[0:00] - The CACJ is a nonprofit focused on restorative justice,
[0:03] a system of criminal justice
[0:05] that focuses on the rehabilitation of offenders
[0:07] through reconciliation with victims
[0:09] and the community, it's justice with the goal
[0:12] to heal rather than punish.
[0:15] