[0:07] At this time, we'll call the August 17,
2026 meeting of the East Enfield
[0:12] Township Zoning Board to order. Members
of the board who are present this
[0:16] evening are Mr. Loose, Mr. Kalis, and
myself, Mark Hansen, chairman of the
[0:21] board. Also, for the record, we have Mr.
commands our zoning officer to the
[0:26] township and our legal counsel attorney
Jason Hes as well. We also have a court
[0:31] reporter with us. Scheduled for this
evening are two new cases and any old
[0:36] business that may become may come before
us this evening. The board will hear
[0:41] each case in an informal manner without
strict compliance with the rules and
[0:45] procedure used in a court trial. We ask
each applicant and any individual
[0:51] interested in a case to step in front of
our table and explain the circumstances
[0:55] involved in their application.
Applicants may present their case
[1:00] themselves through their attorneys or
any other representatives.
[1:04] My fellow board members and I, as well
as our solicitor, may ask the applicant
[1:09] questions from time to time during the
applicant's presentation or at its
[1:13] conclusion.
All persons having interest in the
[1:17] application will be given the
opportunity to ask questions of the
[1:21] applicant, offer evidence of their own,
and inform the board of their position
[1:25] on the matter. In the interest of prompt
and orderly disposition of each case,
[1:31] however, we ask that interested people
refrain from speaking until the
[1:36] applicant's presentation has been
completed
[1:41] and the board has had an opportunity to
question the applicant. At the beginning
[1:45] of each case, people are interested in
the case should decide whether they
[1:49] desire to be a party to it. By given the
status of a party, that person will be
[1:56] entitled to receive notice of the
decision in the case and be entitled to
[2:00] participate in any subsequent appeal or
rehearing.
[2:06] Individuals who are not given party
status may nevertheless ask questions or
[2:12] present evidence but will not receive
notice of the decision or will not
[2:16] automatically be entitled to participate
in any appeal or subsequent reharing.
[2:23] If you desire to be a party, we ask that
you sign an entry of appearance form at
[2:27] the appropriate time. Although each
party will see receive a written copy of
[2:32] the decision, the mechanics to type in
the signed decision will take
[2:35] approximately four weeks. We ask that
each person who ask a question or makes
[2:40] a statement first state his or her name
and address for a court reporter.
[2:46] Lastly, in the interest of time, I will
minister the oath or affirmation to all
[2:51] applicants and to everyone and anyone
who anticipates making any statement
[2:57] with respect to any of the hearings this
evening. At this time, will you all
[3:02] please rise?
[3:06] Under penalties of perjury, you swear or
affirm the testimony you're about to
[3:11] give will be the truth, the whole truth,
and nothing but the truth. If so, please
[3:16] say I do.
Please remain standing. We'll salute the
[3:20] flag.
I pledge allegiance to the flag of the
[3:26] United States of America and to the
republic for which it stands, one nation
[3:31] under God, indivisible, with liberty and
justice for all.
[3:38] Again,
[3:41] just to let everybody know, this meeting
is also in Zoom. So, if you wish to make
[3:45] a statement or offer testimony, please
use one of the microphones so that you
[3:51] can be heard on Zoom, as well as to make
sure our court reporter can hear you,
[3:57] Jeremy. Have the cases this evening been
posted and advertised in accordance with
[4:01] the Sunshine Law and the ordinance?
>> They have.
[4:04] Um, gentlemen, because we we have a
quorum. However, because Mr. Loose will
[4:11] abstain from voting for the minutes
because he was not here, we'll skip
[4:16] approving the minutes this month. We'll
do it next month.
[4:21] Jeremy, any old business?
>> No.
[4:26] » Jeremy, will you call the first new
case?
[4:29] Case number 25000,
Eric Wardrop and Tasha Plunkett, 135
[4:34] Wood Road, seeking a modification of
conditions, requesting a variance to
[4:38] allow an accessory farm worker apartment
and the timing requirements to act on
[4:42] the zoning hears decision.
>> Mr. Yod, are you the representative?
[4:53] » If you would please.
[5:11] Uh good evening members of the board.
Dwight Yoder here on behalf of the
[5:14] applicant. Um attorney Gibble Craven
Hess. Uh with me is Eric Wardrop. He uh
[5:20] is one of the uh equitable owners of the
property that's at issue. The board's
[5:25] familiar with this application because
part of the relief we're requesting is
[5:29] to essentially reinstate a decision that
expired allowing a farm dwelling on the
[5:35] property located at 237 Root Road. Uh it
involves about 37 12 acres of land that
[5:44] they intend to use for um their horse
operation, a riding ring, and then they
[5:51] will also have a house that they live
on. Um,
[5:54] » can I interrupt you for one second?
>> Absolutely.
[5:56] » I'm sorry. Is there anyone that wishes
to be a party to this case?
[6:02] » All right. I'm sorry. Go ahead.
>> Okay. That's all right. Um, so the first
[6:06] request that we have is to essentially
grant uh a modification of a prior
[6:14] condition that was imposed when the
property was subdivided um to allow a
[6:20] farm dwelling on the property. Uh the
reason that expired was there was a
[6:26] little bit of an unexpected twist. When
you're going up Root Road, uh the corner
[6:31] of this property on the south side,
there is a little um auto shop there and
[6:39] they had been using part of this
property for a long time to park their
[6:44] cars. Long story short, there was a need
to do a a lot line adjustment to clean
[6:50] to clean it up and so that has made its
way through. I think the supervisors are
[6:56] going to be reviewing that at their next
meeting. What that meant though was the
[7:01] property couldn't be conveyed and we
couldn't get through the land
[7:04] development on this for a little bit
longer than we anticipated. So, that's
[7:09] the reason for that delay. Uh, which is
why we're back. Um the additional
[7:15] request deals with a farm worker
apartment. Eric will testify that uh due
[7:22] to the nature of this horse operation
uh the level of care that's required for
[7:27] horses, they really need somebody living
on site to care for the animals. And um
[7:34] this would not be anything but for farm
workers and it would be limited to that.
[7:40] Um, so we're asking for a a variance to
allow for an accessory use that would
[7:48] involve a farm workers apartment.
Frankly, some townships recognize um an
[7:55] accessory use for farm workers, but the
zoning ordinance, as it's written for
[7:59] East Hempfield, doesn't have that. So,
that's the second request. And then the
[8:03] final request is to avoid coming back
maybe a third time, extend the time for
[8:09] that land development for an additional
year to give them adequate time to get
[8:13] through the process. So Eric will be my
only witness. We'll run through some
[8:16] questions and then we're happy to answer
any questions the the board may have.
[8:20] » Okay. Um the lot
add-on I believe is being addressed this
[8:27] Wednesday night. Is that correct?
>> That's correct.
[8:29] » Okay.
>> Yep.
[8:32] Good.
>> All right. Uh, Eric, if you just want to
[8:34] speak there. Um, can you just state your
name for the record?
[8:37] » Eric Wardrop. Last name is spelled W A R
D R O P.
[8:42] » And are you and your wife the acriable
owner of the property that's the subject
[8:46] of this application?
>> Yes.
[8:48] » And you have it under agreement from the
criers. Correct.
[8:51] » Correct. Um, and we don't have to go
through that, but um, was the uh,
[8:57] consent for this application included as
part of the application?
[9:02] » Yes.
>> Okay. If you look at what's up on the
[9:05] uh, screen here, and it was exhibit one
to our application, is that just an
[9:10] aerial showing the property that uh, you
have under agreement?
[9:14] » Correct.
>> And is it approximately 37 12 acres?
[9:18] Once the lot add-on is complete, it'll
be roughly 37 and a half.
[9:22] » Okay. And is the property used now
entirely for growing and harvesting
[9:26] crops?
>> Uh, it is.
[9:28] » It was subdivided in 1996. Is that
correct?
[9:32] » Yes.
>> And this property was known as lot four.
[9:35] And was there a condition on the
subdivision plan that basically said no
[9:40] dwelling could be constructed on this
lot?
[9:42] » Correct. Uh, and then back in 2023, as
you heard in my opening, did you go and
[9:49] seek approval from the zoning hearing
board to modify that condition through a
[9:55] variance to allow a farm dwelling to be
constructed?
[9:59] » Yes.
>> And will that facilitate your ability to
[10:02] um use this for a riding ring and your
horse operation?
