questions on the motion? Hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Moving into item four, reports. A, report of the officers. Do any officers have any report? I do not. Any other officers?

I do not.

Okay. Moving on to communications and staff reports, Jerrion.

We have none.

okay program progress report as attached in your agenda yeah i can take care of that gary okay thank you uh just update everyone all we've been spending our time on uh we are um we're finishing up around the planning activity for the nevi program so that's the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Charging. So we'll be submitting some priorities to PennDOT that will help us evaluate applications that will happen later this round. We're working with some of our regional partners on our Sober Ride Home project that the voucher, there's a ride share vouchers to help us reduce DUI crashes. Uh, the voucher kind of budget was expended completely in at the end of the year. So we're now moving into our, our kind of post activity reporting and analysis phase. Uh, we also, we submitted a grant agreement for another round of, uh, safe streets for all safety planning. We've got about a half million dollars in safety planning that'll go towards helping us do some conceptual improve or should say progress or progress some conceptual improvements in locations that are identified in our safety plan and get them better, kind of get them ready to be programmed on the TIP and kind of iron out some of the details in that. We are doing TIP development right now. We're getting our TIP submission package ready. We will be in public comment for the TIP most likely. I mean, this will go through our HATS meetings this month, but we'll be in public comment May 1st to June 1st, and then we're looking at formal adoption of the TIP in June. I did also want to mention that Tri-County staff met with PennDOT permitting staff. to talk about HOPs and kind of how all of the HOP process interacts and kind of plays along with our land development process and kind of where the pain points kind of are and how we can better integrate those two processes. I don't know that we had any grand conclusions, but I think it's going to be an ongoing dialogue I know just based on some of their comments, we're just helping them understand the process better from a pen from pen dot perspective because most of those people have only ever worked in the pen dot permitting office. So they've never really done land development.

Andrew, have you ever had a meeting like that before?

Is that we've had excuse me? I'd say we've had. Informal stuff here and there, but we never had kind of officially. we had eric kiner the the pen not permitting or the the district permitting manager but yeah i forget the guy's name from central office here he's kind of on the policy side and i think eric's number two person essentially was was here too so you know i think from uh you know the the the central office guys are are going to be setting kind of the broad policy, and then it's good to talk to the districts about how that policy actually gets implemented. So I, you know, I think it's going to be an ongoing thing. We've had some challenges here in Dauphin, but really up in Perry, there's been some, just some issues in kind of how things go through that process, what gets recorded and when. So, you know, like I said, I don't know that we have any grand conclusions or perfect fixes yet. but uh i think it's a process and we're at least kind of starting it you and the staff should be commended for taking that initiative because you know all dialogue is important yep so thanks gary um i will mention uh from a regional planning perspective uh we are working on our regional growth management plan uh we're doing a lot of excuse me a lot of outreach right now uh we had a public survey that that was uh that went around i guess the end of the year uh lindsay our regional planner has been doing a lot of stakeholder meetings and one-on-one uh meetings to kind of go through and get some input from kind of a broad policy perspective so that's good we're also hopefully now kind of on the home stretch of developing our model ordinance for data centers. So we're hoping that will be released with our newsletter that should be out, you know, end of this week, sometime next week. So in the very near future, we'll be releasing that data center ordinance.

Andrew, are you still taking input then on the regional growth management plan?

Yeah, I mean, I don't I think so. Yes. So I'm not actively doing it. So I don't know for sure. But Jerry gave me an enthusiastic yes. So yes, we are.

And that's all accessible from the from the website.

Well, no, I think, Gary, if you're interested, she's reaching out to people as groups. And if if If she cannot get it part of a group, then she's doing one-on-one. I know your name was on the list, so I'm not sure where you were. But she did contact you. You were on the list. Let's put it that way.

Well, I would think the Harrisburg Home Builders Association would be an important organization to reach out to. I'm happy to I mentioned that at their upcoming board meeting, but that should be a reach out from the staff to them also.

I'll have Lindsay get in touch with you, Gary, just to see how we want to do that. Great. Is that okay? All right.

That's fine. Thank you.

Yep. Um, the last two things I had to mention are from a county perspective, we are, you know, we have our rep program, we're getting started on our BMP inventories. So that's exciting for some, I hesitate to use that word sometimes, but I, you know, I think that's going to be a great project and, and, and, you know, really the kind of the next step in that rep program that we're really proud of. Uh, Jerry, do you have anything from, uh, plan specific or CAP?

Well, the CAP program, we're still doing that on a multi-county basis. I think we've finalized the last contract with HRG to be moving forward for next year. We're trying to finish up some of the bigger projects, so half the money has to be spent. That was part of the $1.4 or $1.5 million we got in the last round of projects, with the majority of the money going to a big project. And East Hanover, they got $600,000 of that $1.2 million. So that project's moving forward with continuous construction. The main thing that's happening with DEP and the permitting is delisting of streams. So a lot of what we're doing with the CAP and with REP and everything is to have the MS4 communities be a part of that whole process of trying to have a measurable effect on or how how much water quality is improving in the area not only here but in the state so so it's it's uh we're kind of ahead of the curve on a lot of these communities and i think that's that's something that's pretty pretty exciting that we were able to do that uh comp plan we'll get to it at the end the agenda item

Okay, I think that's it then for the staff report.

Okay, then we're moving into the LPA report, correct?

Yes.

Pretty much working with different municipalities. Like you'll see that there's a couple of communities that are looking at some of these data center type of questions also to some things with some possible developments in different places and just kind of assisting them on how to move through the process.

Any questions from any of the commission members on the LPA report? okay moving on then committees any anything on the committees right now i see that we do have a item struck out for the statewide housing plan at the end so and anything else in committees or anything or committees nothing of note okay then moving right into old business subdivision land development matters first one uh millersburg borough

yeah um the next uh this is an item that has been involved for the last few months and we've been kind of back and forth this uh plan is uh uh in millsburg borough who does not have its own subdivision land development uh ordinance and so the county has been involved with it because we have the approval function uh but we've been in coordination with the borough quite a bit uh tanner uh straub is here who's the lpa for millersburg and as a representative of the applicant um you identify absolutely hello my name is chase vader i'm with william site civil representing the applicant uh mid pen bank would you like me to go forth give some sort of presentation um i guess that's up to the chairman are we comfortable we heard about last month uh we can give a quick update of where we stand uh What would the chair like?

I think a quick overview is still worthy for the group to hear. Go ahead. Of course.

The plan in front of you proposes the construction. If you could go forward too, please. She 12 there. That's good. The plan in front of you proposes the construction of a 3,808 square foot facilities building. Now, this is the first phase, more so, of a two-phase project. This is just the construction of a drive-through banking facility that will ultimately be a facilities building. And the reason being this way is the building to the south of Cherry Street, which is their branch bank location is going to be demoed and a new branch bank building will be proposed. And we will actually be coming in within the next three to four weeks with that plan. So back to this one, we are consolidating three lots as well. So there's a lot consolidation and a land development component to this. We have three waivers being requested, the first one being a waiver to provide preliminary plans prior to the submission of a final. We've been considering this a preliminary slash final. The second one is to provide an approval letter from PADEP for the sewage facilities planning module. In lieu of providing that sewage facilities planning module, we have provided a letter from the Millersburg Area Authority stating that the existing water and sewer laterals provide sufficient capacity to serve this and the last one is though a waiver from the requirement to submit a final storm water management plan the lot existing is 100 impervious and we do have a letter from the borough staff stating that it is 100 impervious and as a part of these improvements we are providing more pervious grass areas. So we are decreasing impervious for the site. And additionally, in lieu of the stormwater management plan, we provided an analysis of downstream conveyance facilities showing that storm sewer downstream has enough capacity for these proposed improvements. And considering we are decreasing the amount of impervious, we're actually decreasing the amount of water getting to the existing system. So At this point, do you have any questions for me?

So this actually does not have anything to do with the existing Mid-Penn Bank building structure site, correct? This plan does not, it is not addressing that physical site, right? It's the adjoining site to that.

Correct. The existing building is just south of this, south of Cherry Street. This is its own project. Now, when we come in in three weeks for the remodeling, the demo, and reconstruction of the new Mid-Penn Bank building, we will consider this site just for a limits of disturbance number, but it is its own project.

appreciate you answering that and clarifying that for the for the benefit of the commission members because it it is really a unique uh project in that regard yes two different sites dealing at two different times and it's just from a construction standpoint this is going to be a temporary bank location

until the new facility is constructed so that's the only reason why we need them to go two separate times we need to get this approved constructed and then as soon as it's constructed we can demo the other building very good thank you yes sir staff you have comments then no i think if uh

Andrew, if you want to bring up the letter, I think that pretty much states what we're looking at as the applicant has indicated. Yes, that letter. This is, and if any more detailed questions are to Connor or Tanner is here to, sorry, is here to take them. but in essence the plan there's three waivers as indicated the preliminary plan requirement is uh you know pretty much pre-frontery and so the second one is the sewage information of the uh satisfied the requirement in terms of meeting what the authority feels is important that has been met and then the last part was is about the water uh situation as we all know millersburg has its water quality or water flooding issues And they had that reviewed by their engineer as well, the report that was prepared and had no issues with that. It was part of your packet. The only thing from a more of an administrative type of thing is that the plan needs to indicate if you decide to give these waivers to have the waivers added to the plan. So other than that, Tanner slash Connor, do you have anything else to add? Nothing at this time, no.

Any question by any of the commission members?

Yeah, but we would like to do a final type of thing. You could do it all in one motion to have the action for the granting of the three waivers and then having the granting of a conditional approval.

May we entertain such a motion? Commission members.

Yeah, Bob Spandler, I'll make that a motion.

Okay, thank you, Bob. Do we have a second of that? I see Joe beat me. Okay. Very good. Any questions on the motion whatsoever? Hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Aye. Those opposed? Motion carries. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Appreciate it. Okay.

moving right into new business subdivision land development matters you do have sorry gary i couldn't get my um i had my cell phone mute i'm going to abstain on that motion because i've had some knowledge and some talks on this project very good let the record reflect that mary abstained from that motion or for the midpen bank project thank you yep

Okay, moving on to the seven plans that we have action on. Any noteworthy ones here?

You know, the Hershey West End is always happening. So there's another portion of the Hershey West End that's going on. that's probably the major project that's going on although we don't have since it's been reviewed quite a bit uh it's been pretty consistent about the same level of comments and this encompasses what uh this is the again that whole uh

uh how many acre project i think this one's with the 90 50 uh residential units 52 multi-family and 90 times and it's a big you know it's a mixed-use development that fills in the whole area between um that's not middletown a blanket from that road Oh, I'm blanking on whatever road that is. And down to the road that kind of feeds into the hospital here. It's a very large site.

Yep. So staff is recommending the ratification of your comments on all seven plans.

Well, it's just kind of kind of a review. The Dauphin County Planning Commission has the role and responsibility, the ability to make comments to this. Of course, the municipalities are the approval body. So what we do is we get the plans in and staff reviews the plans and provides it because we have kind of a time window type of thing 30 days within the receive it because because of how it works and such then it's been the past practice i'm not sure exactly when it was decided many many many moons ago but the docket county staff uh is actually the county's comments You're ratifying the comments. And if there's any additional comments that you would like to make, we will put that in a letter and send it off. So that's why you get a copy of the plans like a couple of days beforehand to review it. And if any comments or concerns come up, we will voice that to the municipality. So in essence, what you're doing is ratifying our comments. And if you have any additional comments you'd like to provide, please voice them and then we'll, we'll transmit those.

Any additional comments by any of the commission members on any of the projects?

Gary, I just had a quick question. The poor Schreffler family, why did it have to file three plans just because it's all the same plan just because it's in three different townships?

It's three different townships and This was a decision by each of the individual municipalities that they wanted to review them all separately. Typically, we would just tell them, we would advise that pick where the main one is and go through there and then the other ones just waive the responsibility.

Put a note on the plan.

Put a note on the plan saying that they had a chance to review it and they had nothing to say. But each of the municipalities wanted to crack at it so i understand you still could have done one plan with three signature blocks one for each township but i didn't i wonder what the fees were for this that's just it was it was more than it should have been yeah that's crazy i mean unfortunately john we had no say in this that's not typically what we and that's not what we recommended but that's what each municipality wanted to do

All right. The Stilton Borough, the Stilton Terminal, what are they creating there out of that large tract?

This one is actually kind of a, that plan was the big warehouse plan that was approved and reviewed. They needed a little portion of a part of a road to the north in order to just have a little right of way because of a turning movement and signal improvements. so uh this really is just a um it doesn't affect what was planned and done before it's just a minor modification for a uh a roadway right-of-way take thanks for that update clarifying that what is the solution commission go ahead yeah it was that was actually this is the second time we reviewed for the same thing previous month was uh they didn't submit it to all the municipalities again similar type of thing as the scheffler family each municipality wanted to look at it regardless of it was only in the one community gotcha what what is the wish of the commission members on the uh subdivision land development matter seven plans motion to support staff comments

Motion by John. Who was the second? Was that Chris? Thank you. Any discussion on the motion? Hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Those opposed? Motion carries. Thank you. Now moving into the zoning amendments. Likens Township up first.

Okay. This is the Likens Township is doing a couple of things with this, but the main discussion point is a proposed zoning amendment regarding to regulate the storage of unlicensed or inoperable motor vehicles. They also have some minor changes in order to do about the language change for principal solar energy systems. We've looked at it, but we've seen that the um it's it makes sense particularly in a rural area like they are um in order to try and uh they're regulating actually setback requirements so even though it's very difficult to regulate where vehicles are because they can move and things like that this at least gives them a chance to kind of regulate uh the proximity to neighboring property owners so uh we find that as kind of a general not a big project but we were in support of them adopting it okay do we have a motion to approve and support staff recommendation

Mary Geiske moves.

Thank you, Mary.

Thank you, Mary. Thank you, Brian. All those in favor, say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed? Any opposed? Motion carries. Thank you. Middletown Borough, short-term licensing.

Yeah, the two of them are kind of related, so I'll go over each one of them. The first that's related to our short term licensing and or the short term rental type of thing. We've seen a number of these communities around here previously, probably two or three years ago, look into developing regulations for this, particularly since we have in the southern part near Derry, where there's a lot of rentals related to the entertainment of Hershey Park and Hershey and such. This is Middletown's version of it. We found that it's fairly straightforward. It's fairly along the lines of most of the ordinances that we've seen before. We make our typical caution that you're going to have to deal with enforcement and and measuring of it, but otherwise it's consistent with what we have seen beforehand. So on the first one, we're supporting the language of it. The second part is actually, the first one is actually how to do it in terms of the language. The second one is where they're going to be doing it. And now when we have a little bit more concerned of it, we're concerned with not so much that they're doing it in a certain location, we're just concerned that they have enough of an area that has been designated for allowing these. If you have allowed them to have in certain places, you gotta make sure that it makes sense. They kind of have it in a corner of their, their municipality they do it as an overlay district not that we think that it's wrong or but they did not give a clear reason what they picked the area so so in that case we're not necessarily giving a support we're just providing comments to make sure that that they know that they're not trying to be too restricted

So that's what you're cautioning, that the area that this would pertain to may not be the appropriate size to cover it.

Correct. They've picked the higher density portion of their municipality only. So if there's an interest in having a larger single family residential type of a person wanting to rent that out, would that to other areas and things. So they may have done their analysis. We don't know. We weren't given a copy of that. But we just want them to be cautioned that they feel confident that they're not, you know, their solicitor and everyone understands that hopefully it's not too restrictive.

Questions or comments by commission members on this?

Well, like you said, they may not have another alternative, though, because you said you don't know how well they've assessed it, but it may be their only option. Is that a possibility?

That could be it. And that could be also, too, that might be the only area that they're seeing that the community really wants it as well. It might be as a part of this, you know, that's where the demand is and they're just accommodating where the demand is.

We never get those comments from any public meetings, do we? That's not something that's required to be provided.

No. What happens with any rezoning requests or any zoning amendments, we're the third leg in any review. The first group is the local planning commission, so the municipality planning. Their planning board gives a review. The second is us. And the third one is the public. So and a lot of times we have a tight deadline in order to provide the comments once they give us the notice. So sometimes we're like the first ones to give the first crack at it. And sometimes that works to our advantage and that works to our disadvantage. If the information is available, we use it. But if it's not available from the other two, then we pretty much have to go with what we're given.

Very good. What's the wish of the members?

Let's support the recommendation coming from the staff.

Okay, Joe, thank you. We have a motion. Do we have a second?

First or second?

Thank you, John. Any discussion on the motion? There are none. Go ahead.

I have a question on that. Is that for both number two and three, or is it just number two?

Yeah. The maker says it's for both. Correct, Joe? That was my understanding. Yes, yes. Does the seconder agree with that?

Yeah, that's fine.

Thumbs up. All right. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Thank you. Moving on to Derry Township.

