Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Rich Nuttall.

Here.

Tom is not here. Pete Tantalla.

Here.

Amber, I'm here. Joe Antonelli. Here. Jacob Farben.

Here.

Keith Ourswald.

Here.

Jim Ennis. Here. Matthew Johnston. And we have Andrew Griffin and Dominic Kundari.

Here.

Thank you, Amber. Next item is the approval of the minutes from our July 1st meeting. Did anyone on the board have any questions or concerns for the minutes from the last meeting that they might want to discuss? Seeing none, I'll ask for a motion to approve the minutes.

I'll make a motion to approve.

A second?

Second.

All in favor? Aye. Okay, minutes are approved. Item three. S slash LD 26 dash nine, Marquis Construction Services Incorporated is the applicant and DWB Properties LLC owner. Submitted an application for land development that proposes to construct approximately 542 square foot building addition, handicap ramps and minor modifications to the parking lot layout at 1310 Frosty Hollow Road, Levittown, PA. Tax map parcel 22 dash 053 dash 017. Properties in the township's P professional zoning district and will be used as a deli and a fresh produce store. Anyone here representing the applicant? You have the floor, sir.

Good evening. I'm Larry Young. I'm the owner of Tri-State Engineers, and I'm here with the Barbaretis family, who are the owners, and Bob Marquis is the contractor and applicant. This project received two variances at the end of last year. One was for a use variance. It's in a professional zone, so to get fresh produce and deli, they would need a use variance, and they obtained that, and also a parking variance to allow 22 spaces to service the use. It's located in a professional zone. There's a lot area requirement of 10,000 square feet. This lot is about 29,000 square feet or .67 acres. The existing use that was there prior is a medical office. It's been vacant for a couple years now. I had 22 car parking lot and a shed on it in addition to the 2,900 square foot medical office building. The existing impervious is approximately 49% and the building coverage is just over 10%. There's a couple of non-conformities. The front yard along Veterans Highway is shy of the 50-foot requirement. It's 44.5 feet. We're not encroaching any closer. The building's staying the same on that side. The parking setbacks are also a non-conforming. The traffic engineer for the Barbary 80s testified that 22 spaces is adequate for this use at the zoning hearing board. The proposed use, again, is going to be a a deli fresh produce use. The proposed hours are 7 a.m. to 7 p.m., seven days a week, with two shifts and up to five employees per shift. The proposed improvements are There's a walk-in cooler that's 40 feet long right here. There's a small building addition in the front. And there's a handicap ramp and steps coming into the front door. There's also... upgraded electrical service going in the the parking lot the sheds going to be removed there's a shed back here which will be removed the parking lots going to be reduced the the amount of asphalt out there we are increasing the impervious surface by 175 square feet with the improvements and the cutback of the impervious surface parking area. We're exempt from stormwater things that we're only increasing it by 175 square feet. And we are asking for a few waivers If you would like, I can go into all those waivers, or would you rather questions?

Yeah, we read the waivers. We'd probably rather question them.

Okay. And really, that's it. It's pretty simple. Two small additions, a handicap ramp and removal of a shed and reduction in impervious surface on the parking lot.

Okay, thank you. Mm-hmm. Dominic, I see there's a, you got a couple items here, huh?

There's only a handful of comments, which I assume are all will complies. yeah except if we're asking for waivers correct yeah so um the the comments are minor um all the waivers we are we would support um the one waiver uh which we see often is the curb and sidewalk so i don't know if the applicant's willing to provide a fee in lieu of installing the curb and sidewalk or if the board is is interested in pursuing that um other than that if they are will comply Larry mentioned that they're exempt from stormwater. We had one minor stormwater comment, which is basically just to clarify on the plans how the existing drainage patterns are, because I assume they won't be changing with the layout of the parking lot. But yeah, not too much to add on our end here.

I did forget to tell you that deliveries will not have tractor trailers bringing supplies to them, single unit trucks that will be used.

That's one of my questions I'm gonna ask in a few minutes, but okay, thank you. I'm sorry, Matthew.

Your comments related to kind of trip generation and just wanting to clarify the proposed use. It's kind of a retail, maybe service, kind of a little bit of both. And just any, you know, if the applicant could share with the commission kind of any similar uses in the township or the amount of traffic it would generate. We haven't really seen a trip generation memo yet. So there we are.

our concerns that'll be a will comply the traffic engineer testified at the zoning hearing board and we'll get him to submit uh trip generation so

Are there any uses? Can you maybe just explain the operations just a little bit more? You know, this is not a convenience store per se?

No, it's not a wah-wah, that type of store. It's not tobacco use, things like that. It's kind of a mini Steyer's Orchard. The Barbaretis owned Steyer's Orchard many, many years ago. And it's just a scaled-down version of what they're doing with fresh produce and deli, so. Okay. And they can come up if you need any more information. What's that?

Okay, Pete, we have to mention that you are exempt and in recusion yourself from the rest of this meeting, correct?

Yep, the applicant in this case, Mr. Marquis, he and I have had a working relationship. And so accordingly, I conferred with our township solicitor and I'm choosing to recuse myself from deliberating or voting in this case on that basis.

Thank you. Thanks, Pete. Okay, then we'll go with Amber.

Okay, so I just, I guess my question, again, goes back to the traffic. So if it's a mini Stiers, I'm familiar with Stiers used to have food and a retail component. Will this be similar to the setup with that? I wasn't really clear on the answer.

I can turn it over to Dave. You want to just get up and- Is it food and- You have to come up, sir.

Component similar to, he's kind of described it as a mini Stiers, which I would say Stiers had a mix of both. And so I'm just trying to understand, I know you want to waiver from the traffic study and I'm trying to understand how close it is to a mini Stiers.

It would be a retail, yes. If that was your question.

It would be a mix. And so I guess to Matthew, is that sufficient to you that you still feel that maybe there should be a traffic study? Are you satisfied with what their engineer said?

I think our opinion is it's probably not going to generate 500 trips, but we kind of want to make sure and see that if they're, you know, what the use is. Because if it's completely retail or I think there was some discussion of maybe some tables and so more like a service as well as a retail. So we just weren't exactly sure what was proposed.

Okay, that's kind of what I had in mind. And my other question is, are you will comply on the letter from Middletown Fire and Emergency Services on submitting a fire apparatus term plan to the parking lot? Yes.

Okay. Joe?

The only question I had, I guess, is the sign that you have, is that an existing sign? Or is that going to be like a... A sign that's going to be lit up at night? I see you have a sign next to 413. That's the existing sign. You're putting a new sign up?

We would use that exact size frame. We're not going to put a larger sign there. It's not going to be lit up or anything? There's a possibility that we would be interested in having it lit, yes.

Okay. I guess something...

Yeah, I mean, so they'll have to gain a zoning permit when they're eventually doing that. And if it is going to be either externally illuminated as far as the light shining on it or internally illuminated, they will just have to make sure that they're not in any way not compliant with our lighting requirements when it comes to lumen levels and glare.

That's all question I have.

Mr. Marquis said that signs internally illuminated, so. Thanks, Joe.

I want to pick up where Amber left off. I just don't, I think that you need a traffic impact study too, because no one knows, you know, if you're going to generate 500 more trips per day. And I agree with, even with Matthew said, you just don't know. So that was one thing I agree with Amber on. is I think you do need a traffic impact study along with the trip generation memo.

Well, I think one, there are two different things. Trip generation is based on the use and maybe a similar use. Traffic impact studies basically study intersections.

Well, we've had them here over the years for every different aspect of commercial business going in. And it's just a wide open range of will you generate 500 or more additional trips a day? No one knows. I'm sure the business wants 500 more trips a day. That's more business.

And I would argue that a medical use that's appointment-based is not the same as a retail deli that's show up and come shop.

Yeah. And then, sure.