[10:07] » Yes. Um, and as you heard in my opening,
that prior zoning approval expired
[10:14] because of this little glitch related to
dealing with this slot add-on. Correct.
[10:20] » Yes.
>> Okay. Um, is it your understanding that
[10:24] your engineer has the land development
plans for your property essentially
[10:30] ready to go once the lot add-on is
approved?
[10:33] » Yes.
>> Okay. So, let me ask you some questions
[10:36] about how you want to use the property.
Can you just describe for the board what
[10:42] your intentions are in terms of um the
horse operation?
[10:47] » Yeah. So, this would consist of a uh 16
stall horse barn um with a an indoor
[10:54] riding arena and an equipment um bar or
equipment garage uh with the intention
[11:01] of putting uh the apartment above the
garage building.
[11:06] » And can you provide to the board a
little bit of you and your wife's
[11:10] experience and background in this type
of horse operation?
[11:14] » Excuse me.
>> Yes. Um, can you put the plan up there
[11:18] for
>> Oh, yeah. Exhibit six.
[11:20] » And please show us on the overall plan
where this I wasn't sure where it was
[11:26] going. I thought it was going above the
horse barn, but
[11:28] » that one so we can Yeah. Yeah. There you
go.
[11:35] » Yep. That's my one.
>> There you go.
[11:37] » You can blow that up a little bit.
[11:43] See how to do this
>> using the pointer. Can you show us where
[11:47] the dwelling?
>> This is the This is the barn.
[11:51] » Okay.
>> Um there's like an open covered walkway
[11:55] right here that goes into the uh indoor
arena. This is storage on the end of the
[12:01] arena. And then this is the equipment
garage with manure storage here. So, the
[12:07] intention is to have the apartment uh
above this structure here.
[12:13] » Okay.
>> And that just laid out better than than
[12:18] putting it putting it in the barn
itself.
[12:22] » Eric, can you describe the type of
horses that will be on the property and
[12:27] the type of care that are required for
them?
[12:30] » Yeah, my my wife has been in the horse
business for as a professional for
[12:35] almost 15 years. She's been riding
horses since she's four years old. She's
[12:39] 44 years old now. Um, this is a what you
would call a show barn. So, these are
[12:46] what what in the in the world of hunter
jumper horses. These horses are um very
[12:52] expensive horses that require uh almost
I mean everyday care. So that's
[12:57] obviously the purpose of of having a
person on on the property at all times
[13:02] um you know even throughout the night
just in case a lot of horses have health
[13:08] issues that need to be taken care of and
monitored um at kind of all hours. So
[13:13] it's it's pretty imperative for the
level of care um that my my wife's uh
[13:19] business operates under to have someone
on on site at all at all times. You and
[13:25] your wife would be living in a farm
dwelling as well, but you're not always
[13:30] available. Correct.
>> No, my wife, as part of her business,
[13:33] she does travel a lot um and does a lot
of away horse shows um in the winter.
[13:40] She moves a lot of the horses down
south. We also have a facility not as
[13:45] large as this one in Okala, Florida that
we we operate during the winter months.
[13:50] Um so she's back and forth. So, it's
important that we have a um we we call
[13:56] it a barn essentially a barn manager
that oversees um the care care of the
[14:01] horses on a daily basis.
>> Do you currently have a barn manager
[14:05] that would be living on this dwelling if
it's approved?
[14:08] » We do.
>> And who is that?
[14:11] » Um her name is Katie Dukeman. Uh she's
worked for my wife now probably six or
[14:16] seven years.
>> Okay. Um, and
[14:20] would this accessory farm uh worker
apartment be limited to people living
[14:27] there that are working on the farm?
>> Yes. I have no intention of using it as
[14:32] a a rental. This is purely for and it's
it's something that we would provide the
[14:37] barn manager as part of their
compensation would they would receive
[14:42] essentially free housing. Um, and just
so the record's clear, you wouldn't use
[14:47] it for a short-term rental. Correct.
>> Correct.
[14:50] » You wouldn't use it for people that are
coming to visit with their horses or
[14:56] ride to live there. It would only be for
workers. Uh, in this case, your barn
[15:01] manager,
>> correct?
[15:02] » Okay. Um, and
in your opinion, based on the nature of
[15:08] this horse operation,
would it create a hardship if you
[15:13] weren't able to accommodate a farm
manager on the property?
[15:18] » It it would make it very difficult. Yes.
Um, and due to the nature of the care
[15:24] that the horses require,
is having somebody there pretty much
[15:30] around the clock essential to be sure
that they can be cared for in a timely
[15:36] manner?
>> Yes.
[15:39] » If we could go to the last exhibit, I
think exhibit seven of the apartment
[15:43] plan, just to give the board a sense of
what the apartment might look like. Uh
[15:52] there we go. Yeah. Um I know you're
still working on a land development plan
[15:58] and you may not have finalized your
building plans, but as part of the
[16:03] application, did you provide me with a a
kind of preliminary floor plan of what
[16:10] the apartment might look like?
>> Yes.
[16:12] » Um and this would be above the You
referred to it as the storage garage.
[16:18] » Yes. Okay. Um, and would this provide uh
immediate access based on its location
[16:26] to the horses if there was if there was
a need?
[16:29] » Yeah, it's directly across the driveway.
>> Okay.
[16:32] » And I think just referencing this arena
wall up here. This is a plan that came
[16:36] from an iteration that we decided to
move it out of the barn and the indoor.
[16:42] So this is obviously still referencing
that, but this would be the same layout
[16:47] that we would intend to capture. It's
just, you know, this is roughly, I
[16:51] think, 750 square feet.
And just to be clear, um, if for some
[16:58] reason in the future the horse operation
is long no longer there, would you agree
[17:04] that this would still be reserved just
for farm workers if there was some other
[17:08] egg use? But uh if in fact there was no
need for a farm worker, the apartment
[17:14] really couldn't be used for anything
else.
[17:17] » Yes.
>> Okay. Um
[17:22] let me just go through a few of the
requirements for variance. Would you
[17:26] agree um that if the board approves this
farm worker apartment as an accessory
[17:34] use that it would allow for the
reasonable use of the property as a
[17:38] riding stable?
>> Yes.
[17:40] » And would you agree that allowing a farm
manager to have an apartment on the
[17:47] property would not uh adversely impact
adjoining property owners?
[17:53] » I would agree. Uh, and would you agree
it wouldn't alter the character of the a
[17:58] use of the property?
>> I would agree.
[18:00] » And um having one apartment, would you
agree that's the minimum relief
[18:06] necessary to allow somebody to be there
um on a full-time basis?
[18:11] » Yes.
>> U and just to um to reiterate again, it
[18:16] would not be rented to any third parties
or as a short-term rental.
[18:19] » It would not.
>> Okay. And then the the final questions
[18:22] just deal with the extension of time.
Again, in my intro, I explained that
[18:27] there was a delay because of the lot
add-on. You're requesting for an
[18:31] additional year to for a total of two
years to submit the land development
[18:36] plans. Correct.
>> Correct. I don't think I'll need it, but
[18:40] would rather not come back here a third
time.
[18:42] » Uh and again, you anticipate that you
should be able to get those submitted
[18:46] this fall as soon as the other plan is
approved.
[18:49] » Correct. Um, all right. Those are all
the questions that I have for Eric. We'd
[18:54] welcome any questions from board
members.
[18:58] » Um, I have a question. Uh, how many
workers total will be required for the
[19:04] 16 horses that you have there? um total
is probably somewhere in the seven to
[19:11] eight range, but they there's there's a
daytime kind of barn manager that would
[19:19] be able to come during the day and then
leave. And then you'd have your kind of
[19:23] your overall manager, which is the
intended for this apartment. And then
[19:26] you're going to have various different
folks that um my wife hires a lot of uh
[19:32] girls that are in the horse world. Um,
so they they they range between, I would
[19:38] say, at any given time, seven to nine
different employees. Two employees
[19:44] usually work morning shift. Two
employees work night shift.
[19:48] » Eric, let me just follow up on that. The
floor plan shows three beds, three
[19:52] bedrooms. And I think maybe the question
was, [clears throat] you talked about
[19:56] one uh farm manager. Would there
potentially be two other farm workers
[20:03] that would stay or is is that for the
farm workers family or how do you
[20:08] envision the three bedrooms?