Yeah. The Derry Township has a number of... Where is that one? Oh, it's a little out of order. Yeah. Derry Township has a number of... Derry Township is one of our good friends who are constantly taking an inventory in stock of what their ordinance is. And so this is kind of another example of They're kind of trying to keep their ordinances up to date. This one is with physical occupation and speech therapy facilities, particularly in the East Chocolate Avenue overlay district. It's a mixed use issue or district. There's happening things that happened there and people come in and done stuff and now they're just sort of cleaning up the ordinance to match the real life situation. So we're in favor of them kind of doing that. It doesn't seem to be any issue for them and it's just a matter of codifying what's already on the ground that makes sense to do.

Okay. Any questions? Hearing none, what's your pleasure?

Move to approve staff recommendations.

second thank you thank you mary thank you chris any any uh discussion on the motion is presented hearing none all those in favor say aye aye any opposed motion carries laura paxton township i can take that one um they just have essentially a lot of cleanups and stuff that

It's relatively minor, adding some definitions. I'd say the most consequential thing is they are adding age-restricted development as a use. So they have some additional requirements that they're adding on. They do have to, and you'll see, while we are recommending adoption, they did, uh neglect to put that in their principal use table so i think they'll be following up after this so i've already talked township staff about it uh they'll be following up after this with i'm assuming another revision because this has already gone through their planning commission so um so yeah we're recommending adoption but they'll have to come back with something else so they will again they will be returning with that

That update you're indicating.

Yeah, then just basically which, which districts are allow our, our. Our permitted you start in change. Restricted development would be a permitted use.

Gotcha and that is your staff comments. Correct? So any, and what was the, do you have a motion to approve as being the. Recommended by staff.

So I just have a question, though, Gary. I was confused by that age restricted. And they're saying to require that a minimum of 80% of all single family detached twin and townhouse dwellings shall be occupied by at least one person 55 years of age. So I mean, there's fair housing. implications here yeah i i don't i don't get what they're trying to do if they're i mean if they obviously they don't want anybody in their schools they're trying to limit the school's um enrollment so i think this is consistent with the with the hud standards for age restricted housing is my understanding so you know that 80 percent is not written in stone So when you're age restricted housing, that means all housing in that development must be restricted to 55 plus. And the only reason why that 80% plays in is because they say only one resident within that, only one member of that family has to be of the age of 55 or greater. so then if something happens when the the qualifier is it's called the 55 person or greater that that qualifier if something happens to them then that household is no longer um qualified if you will so they give you a buffer a 20 buffer for those situations so you're not throwing people out because they lost their qualifier So to use that as a basis to, you know, define this, I think is totally wrong. Now, I'm not an attorney, but I know fair housing and I, you know, I don't know if they're treading on some thin ice there with that.

Would you think it's just that should come out altogether or change the percentage? What are you thinking?

Well, I just think that, I mean, Laura Paxton should take it to their legal and make sure that they're not treading on.

I know they have, Mary, because I had a couple of questions about some of the other specific things in other places in there. And I know in that ordinance, it was, in a different ordinance, they were defining it as 50%. They're now bumping it up to 80 to be consistent with that guidance. But I understand what you're saying.

So again, like a developer who wants to do a 55 plus community, they can't, they're not supposed to be playing with that 80% rule, if you will. So there should, you know, they should just be saying everybody who comes in here must have a household member of the age of 55 or greater to qualify. And then, you know, leave it with that. So I think adding it in that definition is just wrong, but, you know, again.

Would you like, we, you know, this letter has not gone out and I can easily add a statement to check with your solicitor about the, you know, the.

About putting that comment into the definition. I just think they're, you know, I think they're, To just say they're going to be a 55 plus community, or they want them to qualify under the 55 plus. Program and now had program. I can, you know, I can see if there's some language to play around with there, but I just think that that's, you know, they want to look at that a little bit harder.

Good point, and I think we should comment on that.

yeah i think that need should be included then andrew sure i'll certainly i'll add that to the to my comments will you reference fair housing or leave it to them to make that deduction i i certainly i certainly can um i mean i'll i'll probably write it in a way that's

encouraging them to check with their solicitor about that provision specifically and whether that complies with fair housing act and any other relevant federal guidelines right good good yeah the fair housing amendments act of 1988. oh my all right thank you when you have to get when do you have to get that out by andrew well what we do is uh we have five days afterwards

So what we would do is we would, if you make the motion to have it modified and you're comfortable with letting Andrew, write it and then send it with the signature. The other option would be to have it done and send it to everybody and then have a consensus to do it. I think we're probably pretty good in understanding what needs to be done, that we don't have to go that way. But that's the two options.

One is- Mary, what are you comfortable with, Mary?

What do you- Yeah, I mean, that's fine if Andrew, if he can do it. Yep, will do.

okay so then we will have a motion to uh uh support staff comments uh with the inclusion of mary's comments on on the on the fair housing 55 plus is that okay sound good it works so mary made the motion who's the seconder this is lisa second okay thank you lisa any other discussion Hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Thank you. Good comment, Mary. Okay. Now we're into sewer modules.

Yes. One of the things kind of just to let you know in terms of sewer modules is a reminder to the Planning Commission and also to the new member. we get the sewer modules in and we have a responsibility to review them however in terms of our overall statements of bearing and such uh we we're just a reviewing entity we don't approve or deny we just give any kind of comments based upon a form that's their component 4b which looks at the county planning review uh as with all the planning sometimes we have time frames so we have to Meet so in sewer modules are the same type of thing. We have a strict time frame to get it in. So what we've done is we made it. The staff is does the responsibility for making the county comments and if there's any comments above and beyond by the planning commission, we can provide those as after the fact. In this case, it's Hershey Creamery within Swatera Township. They're looking to do an expansion project. Actually, it's three different ones. Actually, well, it's two different phases over 15 years, and they're getting their plans approved now. They're looking to have a... a whole new different type of discharge from their facility. They're actually adding a number of EDUs to the place, 27 additional EDUs initially, and a total of 165 over the total three phases of their project. They have information that was reviewed by the authority of which they said that they're willing, they have the capacity or willing to work with them in order to meet the requirements. So we made the comments in terms of a land use type of thing that doesn't have any kind of additional bearing on additional of the plans that are already in place. And therefore we really had no significant comments. And in that case, we're just asking you to ratify that, We have no real above and beyond comments other than to make sure it meets all the federal and state guidelines.

Questions or comments from any of the commission members?

What does EDU stand for? EDU stands for Equivalent Dwelling Units. so uh in terms of capacity uh that's kind of the gold standard of how they do it so uh it's typically 350 gallons per day is what a edu is uh different places have different numbers but that's what dep utilizes and so uh that's how they judge how many what plant capacity is and how the permits based upon and things like that so so it's based upon what a normal dwelling unit would would come out during the day thank you hey i have a question uh or hershey creamery and you're saying sweatera township that's what they listed as being where the plant's gonna be where the plan's gonna be okay do you have a location or an address for that um it's going into the north union pump

north union street pump station that's where it's tying into yeah but that that's i mean i'm not that i'm aware of but i don't know if hershey has a thing in swatara township now hershey has a big plant in lower swatara township it says here the

The additional processed wastewater from the next expansion phase of the Hershey Creamery Facility would be pre-treated on-site and discharged for final treatment at the Derry Township Municipal Authority Southwest Wastewater Treatment Plant via the existing on-site collection system and a collection conveyance system operated by the Municipal Authority of Lower Sutera Township.

So it is lower.

Lower, that's... Yeah, you have it as number one, you have Swatara Township.

The agenda needs to be remodified to be lower. Okay. Good catch, Mr. Svatera Township.

I tried to keep up with things, but I didn't think there was a Hershey Creamery and whatever. I mean, we had everything else.

You are a commissioner there, I understand. So you know your backyard pretty good. Thank you for that.

But he said he'll take the revenue if they want to move there.

That's right. Yeah, we'll take it. Sure. He just wants the ice cream.

Okay. Do we have a motion to approve ratifying staff comments for that?

I'll make that a motion.

Okay. Do we have a second?

I'll second.

Okay. Any discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Now we're into intergovernmental reviews. Sotara Township, Wedgwood Hills Park Phase 1A and 1B.

Susquehanna Township.

Susquehanna Township. What did I say?

Oh, okay.

I'm still on that Swatara kick. Sorry.

Everything's in Swatara this month.

Susquehanna.

Yeah, there's two applications being filed for Wedgwood Hills Park within the township. One of them is for develop a portion of Wedgwood Hills Park, a new neighborhood park located at 20 Diamond Street, the site of the former swim club. It's part of the overall development, which is through the parking, walking paths, and the future plan playground area for the children the uh they're seeking 400 000 from from dc dcnr pennsylvania department of conservation natural resources with the 400 000 match for that and then the second one is they're going for a a second portion from uh from uh from community and economic development for $250,000 to do the trails that are associated with that improvement. So there are two of them that they're asking for. We find them consistent with the comprehensive plan for improving public facilities.

Okay, do we have a motion to support staff comments for the intergovernmental reviews for Susquehanna Township?

But question, is this the same place as we're talking about at Wedgewood Hills Apartments? Is that off of Progress Avenue there?

Yes, it is. That is correct.

The old swimming pool park that was back there? That is correct. And so they're seeking money from the county to revitalize all of that or whatever. From the state, I understand. Yeah, the state. And who is this that's doing this? I'm sorry, the... since my township is applying for money from the from the state to revitalize that okay okay correct gentlemen staff correct yep okay thank you did we have a motion then first remove okay thank you and a second bob standler i'll second it yeah okay any discussion

Hearing none, all those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed? Motion carries. And then the last Intergovernmental Review, Harrisburg City, Capital Region Water, Paxton Creek Interceptor.

First of all, can we go back? Who made the motions? We were talking about something here.

Personer made the motion. Personer, yes. John made the motion.

and bob seconded thanks sorry okay um the next one here and then uh actually mr chairman we're gonna have a another edition of one that came in late here but uh So we have to do a little procedure type of thing.

But this is a little bit different.

This is Capital Region Water for the Paterson Creek Interceptor Project. This is a little bit different in that they're actually asking for support. In the previous one, it was just concurrence. So we've done this one before, but they're requesting $2.2 million from the congressional appropriation request, both to Senator McCormick and Senator Fetterman. So this is a case where they've actually asked for support rather than just concurrence. So this is kind of a planning commission decision whether they want to support or just have a concurrence. And we've done these in the past, giving support.

Is this a federal earmark request? Is that what you're saying? Correct. Is Capital Region Water ever requested or did you can recall our support for federal earmark request?

They've done it every year.

Oh, OK. I'm not aware of that. Typically, these are transportation related. And then there is also an affordable housing component. But I didn't I wasn't aware of that. Have they been successful? Do you know?

I don't think they have.

What's the goal, the stated goal of the construction project?

Well, this is the Paxson Creek, the watershed, the waterway. They have an interceptor that runs adjacent to Paxson Creek. There is, you know, that whole area gets flooded. There's kind of a green space sort of, I don't know, what do you want to call it?

It's kind of a... A re-naturalization of the Paxson Creek channel kind of from the farm show down through, you know, the whole way down through the city.

Correct.

And then hopefully, you know, I think there's some planning to be involved in this, but to be then paired with some publicly accessible, like a bike pen trail, that kind of stuff that would go along with it. But I know they, That's kind of an opportunity that we're looking at. This, I think, is the sewer project itself.

Yeah, they have a fairly large interceptor that's probably 75 years old, maybe even older, that absolutely needs to be replaced. So that's the concept is, while they're in there, that maybe there's the opportunity to do some stuff with the creek. and improve the development potential, recreation potential and everything else. But with Capital Region Water, they're certainly looking for funding to help support fixing their infrastructure problem.

I just was not aware that private entities like Capital Region Water applied for those funds. I just was not aware of that.

you're saying they've asked you're saying they've asked they've asked for lots of money over lots of times lots of things so they're kind of a consistent uh ones on our list for different things for not only this but state grants and things like that

Well, the chair has not been voting as typically the chair does not, but I would recuse myself from any vote on this anyhow, but that's entirely up to the. To the group, so what is your what is your wish folks?

So we're just we're just giving support right for them to.

Yes, they are applying for federal earmark dollars. Now, last year, I will tell you, in the fiscal year 2024 budget that Congress passed, all federal earmarks were eliminated. And again, the key to federal earmarks historically has been transportation improvements that get funded, and there is an affordable housing component. And I was not aware that... private water entities, private water and sewer entities had access to these funds, but you know, whatever your wishes, we will, we will move forward.

And that's, uh, Who's the sponsor of the municipality who's requesting this?

No, this is Capital Region Water. It's making money. Oh, not even just a private. Oh, OK.

Private. OK. That's my concern. And they're asking us to kind of co-sign their request there.

Can we just make a motion to accept it as information and not give a recommendation on it?

well we can there's two things we usually do we basically say that that's concurrent which is uh does their project meet with their goals and uh objectives of the dauphin county planning commission um you know the comprehensive plan and all of our planning documents this one they're specifically asking not just for is it current is it part of what we normally do and see as a plan they're asking actually for a support

saying that we would hope that they get funded what is your dollar request i think they're asking two million dollars yes two million dollars i should probably know this and i don't but is capital region water a non-profit or a for-profit business

Profit.

I think they're for profit. I don't.

Yeah. Pomeroy will make the motion just to concur with the recommendation. Not to support.

Okay, we have a motion for concurrence only not for support. Do you have a second to that motion?

First or second?

okay now now discussion do we do we uh understand the the recommendation and the matter at hand and any any other discussion any questions so so this means that their application they're sending forward does not necessarily go forward with us saying that the dolphin county planning commission has support is that what i'm understanding

well what does it mean if we support what does that mean when the application goes forward what does that mean whenever the application is being supported that means that you think it is a more than than worthy so to speak whenever you're doing it as a a project you find it it meets what our goals and for any kind of community improvement similar to like uh let's just step back the susquehanna project one in essence it said that the um we're going to try and build a park is that something that you find in your plans is something we want when we say yes of course it meets the goals and objectives of the comp plan and whatever all the different right documents right so it's like it's not saying that we think this is the the most important part but it's saying yes it's important to have that what in this case is in capital region water situation we believe in everybody who has failing interceptors should certainly be improving that's in our goal that's in our you know uh up-to-date infrastructure and everything else is uh is stated as being important What we don't, what they're asking above and beyond is to say, yes, we feel that this is a very important project. And not only do you see it as being notified, but you're also supported.

So just for the record, you have other organizations in our area who are also reaching out for support of this funding. And there are nonprofits that do that. So I'm only sharing with you for what it's worth.

Can I give you some background on a capital region water? Thanks to a good Dr. Google. It says it is a municipal authority established in 2013 to operate the water system for Harrisburg. While it's not a typical 501c3 nonprofit, it is a public rate payer funded organization that reinvests any revenue back into infrastructure rather than for profit.

So I don't know if that- So it's a municipal system.

Right. Yeah. So I guess they're still competing with a nonprofit, but they're not trying to be profitable for their own sake, like taxpayer profitable, I guess. I mean, you know, rate holders, whatever you call them.

That means it's not a private entity. It's a public entity.

That is correct.

i stand corrected so that's a little better than i guess right so yeah so brian's motion let's please uh staff repeat that one more time the motion that was made and seconded uh the motion was made to uh provide uh the application they find it concurrent uh with the uh with the comprehensive plan and uh in essence as a result not necessarily

listed as a support so we have that motion in second do we have any other discussion before we call for the question i have not always go ahead because because i live in the in harrisburg city does that mean i should abstain from this uh not necessarily no no okay no all right then my my comment is that i think it it's going to be like any other municipal water system that we're talking about and i think it doesn't cost the um planning commission anything to say yes to this um so that's that's my my argument that i think it we say it will benefit it's concurrent and um That's what my vote would want to be. So that's not on this motion, but looking past it.

I agree, Chris. It helps with the bottom line of getting these repairs done in a timely manner and not impacting their users as greatly.

And thanks to Mr. Robinson for looking them up on the Google device. We actually know that they're manipulable. organization so you know i kind of i'm at a point where i'd like to withdraw my motion or amend it amend it yes give them amend it in such a way that we can give the support that they're asking for for right the possible grant does the seconder agree with the amendment to the motion as stated yes that's fine for full support okay john okay so uh

Are we in agreement that we can vote on the amended motion as presented without getting all parliamentarian here? Yes. Can we just all vote on the amended motion as presented? So all those in favor of that amended motion as presented, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? The motion carries.

Anything else? Yes. Then now the amendment motion, do we agree? You amended the motion. You agreed to amend it. Now you have to vote on, do you say support?

Well, I actually, I w I was including that in what we just dealt with, but we can do that.

Right. And Gary, whenever it comes to the vote before you indicated about your, your question of abstaining, but go ahead. So, so now it,

the vote is to take a vote on whether or not it's supported do we have that mary do we have a second a second all those in favor aye aye aye any opposed do you still need to abstain yeah i will i will just for the record abstain yes thank you

okay moving on to additional items or you had one other item that came in late you said jerry yes well we uh first of all again for parliament parliamentary reasons because it's a uh we do have to take a vote to allow the agenda to be to be amended so the first thing is is uh we do have a an item we'd like to bring up and it is about another grant application for the greenbelt uh so therefore uh we need to take a motion if possible to to allow us to open up the agenda above beyond what's what is listed up on our paperwork and am i correct in seeing that our chairman is the chairman of this organization

No move to open it up for additional items.

Thank you, Mary. Do we have a second? Second. I think we should support it. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Okay. Now the action. Now the request.

Okay, yeah, so this is just for, I don't know if anybody's been following along, kind of the saga of the green belt south of the rock office center where PennDOT offices are. They're seeking funds to do some land acquisitions so that they have permanently owned ground. for the greenbelt through that section. That section was always kind of a handshake deal. And when those three tiny home communities went in, that handshake deal went out the window. So they've been trying to scramble basically for the past two to three years. This is them coming basically to the end of that process. yeah so this is to allow them to to acquire some of the land around around the pennsy supply parcel she's got a right off of sycamore street if we mad comment guy sure yeah if if we would support he said the acquisition of some of that area does it

conflict with the you talk about the tiny homes project i mean it's a it's a few that we're getting ready to take a side i don't know i'm just asking i'm trying to understand the question no it does not this is to this is to kind of solidify the the route that makes that eliminates the need for that feud oh okay okay thank you

okay so we have a motion properly seconded any other any other discussion hearing none all those in favor say aye aye aye any opposed any opposed hearing none motion carries additional items just to confirm gary that that was uh part of the mary gayski and don mr robinson to uh to uh submit this letter

as opening it up and submitting the letter correct okay all right that's that's all right we're good here additional items statewide housing action plan yeah um That is just as a FYI, a copy of that was sent in your packet. It just came out the other day. We have started to do our review of the housing plan and seeing where we stand on how it may benefit us. I don't know if anybody else is from who were involved in the housing and the thing has some comments or such, but in essence, it's we find it this kind of geared a lot to the local municipalities. It also hopefully will strengthen their ability to do some things in terms of encouraging them. There are some carrot provisions that appears to be in terms of you move forward some ordinances and requirements to help improve the housing stock. or now on the amount of it that the state will be more likely to help you get funding and you get up maybe a bump up in terms of that type of thing but also to the state is to put together their own model ordinances on improving and technical guidance to the municipalities Where we stand in terms of the county, I mean, again, we're never gonna say anything wrong about the housing, improving the housing as a major need in our area, but we're trying to figure out where we might sit in this whole, whole program with the state uh not to say that they're bypassing uh county involvement but it is kind of uh from my initial review of it is a lot of it is uh municipality focused which it should be because the controls are at the municipal level we're just trying to figure out how we may be able to help both the state and the county and putting things together so we're looking at that right now

So, I did not know that any technical guidance and I apologize. I did not look at what you sent out. I had gotten a copy when I made my comments. I believe it was last month when the governor. Unveiled his statewide housing action plan. So I don't know if this is the same thing that you shared with the.

No, I just shared the plan itself and last month I've been starting to take a look at it in terms of trying to figure out whether any guidance has been come out and actually to read it to make sense of it if it's something we can and can't do. So I have my own notes that I've started to put together.

yeah my question really uh last month had to do with you know there's a lot of uh there's several recommendations as to increasing the density uh to be able to create more create more affordable housing and my only question was is that you know what what is our staff prepared to how are you prepared to respond to that if a municipality reaches out know and i don't expect an answer today but that was my that was my mindset that you know how proactive are we going to be to respond to the need or the request to help a municipality uh in this area of creating creating more housing sure gary i think the real answer to that is both the dolphin county comp plan but really it's that regional growth management plan they're working on from the

the regional program because that's really trying to look at it from a you know that it's the end result of that rgmp is really trying to argue for more density that's not always the most popular argument to make both in terms of the public and for the municipalities so i think the the challenge of that uh rgmp and its implementation which is often you know kind of a mix of education training and kind of advocacy almost on our part is how do we get that message across that, you know, this growth is coming and then, you know, obviously up to a point, but the denser we can make that growth, the better it is. And, you know, X, Y, and Z is kind of why we're saying that.

Okay. Any other questions?

i don't think there's a great answer there there's like a super answer right now yeah no and the plan offers no guidelines no it doesn't there's no guidelines whatsoever yeah it's it's a plan to plan that's what i mean it's it's uh it's a concept of a plan yeah they basically point out what we already know there's a housing shortage Yes, and they've talked about different things, including model ordinances, housing, ready community criteria, streamlining, permitting.

Run control for manufactured housing.

Yeah, what's another thing that they have for transfer tax on corporate purchases of single family homes?

More like a white paper than a plan then, huh?

correct okay amazing we need to retire with white paper right so uh you know going back to i think we're gonna we're gonna try to figure out where we can help them best uh i think we all know what the problem is but then how do we tackle it how do we help the municipalities tackle it

Sounds good. Well, I'm sure you will inform us as part of your monthly report if you get those specific requests. Probably doubtful you will, but hopefully you do.

Yeah, maybe they'll come from Soterra Township, so lower Soterra.

You never know.

If we get it right. Yeah, funny guy.

is item b dolphin county comprehensive plan update is that what you have already talked about andrew very quickly we're still in the process of going to be doing the uh as andrew mentioned the regional growth plan but we are also uh by next year or to finish the uh 10-year update of the comprehensive plan we've got two grant applications out there one with the state and one with the gaming grant Fortunately, the money that we'd be spending the majority of our time and money with the grant was in the public outreach, but we don't know if we have that money to spend yet, so we've kind of been holding back a little bit on that. We are preparing ourselves to do a lot of the analysis and coordination with the Regional Growth and Management Plan, some of the technical stuff, the census stuff, the land use stuff, things like that that are always important in the comp plan. But to really narrow down what's really important by talking to the public, we're not quite there because we don't know how much we're going to be able to spend, how much we're going to really be able to do. other than just some of the basics. We are going to be having a booth at the county's wetlands festival on April 25th. So if you happen to want to go out and see the frogs, we'll be there too. And we'll have some other kind of public input things in terms of telling us where people think their best things about Dauphin County are, kind of trying to hone in on what makes How do we expand on our. Our strengths type of thing.