Sure. Is there a threshold, and I'm sorry, where the number of trips does trigger a traffic impact study, like you can do trip generation before you do TIS? I don't know if I'm splitting hairs there.

The ordinance just is if it generates more than 500 trips, it requires traffic impact study.

Okay, so then they would have to somehow prove that it's not going to generate up to 500 trips through the trip generation study. Correct. Okay, so it would be trip generation study first. If they do go beyond 500 trips, then TIS is required.

500 trips beyond what the existing use? And I'm clear that that's what the waiver is for, right? Is that the net?

If the proposed use will generate 500 or more additional trips.

Additional trips from what the use was prior. Correct. Right.

Because if the trip generation's the same as what's out there now or was out there, there's really not gonna be any additional traffic impact.

but kind of obvious that there's going to be more traffic. You would expect commercial business versus like Amber said, an office building or a doctor's office. You're definitely gonna have more traffic coming through.

If I can interrupt for one second, we did have a traffic study submitted when we went to zoning and we had the representative here. Then the township should have got a copy of that. He went over all that.

Did you get that? What we,

We got something this morning, yeah, because we saw it was a change in use. Right. We haven't really had a chance to completely 100% vet it.

Okay.

Yeah, so he did both a traffic study and I believe he also included

Yeah, I think they equated it to a farmer's market. The only concern I guess we have is the farmer's market trip generation is very limited in the studies. I think there was only maybe two studies of farmer's markets, and they were more based on an acreage basis than a building square footage. So that's why I was trying to understand if there was any similar use to this type of retail service. And I guess it's, you know, you're saying it's similar to Steyer's, which would be different than Wawa and 7-Eleven and, you know, things like that. But so I was trying to get an understanding of exactly what's being proposed here. Is it more like a farmer's market like Steyer's or is it more like a convenience store? And I know they've mentioned that there's no tobacco products, there's, You know, those types of things. And I wasn't privy to the zoning hearing board discussion with their traffic engineer.

I don't mean to talk out of turn. I just was, okay. So just even for the benefit of everybody here, say we do not or say they do not accept the waiver request of the TIS, all that means is the information that you're seeing right, that you got this morning, if it does warrant a more significant traffic impact study, then there is a potential of them coming before this planning commission again at a second time if they give a recommendation as a condition for that, correct?

I think that sounds fair. If they can show that they don't.

I didn't hear the last part of what you said, Jim.

So if you were to say no to the waiver request on the traffic impact study, because there might not even really need one needed, but you condition it on, they give all the necessary information to our traffic engineer, which they, which our traffic engineer did get some stuff this morning. And if there's a more, I don't know what you want to say.

It's determined that generation requires the study or shows that level of impact.

Then, then it means a reappearance in front of here. If, if it, if it's, to the traffic engineer's opinion that, potentially, right, or?

Well, you're saying if they need to show the, if they have to do a traffic impact study and we then have to determine whether or not what the impacts are, they have to determine what the impacts are, if there is or there isn't, And if there isn't, then there's really nothing to really discuss.

Yeah. So basically, to the traffic engineer's opinion, once he analyzes everything, it's either A, they do have to make a reappearance here, or B, they can just go forward with that as a condition. I'll be honest with you. It sounds like they probably are fine, but we just want to confirm.

That confirmation.

Yeah.

Yeah, okay, well, I'll mention that when everybody gets done. The other question I had is you brought up deliveries, and I wanted to know what time are these deliveries gonna take place since you're not too far away from some residential housing there. Where do we talk about delivery times?

Yeah.

Do we set a standard on that, Jim, delivery times?

No, there's not a specific one in the zoning code. I mean, there's some tied to certain uses, but not this. So, I mean, you could probably just say that it needs to be in compliance with our noise ordinance and not before 7 o'clock in the morning. Got that, Amber? Yeah.

He would get, he could make those deliveries any time and it would be in an off-peak hour, not in early morning. Maybe after the breakfast and before the lunch so that it's not early in the morning.

I think our concern is night at night or real early in the morning and the noise, you know.

They would have to be open for them to get deliveries, so.

Okay. Keith, you're up. Jacob?

Thank you. I only have one question that hasn't been addressed so far by my fellow board members. So I see in Matt's letter here about the ADA requirement about the parking space, but I was also curious to know if the restrooms for the employees and customers would be renovated and will all be ADA compliant? They have to be.

They have to be. Okay. Yeah.

That was my only question.

Thank you, Jacob. Any other questions the board might have to rebuttal?

Jim? Just want to break. Do you have a status on the Bucks County Planning Commission review letter?

We submitted it. There's not too much ENS control out there for this job. It's very minor disturbance.

We did submit, though. Just for everyone, we don't have a minor land development process in our subdivision land development ordinance. Ours is dated. This is a minor land development. I do think that the Bucks County Planning Commission probably won't raise anything earth shattering about the very small addition to the building. So I do recommend, we've done this before, you put that as a condition that so long as nothing's really crucial raised by the Bucks County Planning Commission letter, then you can move forward, depending on whatever tonight's recommendation is. But you do also understand, you guys can't get scheduled in front of the Board of Supervisors until that letter is submitted. It should be coming. Okay, cool. If you get a recommendation of approval tonight. Okay, thank you.

Okay, is there anybody out in the public that would like to come up and speak on this case? Anybody here for this case tonight? Sir, ma'am? The only two, okay. So at that point, I think, just like to take a little survey of the members here, I'm going to, once I find it, oh, a recommendation to approve, I'm gonna make a motion for the recommendation to approve, but the one thing that keeps coming back to me is the traffic study. I just think that it might be beneficial, especially since it's on 413, and that's my only hiccup here. The rest of the waivers, I don't see any problems with. Does anybody else see anything, issues with the waivers? Okay. right well then let me find that one uh where would there was the tra the traffic study was in um matthew's letter right is it in remington vernix too yes because they're requesting a waiver from we're asking for a waiver from it that that's probably why it came up in so is there a special way we need to award that with the compromise we were talking about that

There is, and I'm trying to even figure out what that would be.

I think the best method to do it would be just to deny the waiver, but put a condition on that they'll provide a traffic generation study to the traffic engineer, and then depending on what comes from that, it's up to them whether they want to come back here if the traffic impact study is required and ask for a waiver, or go forward to the Board of Supervisors with a recommendation to deny it or with evidence that they don't actually need it.

So in essence, we would be denying the recommendation if it needed a traffic impact study, if they didn't want to come back?

You're going to be denying the waiver request that they don't need a TIS. And instead, the condition would be based off of the traffic generation numbers that are provided to the traffic engineer they will either, A, it'll be determined that they do have to do a traffic impact study, or B, that they didn't need a traffic impact study to begin with. And then if they do need a traffic impact study, they could come before you guys again and ask for a waiver. Or if they do need a traffic impact study, they could ask for a waiver from that.

We would probably most likely say denied on the waiver because we asked for this the first time.

You could. I mean, that could happen.

I'll ask them. How do you guys want to take this? Do you want to just do the traffic impact study and save yourself a lot of time?

Well, I think the best way to handle it is Mr. Barbaretis said that Mark Roth, his traffic engineer, did submit a traffic study. So let Matt... Review it. And if his recommendation is it's below the 500 trips, which is not a big impact, you know, he could write that in his letter at that point.

So in the grand scheme of things, it sounds like they just don't need the waiver, right? They already kind of did a traffic impact study. It just needs to be reviewed by Matt.

Well, what they submitted with the zoning hearing board was a trip generation parking report. It wasn't a full traffic impact study. It basically showed whether or not they generated, how much traffic they generated to show whether they needed a study or not.

I think you just deny their waiver right now, and then let everything get kind of worked out with the traffic engineer, and depending on what happens there, maybe they're making another appearance in front of you, but they're probably, I'm going to guess they're probably fine, and they're just going to go, if they get a recommendation of approval tonight, they'll probably just go ahead further in front of the board with whatever recommendations are given from Matt. And that's if the traffic...

Do we need to say denied unless sufficient proof is provided to our engineer?

What did they have again, Matt?

They have a trip generation slash parking report. And I believe what they're saying is that that trip generation study does not exceed the 500 vehicles that the ordinance would require a study. We just need to review that and confirm that. I did reach out to their traffic engineer today to discuss it and kind of understand a little bit more about their rationale and how they were approaching it, but I did not get to speak to him.

I do think the simplest thing right now is just deny the waiver.

Deny the waiver?

Yeah.

Which means that they would have to come back at one point if they did need to study. If Matt decided they needed to study, they would come back to us again.

That's exactly it, yeah.

Yeah, I just don't want to come back if a traffic study's not, you know, required.

Right, so that's it, yeah.

Well, that's why we're asking you, do you want to take care of that, and then you wouldn't have any problems.

Well, it sounds like Matt's saying that our trip generation falls below the 500.

No, it sounds like Matt's saying when he read your engineer's report that the trip generation's saying it's below, but... He also mentioned several other factors in there that there's hardly any basis to go on, only two trafficking studies with that. So he's not saying your report that you sent him was good. What he's saying is he hasn't had a chance to review it, and he doesn't have a lot of items to go on, either cases to go on to determine that. So that's why we're feeling that you need one. So we're asking you, do you want to cut out all the extra legwork and just get one? We'll deny it in here, then you get a traffic impact study and all is well, or you're risking the risk of coming back to us again with the traffic impact study. Did I say that all correct, Jim?

Essentially, yeah.

If they don't need the waiver, right, because they're not exceeding the number of trips, then they just don't need it. They could go forward to the Board of Supervisors without ever needing the traffic impact study. So if you're not inclined to allow them to get away with not having a traffic impact study if they need one, just go ahead and deny the waiver and it'll get worked out with the traffic engineer. And then if it's determined that they do need a traffic impact study, it's up to them whether they wanna come back before you or try to go to the Board of Supervisors with a denial in the results of that study.

Everybody got that on the board.

So, I mean, it sounds like you're confident in your traffic engineers numbers to probably go ahead and say that you're okay with either withdrawing the waiver request or they are, are them denying that waiver request.

We can withdraw it if we have to come back for the waiver after Matt talks to the traffic engineer. That's fine.

We'll withdraw it. They'll withdraw that one request.

And possibly come back. And if Matt and our traffic engineer can't reach a decision or Matt thinks it's higher than 500, we'll have to do the traffic study and come back.

Is that acceptable to the members of the board? Yes. Everybody? Okay, just asking. Okay, so the waiver, that would be waiver two. Okay, so I'm just gonna cross that out and not even mention it. Jim, the only other one I have is pending review of the Bucks County Planning Commission letter, correct?

Correct.

Nothing else other than that?

No, and I did go to the EAC as well.

Yeah, I didn't see their letter.

Yeah, they didn't generate one because I don't think they really have much to say about it. Again, there's no real environmental impacts. It's a very small addition that's being added to the bill. Okay. But you can also put that in there that based on the condition that the AC letter doesn't also raise anything that would warrant a reappearance.