>> I think it could be for the farm
[20:11] manager's family. Um, you know, the
current farm manager that we have does
[20:16] not have any children. Um, I think
there's also a lot of situations that
[20:22] require additional people to potentially
be there um throughout the day. you
[20:28] know, overnight when we had snow last
year, we had to put people up on air
[20:33] mattresses in in the barn um because
there was we were concerned that they
[20:38] couldn't get there. Um I mean the the
purpose of the apartment is the and the
[20:44] layout's not finalized yet. This is just
an you know an option for us. Um but the
[20:50] the purpose is for for the barn manager
specific. Um could could another worker
[20:56] stay there potentially, you know, on
occasion? Sure. But it's the the
[21:01] intention is not to um use this for any
other uh reason other than than the B
[21:07] manager and the care of the horses.
[21:13] » That's when when you say you go back and
forth to Florida, does the bar manager
[21:17] go with you?
>> No, she stays.
[21:19] » She's permanently there.
>> She stays. We take another employee down
[21:23] for and and our property in Ocala has an
apartment um in the barn so that's where
[21:29] she stays when she comes down. So
similar setup just a little bit smaller
[21:33] facility.
>> Okay.
[21:39] » Couple questions for you. Um
[21:43] you're asking for a variance of section
270 um-5.2
[21:49] to FFF.
What I'm curious of, are you asking for
[21:54] a variance to the whole section or a
specific part of that?
[22:02] » Give me one second. 270-
>> 5.2
[22:08] FF
[22:26] 5.2 F. Oh, triple F. Not
>> triple F.
[22:30] » Keep flipping it way back.
>> What's that?
[22:33] » It's way back there in the ordinance.
>> I see that. Okay.
[22:36] To the triple Fs.
[22:46] So this is to the first request for the
single family dwelling,
[22:49] » right?
>> Um
[22:54] I think this is related to and this goes
back to your prior decision where you
[22:58] cited this section. So, the request is
for a modification of the prior
[23:03] condition, but it does say that I think
it's to subsection
[23:09] um
C. Uh
[23:16] well, actually, they would be they would
have a right because it's more than 20
[23:22] acres to have a single family dwelling
on the property. So
[23:28] technically I think it's it's a
modification of the prior condition.
[23:33] » Okay.
>> Um but uh I think we just added this
[23:37] section because of that's how the prior
decision was written. I don't have
[23:41] » I think that and I think that this was I
mean that this was more or less the same
[23:48] and um in the previous ordinance but I
think that um the the your prior
[23:57] subdivision was in 1996 and this
ordinance refers to every 20 acres or a
[24:03] fraction of there of contiguous land and
single and separate ownership as of the
[24:07] effective date of the zoning ordinance
which was 1994. for. So I think that
[24:11] when you got the subdivision in 1996
that exhausted your subdivision rights
[24:15] under this section in in addition to the
and uh so in addition to the condition
[24:21] that was placed on there, you still do
need a variance from this section
[24:26] because of the subdivision rights being
exhausted.
[24:29] » So is from the whole section or just a
specific section of that?
[24:40] I think it could be subsection D maybe
that just allows this to
[24:49] um
so it says regardless of size no track
[24:53] of land subsequently subdivided from its
parent track shall qualify for
[24:56] additional
>> yeah I would agree D would probably be
[25:00] the and it also refers to A and C as
well
[25:05] So, I'm sorry. E
>> D.
[25:09] » Yeah.
>> Okay.
[25:11] » Not FF.
>> Well, section FF
[25:15] » D.
>> Okay.
[25:17] » Um
section 270-5.2A
[25:25] is the um specific use regulations for
an accessory dwelling unit.
[25:32] Uh once you have that let me know.
>> Okay.
[25:37] » So [clears throat]
[25:42] three says the accessory dwelling unit
should not exceed 40% of the total
[25:48] square footage of the primary set or um
structure.
[25:54] How big is this garage or whatever
you're putting though? Because I'm
[25:58] looking at what you have up there
originally.
[26:02] If that's 720 square feet,
I don't think it's going to fit over
[26:07] that what you have shown on the
>> Yeah. So, I would just note that the
[26:14] accessory dwelling unit is for I think
limited to family members, an ADU. Uh,
[26:21] and it's typically based on the size of
the house that you can, which I'm sure
[26:26] the board's familiar with it.
>> It is, but the reason I'm asking about
[26:30] the garage because the accessory
dwelling unit is going to be right
[26:34] » part of this garage. So, as long as it
doesn't exceed 40% of that garage space,
[26:41] you wouldn't need to do anything. But if
it's going to exceed 40%.
[26:45] Because it looks like it would take up
the whole top four,
[26:48] » right?
um you happen to know will the garage
[26:53] have is this the entire second floor of
the garage or is the garage have some
[26:59] additional floor space that uh would be
built? I don't know if you can bring up
[27:05] that.
>> So the it it would not be the entire top
[27:08] of the garage. So if you pull that plan
back up
[27:12] » Y
>> and I think the the the submission
[27:15] that's been updated um
will show a more you know again we're
[27:22] this from a storm water management
standpoint we're just trying to get the
[27:26] the sizes of these buildings down. Um
but that right there that garage it it's
[27:33] going to be roughly four garage doors.
>> Okay. So, this is probably still showing
[27:38] a little bit smaller than what it will
actually be. So, um the apartment, if
[27:43] this was to scale, the apartment's only
going to come to like here.
[27:47] » Okay.
>> It would actually come to here because
[27:50] we're trying to stay away from this over
here.
[27:52] » I would hope.
>> Yeah.
[27:55] » I just want to make sure that
>> we don't have to come back here and say,
[27:58] "Hey, it's going to be more than 40%
now. We need a variance to that."
[28:01] » Yeah. I mean, I think the question would
be if the board's viewing this as an
[28:05] accessory dwelling unit and we're
seeking a variance for the limitation on
[28:09] family members because I looked at the
definition for accessory dwelling unit.
[28:13] Um, we asked for a variance to allow a
farmworker apartment uh as an accessory
[28:20] use to the egg use. Uh, but to the
extent the board is viewing this as an
[28:25] accessory dwelling unit, um, do you
think you're going to be 40% or less of
[28:30] the garage?
>> So, you're saying the the floor plate of
[28:34] the garage, let's just say it's 1,000
square feet. The apartment then could be
[28:39] 400 square feet.
>> Yeah, correct.
[28:41] » Unless you ask for a variance to that.
>> I mean, I would
[28:48] » might be a little small.
>> It might be a little small. I mean, I I
[28:51] don't have an answer sitting here if
it's going to be over 40 or not. Um, I
[28:56] mean, if I had my choice, I would say
not to limit it to that just in case we
[29:01] run into
whatever maybe stair staircases, things
[29:05] like that that are going to take up
square footage that would ultimately go
[29:09] against that 40%.
Okay.
[29:12] um number 11 under the same section,
[29:20] » right?
>> I think he would need be. I have some
[29:24] suggested changes here that you might
want. Um and then also number 12.
[29:32] » Yeah. So again, um the application
wasn't really submitted as an accessory
[29:38] dwelling unit, but we certainly if the
board is more comfortable
[29:43] uh with that approach, we don't we don't
have any opposition to that, we would
[29:47] probably need to amend the request to
ask for
[29:52] um variances to the 40% and the family
members uh provision
[29:59] um and to the extent that you want the
property owner to record something to be
[30:06] sure that future property owners are
aware that it's limited. I don't think
[30:10] you'd have a problem with that.
>> And [clears throat] that's what I'm
[30:15] basically headed to.
>> It actually makes some sense to me to to
[30:18] maybe approach it that way. So, I mean,
if that feels like the right approach,
[30:25] we would just make a motion to amend the
request for a variance to include 270-
[30:34] 52A
[30:38] 3 to allow the apartment to potentially
exceed 40%.
[30:45] And 11
to allow farm workers
[30:51] to reside there and not limit it to
family members.
[30:57] And uh I think those would be the only
two. You'll have at least one parking
[31:02] space for the farm manager.
>> Yeah.
[31:05] » Okay.
>> Um we'll get to your request for
[31:09] amending here in a second.
um
[31:16] for the time extension because the board
will be considering this in two days on
[31:21] Wednesday night. If they approve that,
do you still need an additional year on
[31:29] top of the year you're permitted?