So, so what so what is what is the timeline or the date that you're looking to. Wrap up all public input and comment on the plan.

We were looking at June 1st is kind of having as all as much public comments as we can. If we get the grant, we're going to really hit it hard with more public outreach stuff. If we don't, then we're going to kind of go and kind of pigtail your tag along with the regional growth management plan, sit in on a lot of their conversations and kind of focus in on the listening for the Dauphin County portion of it to try and do things. We do have the survey still out there. It's still live. We're still getting comments in. a lot of municipalities have put it in their newsletters so things are trickling in from that so we're still getting public comments from the survey and it's still live and that'll definitely be open for the end of may okay very good any questions any commission members have anything for the good of the order real quick quickly please yeah if i may uh

What what came out of this water Township meeting where after that field trip with the everybody's allowed in County about the data centers I guess at the golf course I was looking to buy that I think they were gonna have a town meeting and sweater about the About the plan I guess to sell that to that company to put data centers there. I didn't attend that meeting I'm just curious had you all heard any feedback from that meeting? It's probably a couple weeks ago. I

well like there's a couple things i guess you're asking there one is is we took part about six weeks ago of a trip down to where i did i went down a lot with a lot of the reps and that was more of a for me and for for the group that was there is understanding what these things are in terms of uh how they function what the kind of the components of it what's the uh you know the the impacts of it, of what we'll kind of see them in person type of things. That was the main thing. And that's actually helped me in terms of working with our staff and putting together this model ordinance that we're considering sending out to everybody. That's how we've been mainly functioning. In terms of the county's actions, in terms of the property they own and everything, we are not part of that. We don't know what the county is doing. That's kind of, that's George Connor, Commissioner for Economic Development. So to speak on specific specifics. Yeah. Okay.

Okay. Okay. All right. So I was just curious how to, how to meeting with local residents, if they got the insight on that.

okay i do not know other than whenever they uh resell the property right but i understand you said that's not our lane so i get it thank you yeah that's a that's a different track right that's right okay good question on the um meetings that you're going to at the local level and the data centers come up is it mostly um comments that lend you to that they're they're opposed to that coming into their jurisdictions or uh do they seem open-minded or it is uh very it's very unique um most of the times whenever i've done these things in the past on any kind of development it's mostly

mostly all nimby you know most most like if it's the landfill cell tower or any of that stuff yeah uh there is a fair amount of components out there that think these things are not as bad uh in terms of particularly when it comes to uh the policy makers and the uh the people who are looking at you know trying to find a in some ways a development that is not as training on other resources other than everyone's concerned about the water and the noise, things like that. But in terms of impact on traffic and in terms of impact to the school districts, in terms of how you land the tax opportunities, there is that component out there. I won't say that they're the vocal ones as much, but they're not totally hiding it either. So there is a mix out there. And it depends on where you are. Up in Northern Dauphin, I think they're more concerned about maintaining their lives, the rural aspects. Here, I think they're more of the concerns of is it going to be compatible with taking cost of the energy and cost of the water resources, And the noise.

Yeah, I just saw you were doing a lot of the northern dolphin visits. Yeah.

Well, I think they're concerned up there whether or not, do I think they may end up happening? One of the things that you see is where they're looking. There's And I won't go too, too long in it, but a lot of people are prospecting. And I think they're prospecting because land in the Northern Gulf is a little bit more cheaper than somewhere down here. But a lot of what these data centers are looking for don't really have what they need up there, and particularly they need access to the data. I mean, they need high-speed internet. They need to move information, and they don't have that up there. They have the water, they have the power, they got lines moving through, but they still don't have that component, whereas everything else is down here. So if I'm guessing, based upon what i know uh it's not going to be much of a northern dolphin input unless something changes um it's more going to be in our area down here in in the areas where the all those things are jerry do you guys have is there like a a white paper or like a one sheet from the planning side of

what like a data center consumes as far as public utilities and that kind of thing? Something like that that you could send?

Yeah, Chris, I know you're in the car, probably can't see. Oh, is it up? Yeah, we have a planning toolkit fact sheet we put together. So if you go into our fact sheet areas and maybe what I'll do is I'll send a link to everybody. We try to keep this thing as up to date as we can. I'm not sure if we got all the things on this last one. I know things change so fast with this data center stuff, but we do have some information out there that can help you kind of understand some of the components of it. Awesome. Thank you.

Just a comment. You mentioned or County Economic Development and George Connor. I ran into George over the weekend and he shared with me he's retiring here. What? Next week or so. Not sure if you're aware of that all, but I'm sharing that with you.

Oh, is he?

So we do have our next meeting Monday, May the 4th. And I will remind the group that the Regional Planning Commission annual luncheon is that Thursday, the 7th at 1130 at the Sheraton. So you get registered for that. I will tell you that. There is a little bit of a conflict, but I will be at the luncheon. But Pennsylvania Housing Finance Agency has their every other year housing forum, which was actually on the 6th and the 7th. So just passing that along. But I will be at the luncheon. Look forward to Ms. Whitcomb making the presentation. great i do have a conflict on the fourth so i won't be able to be here unfortunately just so you know the next meeting yeah okay any anything else for the good of the order good meeting went a little long but we got a lot accomplished so yeah please uh please tell our chairman how well the vice chairman did good job good job everyone have a great night

All right. Take care.

Hey, Gary, you saw my email, didn't you?