Okay, fire marshal's on here. Okay, everybody good? Recommendation of approval for S-LD number 26-9, land development application proposing to construct an approximately 542 square foot addition to an existing building that will be used as a deli and a fresh produce store at 1310 Frosty Hollow Road. Levittown PA-19056, Bucks County Tax Map Parcel 22-053-017. Recommendation is based on the plan entitled Preliminary Final Land Development Plans for 1310 Frosty Hollow Road. comprising six sheets and dated August 7th, 2026. Plan prepared by Larry P. Young, P.E. of Tri-State Engineers and Land Surveyors of Feasterville, PA. Recommendation is further based on the compliance with the comments provided. An August 25th, 2026 letter from Isaac E. Kessler, P.E. of Remington and Verdict Engineers. They are Middletown Township's engineer. B, August 26th letter from Matthew D. Johnston, P.E. of Pannoni Associates, Middletown Township's traffic and transportation engineer. C, August 27th, 2026 review letter from Alan Welsh, the fire marshal for Middletown Township. And the following waivers from the requirements of Middletown Township and land development ordinance Section 440-301.E to allow preliminary and final plans in occurrence submission. Section 440-419A to waive the requirement to construct sidewalks along Veterans Highway and Hollow Road. I would just like to say real quick on that. Fee in lieu of comes with that whole, right? If that's what you're stating and then- Okay, before I go any further, sir, on the waive of the curbs and sidewalks you're willing to pay the fee in lieu of?

Yeah.

Yes. Yeah, can you say that on the microphone? Not my money. I just want to make sure. So I'm going to add that in. I'm going to re-say that whole section over again just to be sure. Section 440-419.A, to waive the requirement to construct sidewalks along Veterans Highway and Frosty Hollow Road and to pay a fee in lieu of. This one. Next, section 440-421.B.1, to waive the requirement to construct curbing along Veterans Highway and pay a fee in lieu of.

We're paying a fee for sidewalks we're not putting in. I don't understand what we're doing.

Want to take that, Jim?

So this is very standard. I mean, it's been the township's objective to try to install sidewalks. Right now, they don't want to install sidewalks along them going to the path of nowhere. So what we've been doing is whenever there's a waiver for the installation of a sidewalk, we instead request a fee in lieu. A fee in lieu of instead of installing the sidewalks. So that would be under the determination of the township engineer after they do an analysis of the amount of sidewalk that would be needed.

There's no sidewalk on either side of Frosty Hollow all the way down from Frosty Hollow to Oxford Valley.

That's exactly the point. Yeah, I mean, it's pretty straightforward. We just measure the property frontage where a sidewalk would be going, but since the waiver's being requested to not install it, it's based off of the square yardage of what that sidewalk would be and current industry pricing for what it would cost to install a sidewalk. Similar with the curb.

The fee is...

You're paying the fee in lieu of installing that sidewalk and curb.

Maybe cheaper to put the sidewalks in.

I'd rather not pay a fee for sidewalks that I'm not putting in. He's telling me that it's going to be very expensive.

And I'll just note, too, I mean, that is PA 413 is a PennDOT road.

There's no sidewalk on 413 all the way up and down.

Understood.

We get that, sir, yep. We get that. But part of our 10-year plan was every time a developer came up, We wanted curb and sidewalk to be more pedestrian friendly and we still give the right to pay the fee in lieu of. So I really don't want to go any further if you are not in line with that because it's every time we come up with an applicant. If they don't want to put curb and sidewalk in, we tell them they have to pay the fee in lieu of the curb and sidewalk. You can put the curb and sidewalk in if you want.

I don't see where it's necessary to have.

We're not debating whether it's necessary or not necessary. We're saying, you know, years ago it was determined that that's what we're doing with the township.

I'm not a developer. I'm a small guy that's trying to.

We get it.

Yes, sir. I mean, honestly, it's either you request the waiver, but they're going to say that we'll give you the waiver, but contingent on the fee in lieu, or you install the stuff yourself. And you can go through. I've been here since 2022, and you can go through numerous records where that's exactly what people did. They paid the fee in lieu. even if if there wasn't sidewalk to connect to they usually paid the fee and low yeah well the other thing is i'd like to get an idea what this course is what the cost is going to be again that as the township engineer it's it's based off of the industry standard the amount uh the the the stretch of it and everything else

Yeah, it's based on, like I said, industry standards, prevailing wages, which is what the township would need to pay to have it installed themselves. I mean, I can give you an idea of...

Sir, you have to, I can't finish. I'm in the middle of a motion here, so I have to either take the section three and four off the table and reread this whole thing, or you're staying with what I said, which was agree to pay a fee in lieu of.