>> Well, um
[31:35] probably not.
>> Okay. But I think just based on how
[31:39] things went last time, we would at least
maybe request six months if the board's
[31:45] inclined to give us a little cushion to
have enough time. While the land
[31:51] development plans have been prepared,
there's storm water management. There's
[31:55] unlaw septic. There's still some
complexities that can take longer than
[32:00] you anticipate.
>> Okay.
[32:02] » Eric, if you
>> I mean, a lot of that Sorry. a lot of
[32:06] that work is done. Um or it's it's at a
it's 75 85% complete. Um maybe I ask a
[32:14] question. When when does that clock
stop? Is that at a stormwater management
[32:19] approval or when when what when does
that year when does that stop?
[32:26] So,
my understanding, I'll have our
[32:30] solicitor correct me here if I'm wrong,
which I'm probably going to be, but um
[32:36] once you get all your zoning
permits
[32:41] and once you start the land development
process, I believe there's a fiveyear
[32:46] grace period. Is that correct
with the MPC?
[32:53] Um
I don't know because there there's also
[32:58] a requirement in for um I think for
construction as well. I I I thought
[33:06] » this
uh this is Nate the planning director.
[33:11] Uh so for the timing from the the zoning
hearing board approval through land
[33:16] development approval would be the
recording date and then once they record
[33:20] the plans they are protected from a
zoning perspective for five years.
[33:26] » So the once we record the storm water
management plan is that what you're
[33:32] saying? Well, it would it would be the
the recording of the land development
[33:37] plan, which would only be recorded if
you have the storm water management
[33:41] plans approved. I I think to answer the
chairman's question, when I look at uh
[33:47] 270-9.1
[33:52] D or D3E,
[33:57] it says for zoning hearing board
approvals which are required as part of
[34:01] the subdivision and land development
process,
[34:04] um
the above stated time restrictions do
[34:08] not apply so long as the subdivision or
land development plan is filed within in
[34:12] the township within one year from the
board's decision and the final approval
[34:17] and recording occurs with one year um
within one year from the date of the
[34:23] authorization thereof
uh if such special exceptional variance
[34:27] has been appealed. So, as I read that,
you have to submit a land development
[34:30] plan within a year and then um you will
have to record it.
[34:37] Um
maybe within another year,
[34:44] » maybe.
>> Mine says six months, but mine might be
[34:46] old for for actually submitting the the
subdivision of land amount development.
[34:51] » We we did update that uh
>> I believe a year and a half ago.
[35:00] So,
if we were to give you approval tonight,
[35:04] you have one year to file land
development plan. At that point, once
[35:08] the land development plan is filed, you
have a 5year grace period to complete
[35:13] constru construction. Correct, Nate?
>> Correct.
[35:20] » Wow. Wait, say that again. Sorry.
Once the land development plan is filed,
[35:26] if we were to give them approval
tonight, they have one year to file the
[35:29] land development plan. Once that's
filed, they then have a fiveyear period
[35:34] to complete.
>> Once it's filed, they have a year to
[35:37] record the plan
>> and then you have a
[35:39] » then correct.
>> Yeah, that's my understanding as well.
[35:43] So, we basically have two years to
record it, one year to file it,
[35:48] » right? And at any point I think we can
come in before it expires and request an
[35:54] extension. That's correct.
>> We will just need to do extra diligence
[35:58] on the tickler side of things to be sure
we know.
[36:02] » But does that make sense? So
>> uh I I think we would be okay
[36:06] withdrawing the request for the
>> because I I just hate to give you I
[36:10] always like to give the minimal variance
request. Y
[36:12] » and if you only need the six months, I'd
give you six months. If you think you
[36:15] can get it all done in a year, if not,
you can always come for an additional
[36:19] time.
>> No, I I think that's fine.
[36:22] » Uh just so your
[36:26] um client is aware, uh conditions in
case 1051 would still be in effect
[36:32] except for um number one, which is the
no dwelling, which we we could approve
[36:38] tonight.
And case number 247 is null and void
[36:43] because that expired.
[36:52] One last question. I didn't see this
anywhere on any of the submitted
[36:55] drawings.
What's the expected lot coverage?
[37:00] » The impervious surface.
>> Y
[37:04] » I don't know the exact amount, but I do
know that it's well within the
[37:09] requirement. I think it's 10%. Correct,
Nate
[37:14] or Jeremy?
>> Um, they're allowed substantially more
[37:19] than what they're going to use.
>> Okay. I think it's you I think it's 10%.
[37:25] So, in your case, it's 37 acres,
correct? So, you'd allow 3.7 acres of
[37:30] lot coverage.
Are you going to you're going to be
[37:33] substantially under that? Is what you're
saying?
[37:35] » Yeah. I mean, this the civil engineer
that I'm using has has obviously looked
[37:39] at that and done the calculation and he
said there's no issues with impervious
[37:43] surface um based on this this current
plan.
[37:48] » For what it's worth, I'm looking at
maximum lot coverage.
[37:53] It says agricultural 60% which sounds
high to me for an a district, but
[37:58] » I thought it was 10. I looked up
>> uh and and the residential use is still
[38:04] fairly high. I think slight 35% like
they they have no issues with lock
[38:08] coverage.
>> Okay, perfect.
[38:14] Any questions?
>> No. Jason,
[38:18] » um yeah, just one or two. Uh did you So
you is there currently a local horse
[38:25] operation that's being moved to this
property?
[38:28] » Correct.
>> Okay. Um and where is that?
[38:32] » It's in Litz. Okay.
[38:40] and it be about the same size in terms
of horses and and everything.
[38:45] » Actually, this would be smaller. So, the
current operation is
[38:51] 22 horses give or take. So, this would
this is purposely smaller.
[38:58] » Okay.
[39:08] Um,
[39:13] all right. And so you're you're
withdrawing the request for the the time
[39:17] extension.
You're um I don't think the board's
[39:20] acted on it yet, but you made a motion
to uh request the additional variances
[39:26] from the accessory dwelling unit
criteria. Essentially,
[39:29] » we'll get to that one minute there.
>> Okay.
[39:33] » Um,
okay. I think that's all.
[39:38] » Anybody in the audience have any
questions for the applicant?
[39:46] » All right.
Mr. At this time, we'll um you would
[39:52] restate your request to amend your
application.
[39:55] » Sure. We'd like to amend the application
to include a variance to 270-5.1,
[40:05] I'm sorry, 5.2
A, which is accessory dwelling units
[40:10] subsection.
Um,
[40:16] » three
>> three1
[40:19] and 12.
>> Thank you. 311. Uh, and I guess 12 we
[40:24] wouldn't be looking for relief from. We
would actually be willing to record that
[40:27] document if the if the board would like
us to see that. Uh, it would just need
[40:33] to be I guess you're right that the
relief would be to indicate it's limited
[40:37] to farm workers and not family members.
>> Correct.
[40:40] » So, it's the same concept as the
accessory dwelling unit, but it would be
[40:45] limited to farm workers.
>> Right. And it would have to be recorded
[40:48] on the land development plan.
>> Yep. Um I think it actually requires
[40:54] maybe recording on the
>> deed also
[40:56] » uh recorder of deeds a notorized
document. So uh we can do that
[41:02] and we'll run that by the the township
solicitor to be sure it's acceptable.
[41:08] » We do have a template agreement for
that.
[41:11] » Oh great.
>> And you would like to
[41:14] withdraw the request for the time
extension.
[41:16] » That's correct. Gentlemen, you had a
request by the applicant to amend their
[41:21] um application as stated. Um do I have a
motion? Can
[41:25] » I ask a question first before we move on
that? When you're asking for the
[41:28] extension um to exceed the 40%, what
would be a comfortable number? I don't
[41:32] want to just throw you do whatever you
want.
[41:41] » Are you So you're saying the the 40% is
the size of the apartment based on the
[41:45] barn size. All right. right now. Right
now is what it's allowed, but what would
[41:49] you feel comfortable with?
>> What you what you submitted was 720 ft.
[41:54] » That Yeah. And again, that it's not the
final, but it's that that is what we
[41:59] intended to to look like.
>> My suggestion is yes, for 50%. Because
[42:04] if you're building a two-story garage,
that gives you the ability to use the
[42:10] whole top floor of the garage.
That
[42:12] » That's fair. Good.
[42:17] I'm good. Okay. Do we have a motion?
I'll
[42:20] » move. Have a second.
>> I'll second it.
[42:22] » All right. We have a motion, a second to
amend the applicant's application to add
[42:28] a variance to section 270-5.2A3
[42:33] uh 11 and 12
and to withdraw the request for a time
[42:38] extension. Mr. Kalis, how you vote?
>> In favor,
[42:42] » Mr. Loose. in favor.
>> I will also vote in favor. Your
[42:46] application has been amended.
[42:50] » Um, is there anything else you wish to
add before we close testimony?
[42:56] » No. Thank you for directing us to the
accessory dwelling unit. I think that's
[43:01] a better approach.
>> I just think that's the way to go.
[43:03] » I agree.
In that case, uh, in case number
[43:10] 2500,
we will, uh, close testimony and take
[43:15] administrative notice of cases number
1051
[43:20] and, um,
2470.
[43:26] Gentlemen, I'll entertain a motion.
Mr. Chairman, uh, for case number 2500,
[43:35] uh, for Eric Wardrop and Tasha Plunkett
at 135 Rut Road, I move that we approve
[43:43] the variance to section 270-5.2
[43:47] FFD
to allow construction of a triple FD.
[43:52] Section FF,
>> didn't I? Okay. D.
[43:56] » Yeah. to allow construction of a farm
dwelling
[44:00] and the variance uh approved the
variance to section 270-3.2B
[44:07] to allow an accessory farm worker
apartment
[44:13] to allow the variance of section
270-5.2A3
[44:18] to allow the dwelling to exceed the 40%
to 50%.
[44:25] To variance uh approve the variance of
section 275.2A1
[44:32] to allow that dwelling to be occupied by
a non-family resident
[44:37] and then 270-5.2A12
[44:43] to record the residence as a non-family
and only foreign work.
[44:48] » Okay. And um what about the request for
variance to modification of conditions
[44:53] in case number 105?
>> Again, the modification of conditions.
[44:58] » Okay. Um I'd like to add our standard
conditions.
[45:03] » Yep.
>> All right. Case number 2500. Uh request
[45:08] of Eric Orard and Trisha Plunkett for
property located 135 road, Manheim PA.
[45:16] Grant them a request their variance for
modification of condition number one in
[45:21] case number 1051
a variance from section 270-5.2
[45:29] triple FD
the section
[45:34] variance to section 270
uh-3.2B
[45:43] to allow for farm workers
um
[45:49] accessory dwelling unit. The variance to
section 270-5.2
[45:57] two
A
[46:00] 3 11 and 12 to allow for um three to
allow for uh 40 50% total square footage
[46:10] of the primary structure of the
residence.
[46:16] 11 allow um to allow
farm workers to occupy the accessory
[46:24] dwelling and 12
um to allow um that um farm workers the
[46:33] the property owner record shall record a
notorized statement
[46:37] saying it's farm workers and if
in the future I would like to add one
[46:44] other condition um that if the property
is no longer going to be used for
[46:51] agriculture, this decision become null
and void.
[46:57] » I'll second it.
>> So motion uh made and seconded by Mr.
[47:03] Caldes.
Any discussion?
[47:10] If not, Mr. Kus, how you vote?
>> In favor,
[47:13] » Mr. Loose. in favor
>> and I will also vote in favor. Your
[47:16] request has been granted.
>> Thank you, gentlemen.
[47:18] » Thank you.
>> Thank you.
[47:23] » Take a five minute break real quick.
[47:28] » Back on the record.
>> All right, we're back on the record.
[47:32] Jeremy, would you please call the next
case?
[47:36] » Case number 25501, Specialized Education
Systems, Inc. 808 Estella Drive seeking
[47:42] a special exception for a use not
provided for.
[47:46] » Is there somebody here from Specialized
Education Systems?
[47:49] » Yes, my name is Elizabeth Venos. I'm
here from Barley Snder on behalf of
[47:54] Specialized Education Systems. We also
have two representatives from
[47:58] Specialized Education System here this
evening.
[48:01] » Two things. One, can you state your last
name again?
[48:03] » Sure. It's Venos.
>> Venas.
[48:05] » Van AS.
[48:11] And is there anybody in the audience
wants to be a party to this case?
[48:16] » Are they
>> They're already They're with us.
[48:19] » If you're part of the application,
you're already a party.
[48:23] » So, we have two witnesses planned for
you this evening from Specialized
[48:27] Education Systems, Inc. Since that name
is a mouthful, we'll just be referring
[48:31] to it by its acronym, which is CESI,
just to save us all some time. So from
[48:36] Cessi, the two witnesses we have planned
this evening are Marcus Henley and
[48:41] Michael Espazito and you'll be hearing
from both of them shortly about the
[48:44] plans for this property. We also do have
a member of the entity that owns this
[48:50] property. We have Wilmer Muser um from
Estelle Group LLC um the legal owner of
[48:56] the property. Uh we do not plan to ask
him any questions, but he is here if the
[49:01] board has any questions about the
property itself or anything that he
[49:05] might be better poised to answer.
So, as was mentioned, we're here about
[49:12] property located at 808 Estelle Drive.
You may be familiar with this property.
[49:17] It was most recently used as a
Chesterbrook Academy daycare, and Cessie
[49:23] is the prospective applicant of that
same building. That building is
[49:27] currently vacant and has been for a
period of time since um Chesterbrook
[49:32] moved out of it and it is available for
lease and Cessie is looking to use the
[49:39] property for its specialized education
programming. Um CESI you'll hear shortly
[49:45] from Mr. Espazito is a company that
contracts with and partners with local
[49:51] school districts to provide specialized
education services for students who
[49:56] might have behavioral or learning
disabilities um or special needs of some
[50:01] kind. And it provides some programming
um outside of the traditional school
[50:07] system and outside of the traditional
classroom environment.
[50:15] So Cessi is looking to use this existing
building. There is no development
[50:19] planned to it. They're not planning to
um really make many changes at all as
[50:24] Mr. Espazito will say. Um and I'll have
them up shortly, but just to kind of tee
[50:29] this up um the applicants p
representatives met with township staff
[50:34] earlier this summer um to talk about how
this use might be categorized since it
[50:40] is a bit of a unique use. It's doesn't
fall under any of the definitions in the
[50:45] ordinance. It's not an office or
professional service building. Um, and
[50:50] it's also not necessarily a traditional
school. So, after meeting with your
[50:54] zoning officer and your township
manager, um, we were advised to apply
[50:59] for a special exception for a use not
provided for as a special education
[51:03] facility. It has some markers of a
school, but as I said, it's not a
[51:09] traditional classroom environment. and
Miss Henley will come up shortly to
[51:12] explain kind of what the day-to-day
programming looks like um and how it is
[51:17] different from a traditional school.
So again, we're asking for a use not
[51:22] provided for um which is something
that's not necessarily specifically
[51:27] prohibited or um allowed by the
ordinance and it doesn't meet any of the
[51:31] other ordinance definitions. Um, we did
go through kind of the general and
[51:36] specific special exception criteria from
your ordinance for this use, but again,
[51:40] that's under section 270-1.9
for the use not provided for. So, I'll
[51:46] have Mr. Espazito come up first to give
some background on CESI and what it does
[51:51] in this area and then we'll have Miss
Henley come up next to talk about
[51:54] programming.
[52:00] » Apologies. Just for the record, the
applicant is specialized education
[52:04] services, not systems, but I'll keep
referring to it as CESI just because
[52:08] that is a mouthful. So, um, can you just
state your name and title for the
[52:13] record?
>> Michael Espazito, regional vice
[52:15] president.
>> And what is your role at CESI?
[52:19] » So, I oversee, uh, the Pennsylvania
region, Ohio region, parts of Georgia
[52:24] and stuff. Um, I oversee the operations
of setting up programs, getting them
[52:28] started, getting folks trained, and
getting them to go.
[52:32] » How long have you been in this role or
involved with CESI?
[52:35] » I've been with SESI since 2010. I've
been in this role since 2015.
[52:41] » So, can you scribe describe just a
little bit for the board um what SESI is
[52:45] and what it does and especially focusing
kind of on the Lancaster area?