Now, let me ask, if he accepts the fee in lieu and then decides he doesn't like the fee, he can just move ahead and put the curbs in, correct?

That's right. So it's a waiver conditioned on the fee in lieu.

Right. So we don't need to be hung up on this one point right now. If he accepts the fee in lieu, decides he doesn't like that and would rather put in the sidewalks, no harm, no foul.

That's correct.

But if he decides to do neither, then it's an issue and we've got to come back.

Right. That's correct.

I've got to be honest with you. You told Dominic earlier that you will comply with all his issues, right, sir? You told Dominic earlier you were gonna will comply with all Dominic's issues. Well, in there, number six, curbing and sidewalks are required along street frontages. The applicant has requested waivers from these requirements along Veteran Highway, as these features do not currently exist along Veterans Highway and the vicinity of subject property. The requested waivers may be considered by the Board of Supervisors. A fee in lieu would be requested for these from the applicant. And you said earlier you would comply with every one of his issues. Well, it says May, too, in there. No, I'm reading a fee in lieu would be required for these from the applicant. I mean, that's what I'm reading.

Anytime there's a project that works sidewalks, they do require the fee. This is standard for any project.

I mean, it's a standard practice here all the time.

Yeah, the owner just wants to know. He doesn't have any idea how much it would be.

Neither do we. Dominic would be able to give you that answer afterwards, but what you have to do is tell me, you said you were agreeing to his terms will comply earlier in the meeting. In there, it states a fee in lieu would be requested for these from the applicant. So you kind of said yes earlier. Is that right, Andrew? You said he will comply with these?

I mean, he did, but I think they've clarified at this point that he's not willing to do that. I mean, the option that you have is to make your recommendation that you're only gonna allow that waiver with a fee in lieu, and then at that point, he makes the decision. Is he gonna go with the fee in lieu, or does he have to comply by providing the sidewalks?

A lot of conditions here.

We went through zoning, and there was no...

I'm just saying it's something that happens. You're not the only one. It's every person.

Let me just add also, the zoning hearing board is only taking variances that you're requesting from the zoning ordinance in consideration. This is actually a subdivision land development ordinance, so they wouldn't even be considering that nor trying to in any way enforce that during their hearings.

I think we're going to agree to the fee in lieu of, and if it gets too expensive, we'll put the sidewalks in.

so I can continue on the way I was going. All right. So other than that, we clarified the fee in lieu for the curb and the sidewalk. Item D is pending a review of the Bucks County Planning Commission. And E is the EAC didn't raise any concerns

um we we don't know they didn't release a letter okay we didn't receive a letter from the environmental committee and and we assumed we assumed that they don't have any concerns at this point that's correct so but if they did have any real crucial concerns that warranted a reappearance same with the bucks county planning commission letter i have a i'm pretty strongly that there's probably not but okay yeah and the other thing i wrote down which is something i um

Didn't even say here. Okay, so we're all good, everyone. We're all crystal clear on the understanding of everything? Sir? Yeah. You're clear on all the items? We're giving you all the couple waivers. Two of them require fee in lieu. The other one is just a waiver. We are going to pen the traffic study part, pending more of what? Matthew comes up with, it's a possibility we will see you again, but at this point, I had the recommendation that I started about 15 minutes ago to approve, so I'll ask for a motion to approve. I heard a motion, I need a second. Joe, I'm second. All in favor?

Aye.

Opposed? Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Next item we have, once I find my agenda here, oh, here it is. Review a zoning hearing board. Jim, anything vital on the zoning hearing board for us?

I actually have to look at it, even though I just wrote this stuff. There was two pages. So there's nothing here that would, if any of these variances were granted, would all of a sudden result in a land development in front of you guys at a later time. Okay. Yeah.

Any other business with the board members? Questions from the crowd? None? Seeing none, I'll ask for a motion to adjourn. Motion, second. Joe on the second. All in favor? Aye.

Have a good night, everybody.