[52:49] » Yes. So, so we what we do is we
typically um we'll go out to districts
[52:54] and talk to them and see what their
needs are and they'll sort of bring
[53:00] their consortium of the surrounding
districts uh around, right? Because some
[53:04] of these some of the services that are
needed desperately in some of these
[53:08] districts, they can't sustain an actual
program on their own. So what we do is
[53:13] we bring the consortium where it's uh
cohesive together and they collaborate
[53:18] with each other and then we sort of
script out our plan and stuff and what
[53:21] the services we'll be providing to them.
Lancaster we actually we've been in
[53:26] Lancaster for about 14 years. Uh we ran
we run a credit recovery program there.
[53:30] We run alternative ed for folks that you
know behavior students. Uh we've been
[53:35] there since Yeah. 14 years.
>> And has Cessie already been in contact
[53:39] with Hefield School District? I actually
met with uh Hempfield School District
[53:43] personally last August with uh Dr.
Goodidge. Um we have a bunch of York
[53:48] programs that are going to be similar to
what we're looking to do here and
[53:53] Hempfield actually sends their students
out to York. And just one thing I just
[53:58] want to note like well when I did tell
them that we were actually looking at
[54:01] the Bustleton area and stuff like they
went crazy like they you know they were
[54:06] excited that we get closer because
transportation for some of these kids uh
[54:10] it's a lot they're sitting on a van and
these are kids that are on the spectrum
[54:14] and stuff so you know them being on the
van as long as they are in a day and
[54:17] they should be in the building you know.
So based on your meetings with the
[54:23] school district and what you just said
and in your experience, would you say
[54:26] there's a need for this type of facility
in this area?
[54:29] » And absolutely. And it wasn't just
Hempfield. We've met we, you know, with
[54:33] the consortium idea. We met with Eastern
Lancaster. We've met with Warick. We've
[54:37] met with starts with P. Yeah. Yeah. I
can never get it right. Um yeah. So
[54:43] there there's a bunch of districts that
are sort of in the wings hoping, right?
[54:48] Um you know, this is one of our biggest
issues when we look at some of these is
[54:53] actually finding the space and once this
fell I mean it couldn't be more perfect.
[54:59] » So I know you just mentioned that this
building is well suited. Um we do have
[55:04] and I'll pass this around to the board.
This was not submitted with our
[55:07] application but um the applicant did
work with a local architect to put
[55:14] together a revised floor plan. um
actually measured out. The one that was
[55:18] um included in the application was from
the property's broker. So um I'll go
[55:23] ahead and pass this around and we'll put
this into the record.
[55:31] » I mean the the build this building
layout is a split image of the ones we
[55:36] have in York. Like just bizarre that
that because that never happens like
[55:39] that for us, but it is exactly a
splitting image.
[55:59] So the the the exhibit that's in that
was with the application that said floor
[56:04] plan. That's not correct. That's
>> So that is correct. But this one
[56:07] actually has measurements on it. The
architect did actually go out to the
[56:11] site and measure everything with a tape.
So, we wanted to provide this updated
[56:16] plan. It actually shows the same thing
that's currently being projected. That
[56:21] was the floor plan submitted with the
application. The only thing I will warn
[56:25] you is that this one is orientated
oriented slightly different. Um, so you
[56:30] would want to turn it to 90 degrees. I
think it would be
[56:35] » counterclockwise.
>> Yes. just so you can kind of match it up
[56:39] with what um what the floor plan was
that we submitted with our application.
[56:44] Um but Michael, what I want to ask you
about this uh exhibit A1 that we're
[56:50] looking at this floor plan is Cessie um
proposing any big changes to the
[56:56] building.
>> Like I said, it it's pretty much ready
[57:00] to go. I mean, maybe some minor work
around the bathrooms depending on stuff,
[57:05] but that's about it. Okay. So, this is
already outfitted for an education use.
[57:11] You've got the facilities you need.
>> We could run the program. We could start
[57:14] tomorrow.
>> Okay.
[57:20] » Just a couple of more questions. So, one
of the things we have to show is that
[57:25] this proposed use is compatible with the
other neighboring uses in the area. it
[57:30] won't detract from them and won't cause,
you know, any detrimental effects to
[57:34] health, safety, and welfare. In your
opinion, does this pose any of those
[57:38] risks? And in your opinion, this is
appropriate. This is an appropriate use
[57:42] for the site?
>> Yes.
[57:44] » Okay. Those are all the questions I had
for Mr. Espazito. We do have one more
[57:48] witness planned, but if the board has
questions for him at this point,
[57:54] » um, my question is how how recently
vacated was the previous Mr. Muser would
[58:00] probably be
How recently was this vacated? My
[58:05] understanding is it was a little over a
year.
[58:11] » All right. Um,
for the record, could you please state
[58:16] your name and address, please, for the
court reporter?
[58:22] » Homemer Muser, 1721
Lilac Drive, Litz.
[58:28] » Okay. And you're representing uh the
owner
[58:31] » ownership.
[58:34] Do you have any questions for
>> you said that it it it's ready to go and
[58:38] could be How quickly are you thinking of
getting in and and doing the uh your
[58:45] programs for Hempfield?
>> Yeah. So when we do open these programs,
[58:49] we also have to fill out an application
with the state and we work with PTE and
[58:53] stuff. So we've been currently working
and sort of like prepping that these are
[58:58] possibilities because they have very
strict guidelines in terms of their
[59:02] board meetings and when you can get on
their agenda and stuff. So if all in a
[59:06] perfect world, we would look for like a
mid January start.
[59:12] » Nope.
[59:17] » How would you describe this company? Is
it a education company? Are students
[59:24] there all day long or students come and
go?
[59:27] » So we have a variety of programming,
right? So specialized education
[59:31] services, that's that's it. So depending
on what the programming is, this
[59:36] programming being that it's going to be
mainly for kids that are on the autism
[59:39] spectrum and stuff, we typically have
those kids for some time, right? They're
[59:44] they're sent to us. The ultimate goal is
always to try to one get kids back into
[59:50] society to be productive citizens and to
get, you know, if it's a behavior
[59:54] program, you know, the state also has
different guidelines too, right? Like
[59:58] you got you got to transition kids back
into the homeschool districts, get them
[1:00:02] back into the mainstream so they could
function and whatever. But it depending
[1:00:07] on the programming, we do a ton of
professional development for teachers.
[1:00:10] We work with districts with coaching,
tutoring, um, mental health. I mean, it
[1:00:15] it's a variety of things depending on
what your
[1:00:18] » I think if your question is more kind of
geared toward maybe day-to-day
[1:00:23] activities and programming students in
the building.
[1:00:27] » Yes,
>> Miss Henley's going to be your
[1:00:29] » Do they come here in the morning and
stay until it's time to go home?
[1:00:32] » So, those students are there pretty much
all day. Correct.
[1:00:35] » Correct.
>> Sounds like a school to me.
[1:00:39] Well, based on our meeting with township
staff, it doesn't quite meet the kind of
[1:00:44] run-of-the-mill school definition since
it's it's a quasi school office and it
[1:00:48] does provide some other specialized
programming that's a little bit
[1:00:52] different from a school or a daycare.
>> I understand that. I have an issue with
[1:00:57] a use not provided for.
>> Sure.
[1:01:00] » Um and we'll get into that in a minute.
I'm going to turn it over to our
[1:01:04] solicitor here a minute about the time
limit.
[1:01:08] Okay. Well, yeah. So, I guess the the
question has been answered that it's
[1:01:14] it's been vacated for over a year.
>> Yes.
[1:01:16] » Otherwise, you could have asked for a a
um substitution of a non-conforming use.
[1:01:22] » Right. That's why we had met with
township staff beforehand since this was
[1:01:27] vacated. We couldn't reinstitute or try
to substitute a non-conforming use. We
[1:01:31] had Mr. Espazito was in the meeting as
well. we had kind of, you know, run
[1:01:36] through with zoning officer and township
manager types of programming here the
[1:01:40] work that this um business does with the
school districts. And we're advised
[1:01:45] that, you know, this isn't technically a
run-of-the-mill school um under the
[1:01:49] definition in your ordinance. And it
also doesn't necessarily meet, you know,
[1:01:54] community activity building or
professional offices or um you know,
[1:01:59] services buildings and things of that
nature in your ordinance. So this is
[1:02:02] kind of a unique
>> Okay. How how are you licensed by the
[1:02:05] state?
>> Once once we fill out that PAS
[1:02:09] application, they'll come in once we
have the certificate off. That will
[1:02:14] trigger them to come out and they do
their whole like walk through. They do
[1:02:17] their audit. They check make sure our
programming is right, staffing is
[1:02:21] according, certifications are correct,
and then they will issue us the
[1:02:26] certificate. And then after the first
year of operations, because we are an
[1:02:31] accredited organization through Cognia,
we will live under the Cogna
[1:02:35] accreditation license and then PAS will
ship that that paperwork over to them.
[1:02:41] » Okay. I guess I meant is it are you
licensed in the same category as a
[1:02:45] private school or
>> private academic school? We lic.
[1:02:49] » So you'd be licensed as a private
academic school.
[1:02:52] » Private AC that because that's how they
count. So like you have all bed like ADY
[1:02:58] that's a totally different program
that's a totally different license for
[1:03:01] the state.
>> My issue here is I would rather have
[1:03:05] seen this as a variance because my
problem with a use not provided for even
[1:03:11] though every case is decided on its own
merits it does set a precedence
[1:03:17] » and I'm not sure I want to go that
direction.
[1:03:21] I would much rather see this as a
variance
[1:03:25] um a use variance as opposed to a use
not provided for.
[1:03:32] » Okay.
So, in your view, this this would meet
[1:03:36] the ordinance's definition of just a
school.
[1:03:39] » Does it meet it completely? No. But I'd
rather see it go that way as than
[1:03:45] opposed to a use not provided for again
because especially in this uh CBC zone,
[1:03:55] it could open a can of worms down the
road that I'd rather not go down. Are
[1:04:00] there any conditions that would be um
that we could propose to the board
[1:04:04] keeping this as a use not provided for
and kind of trying to tailor it um in
[1:04:10] such a way to not open the door to uses
that maybe wouldn't be appropriate for
[1:04:15] the site.
[1:04:21] What do you think?
>> Well, okay. Maybe just a couple more
[1:04:25] questions about are students they're not
are they actually going to graduate from
[1:04:30] this school? Will there
>> they won't graduate? They'll graduate
[1:04:34] from their sending district. So, if
Hempfield sends five kids from us,
[1:04:40] they'll complete the program, but their
diplomas will read Hempfield School
[1:04:44] District.
>> So, if I can just jump in and please
[1:04:46] correct me if I'm wrong. This is kind of
a diversion program for students who
[1:04:52] aren't thriving in a traditional school
setting. Um, but it's not a school that
[1:04:58] offers, you know, programming where they
would get a diploma from it. It kind of
[1:05:02] offers them alternative
learning environments and the goal is
[1:05:06] ultimately for them to go back to their
normal home school district.
[1:05:12] » Yeah. I just want to clarify that when
you're talking about the autism
[1:05:15] population, the the need is more so the
the the ask of the districts like
[1:05:21] Hefield is sending us kids to York,
right? They you have Eastern Langster
[1:05:26] sending us kids to York around because
there's just not enough autism services
[1:05:31] and resources for districts and then by
sped law, you know, the district is
[1:05:36] responsible for that education of that
student. and stuff. So again, that this
[1:05:40] is the main reason we're here is just
because the dire need of of the
[1:05:43] services.
>> I I don't have an issue with your
[1:05:45] services, right?
>> Okay. I I have a nephew that's on the
[1:05:49] spectrum, so I I granted the service are
needed. My issue is how do we get here
[1:05:55] » and that's acceptable to everyone. Um
let me continue asking some questions
[1:06:02] here.
How many students are you going to have
[1:06:07] in the building at one time?
>> We can have Miss Henley come up and
[1:06:10] she's kind of our go-to for the the
programming and dayto-day on this site.
[1:06:14] » Okay, go ahead.
[1:06:20] » Do you want to just state your name and
title for the record?
[1:06:24] » If you're more comfortable, you can take
it out of the hole or you can lower it
[1:06:26] down a little bit. Either way I
[1:06:32] » I'll just you can just pull it down.
>> Yeah.
[1:06:38] » Um Marcus Henley
>> and your title?
[1:06:41] » My title is uh regional director.
>> So we just heard a lot of testimony from
[1:06:47] Mr. Espazito kind of big picture about
sessy what it does in Pennsylvania in
[1:06:52] the Lancaster area. Um, just to get this
on the record, how many students
[1:06:59] ballpark is Sassy proposing maximum at
this location?
[1:07:03] » Okay, so maximum at this location would
be 48 students. By law with students um
[1:07:09] with autism, we can only have eight
students in a classroom.
[1:07:15] Um, so we've to in total we're looking
at maybe six classrooms on down the line
[1:07:23] the first year with year one being only
two classrooms.
[1:07:26] » So I know Mr. Espazito mentioned that
typically if you have a group of
[1:07:30] students in or when you do um they're
there for the school day.
[1:07:36] » Yes. But the intent is not for them
necessarily to be only at Cessie as
[1:07:41] their school for years on end or long
term. Is that correct? That is correct.
[1:07:46] » So this is a diversionary program
basically where they can go for a period
[1:07:52] of time as needed to then be able to
hopefully be reintegrated into their
[1:07:56] home school district.
>> That's correct.
[1:07:58] » Okay.
And with those 48 maximum students, is
[1:08:02] there ever potentially a time when all
48 of them could be in the building at
[1:08:06] once?
>> Potentially.
[1:08:10] » Potentially. But the building is suited
for up to that many students in your
[1:08:14] opinion?
>> Yes. Okay.
[1:08:16] » And um do you have employees at the
facility or would you?
[1:08:20] » We would have employees. Um year one it
would be uh about 12 employees
[1:08:27] um with um if we get up to six
classrooms or when we get up to six
[1:08:32] classrooms we would add an additional um
four teachers and four teacher
[1:08:39] assistants.
So that would add an additional eight
[1:08:44] employees. So up to like 20 employees
>> and these are full-time employees.
[1:08:48] » These are fulltime full-time employees.
And I know we said this operates
[1:08:52] basically same as the school calendar.
Um, do you anticipate any evening or
[1:08:59] weekend hours?
>> No.
[1:09:02] » Um, one of the things that I'm sure the
board will have questions is we have to
[1:09:06] show that the property will be able to
handle um, anticipated traffic for the
[1:09:10] proposed use. Um, obviously this
property has existing access drives and
[1:09:15] a pretty large parking lot. Um, and it
was previously used for the daycare. Um,
[1:09:19] will students be bus to the property?
Are they typically driven by a parent?
[1:09:24] How does that work?
>> Typically, they're um bus or in a van.
[1:09:28] Most of the time it's a van. If it is a
school bus, it is the smaller size
[1:09:32] school buses.
>> And do the school buses park there all
[1:09:35] day or do they kind of drop off and pick
up?
[1:09:37] » They do not park. They just drop off and
pick up at the end of the day.
[1:09:42] » So, in your opinion, is the existing
parking lot adequate for this use?
[1:09:47] » Totally.
Yes.
[1:09:49] » Are there other questions from the board
for Miss Henley about um day-to-day
[1:09:54] activities, things like that?
>> Just out of curiosity,
[1:10:00] » what time what would your hours of
operation be?
[1:10:03] » Um the first staff would probably um
enter open the building at about 7:15
[1:10:10] um with the remainder of the staff
arriving by 7:30. Um buses will probably
[1:10:16] or vans will probably arrive at 7:45
and the drop off um process usually
[1:10:25] takes up until it probably would take
around till 8:15 8:30 at the latest and
[1:10:32] then students would you know have a
normal uh day. They come in, they have
[1:10:36] their morning classes, they have lunch,
they may have recess. Um, and then they
[1:10:42] have their afternoon classes, and they
prepare prepare for dismissal at 2:45.
[1:10:47] The first vans will arrive arrive around
then. And that process again will take
[1:10:53] probably until 3:15 at the latest and
then staff would stay until 3:30.
[1:11:00] » So by 4:00 everybody's out of the
building.
[1:11:02] » Yes.
And that is again I'm sorry Monday
[1:11:06] through Friday. Correct.
>> Monday through Friday
[1:11:11] » questions.
[1:11:15] No township having a question.
[1:11:20] » Yeah. So um just in in terms of
differentiating this from a traditional
[1:11:26] school um so how
um how often does the the group of kids
[1:11:33] sort of I mean turnover how how
I guess like how what's the percentage
[1:11:39] of kids actually do get reintegrated
back into their schools or a rough
[1:11:44] estimate?
[1:11:48] Yeah, ES would be more they would uh it
would be more turnover for them. Um ES
[1:11:55] is emotional support students. Um and
generally they stay with us about a year
[1:12:02] maybe two.
Usually when they get to us they do stay
[1:12:06] for the entire school year. It's not
like midyear transitions.
[1:12:11] And then the autistic population, um,
they would stay a a lot longer,
[1:12:16] sometimes three, sometimes four years.
Okay. And I'm not sure if you're
[1:12:24] familiar with uh I know there's another
there's a school in I think Mount Joy
[1:12:28] Janice School and um I'm not sure if
you're familiar with that one.
[1:12:34] » No.
>> Okay. Well, then you wouldn't be able to
[1:12:36] answer. I was just going to ask how it
might differ from that school because
[1:12:39] I'm pretty sure that considered school
but okay
[1:12:45] and you will have emotional support and
autistic population at this school
[1:12:50] » correct
>> okay
[1:12:56] thank you
anybody in the audience have a qu
[1:13:01] question for the witness
[1:13:06] » um when we're talking about the
different what are the ages of these
[1:13:09] kids a beyond elementary um is it just
>> so our PAS um application went in as a
[1:13:19] first through 12th grade population.
>> Yes.
[1:13:23] » So it's all okay.
[1:13:30] » Just uh
for your information there are two cases
[1:13:34] associated with this property. Yes, I
did provide one of the cases which um
[1:13:39] your zoning officer and manager kindly
went to your paper records and dug out
[1:13:44] for me, but I don't believe we could
locate a paper copy of the one that
[1:13:48] preceded that one.
>> 1079, which was the one that preceded
[1:13:52] the one that was you noted was a deni
denial anyway. So that had nothing.
[1:13:58] » Sure.
>> Your applicant is aware that everything
[1:14:01] on case number 1111 is still valid at
this point.
[1:14:07] Um who
and one one of the things reading the
[1:14:12] previous uh decisions is
when did Estelle Properties take
[1:14:18] ownership of this because I thought this
was a partnership down the road
[1:14:22] especially from case 1111
[1:14:26] » over in 18 2018.
>> Okay.
[1:14:30] » Bought it. Chester Book was in it at
that time and they consolidated and
[1:14:35] So her willing to give it up for
somebody else to come in.
[1:14:40] » Okay.
Thank you.
[1:14:46] Anything else
you wish to add?
[1:14:49] » No, not at this time.
>> Okay. I would like to go off the uh
[1:14:54] record for a minute and have a
discussion with our solicitor here.
[1:14:59] » All right. We'll be back on the record.
I have two additional questions.
[1:15:04] » Sure.
>> One, and this is going to be one of your
[1:15:07] witnesses here.
[1:15:11] » When you have a student that's in 12th
grade, he's ready to graduate. Who makes
[1:15:16] the determination whether he graduates?
You or the school district?
[1:15:21] » You collaborate with
>> collaborate. Okay.
[1:15:23] » So, again, and it's the IEP that also
IEP special education.
[1:15:30] » Okay.
Second question would be for the
[1:15:33] representative of the property owner.
[1:15:40] One of the conditions if we approve this
that we would like to put on here is is
[1:15:45] if um
specialized education system
[1:15:51] incorporated lease
that's it. It can't be used for any
[1:15:56] other
type of same type of thing unless they
[1:16:00] come in and reapply.
>> Are you acceptable to that?
[1:16:03] » I have a problem with that.
>> Okay,
[1:16:06] » that's all good.
>> All right. May too. Um
[1:16:10] I was just talking with your your
township manager over um over the Zoom
[1:16:15] and one of the things we had discussed
if the board is kind of leaning toward
[1:16:20] looking at this as a school that we
could kind of propose as a middle ground
[1:16:23] here is we would ask that the board
tables this um for this meeting and at
[1:16:29] the next meeting we would propose to
amend our application
[1:16:34] um to pose this as a use variance for a
school.
[1:16:38] » This board is willing to grant your
special exception request
[1:16:44] with the condition
>> with the condition as stated
[1:16:47] » as stated. And we want to move this
forward because if you go
[1:16:53] as a school, you're going to need to
request a variance which is going to
[1:16:56] require you to
>> uh re reapply because it's such a change
[1:17:00] in right what you're asking.
>> Right.
[1:17:03] » Well, I appreciate you being willing to
to work with us on this.
[1:17:06] » So, In that case, if you have nothing
else,
[1:17:09] » yeah, that's all we had planned.
>> We will close testimony in case 2051.
[1:17:14] Take administrative notice of cases 1051
or I'm not sorry, 1079 and case 1111 and
[1:17:25] applicants exhibit number one, which is
the floor plan.
[1:17:30] » Mr. Chairman, just one qu one more
question. What what was uh Mr. Espazito,
[1:17:35] what was your title?
vice president.
[1:17:38] » Okay. All right. Thank you.
>> Do I have a motion?
[1:17:47] » Which one? [clears throat]
>> To approve the special exception.
[1:17:52] » Mr. Chairman, case number 25501,
Specialized Education Services
[1:17:58] Incorporated at 808 Estelle Drive. I
move that we
[1:18:04] approve the variance for section 270-1.9
[1:18:10] C for use not provided for as a use for
a special education facility
[1:18:18] with the conditions that upon
exiting of this property um this
[1:18:26] approval will be null and void
and not provided by the next tenants.
[1:18:35] » Okay.
>> And our net our conditional conditions,
[1:18:39] » our standard conditions. I also have one
additional
[1:18:43] condition.
Um the applicant um should obtain all
[1:18:48] state permits required
and necessary to operate and submit
[1:18:53] copies to the township. And if you have
to renew them, any renewals would have
[1:18:58] to go to the township. Also,
>> what can you restate that one?
[1:19:04] » Applicants should obtain all state
permits and approvals necessary to
[1:19:08] operate and submit copies to the
township and as they renew, they would
[1:19:12] need to be submitted also to the
township. Okay.
[1:19:18] Um, [clears throat]
[1:19:22] case number 201, the request of
Specialized Education Services
[1:19:27] Incorporated for property located at 808
Estelle Drive in Langster, PA 17601.
[1:19:34] Motion to grant their special exception
to section 270-1.9C
[1:19:40] for use not provided for to allow them
to operate a educational school for
[1:19:47] special special education facility with
the following conditions. One if
[1:19:53] specialized education system leaves the
uh special exception becomes null and
[1:20:00] void.
two, our standard conditions, and three,
[1:20:05] the applicant will submit shall obtain
all state permits and approvals
[1:20:09] necessary to operate and submit copies
to the township and the and the renewals
[1:20:15] of those uh approvals.
Is that your motion?
[1:20:19] » Yes, sir.
>> Do I have a second?
[1:20:21] » I'll second it.
>> Motion and a second. Any discussion?
[1:20:28] » I'll say something here. I'll make sure
I'll happy.
[1:20:31] » Yeah. Um, I I think this is a definitely
a needed here in in the county and to
[1:20:38] have it here in the township is great.
Um, again, it was just trying to get the
[1:20:43] approvals that we I have an issue with
and uh so hopefully we can move on. You
[1:20:49] get your approvals and everything will
move forward.
[1:20:53] There's no other discussion. Mr. Kalis,
how do you vote?
[1:20:57] » In favor,
>> Mr. Loose
[1:20:59] » in favor. I will also vote in favor.
Your special exception request has been
[1:21:03] granted.
>> Thank you. Thanks for your time.
[1:21:06] » Thank you. Gentlemen,
my understanding is we do have a case
[1:21:10] for the September meeting. Is that
correct, Army?
[1:21:13] » That's correct.
>> And that would be
[1:21:16] » that'll be on September
21st.
[1:21:20] » 21st. Cheryl, you're available.
[1:21:25] » Oh, you can zoom in.
>> You zoom in.
[1:21:28] » [laughter]
[1:21:31] » Nathan, are you available?
>> Not if you're on vacation. Available.
[1:21:34] » Are you available? I'm available.
>> And you're going to check with Mr. Kyle,
[1:21:38] make sure he's available. Correct.
>> I'll send out that email asking for
[1:21:42] attendance. Okay.
>> That case, this meeting is adjourned. We
[1:21:46] » got to accept these next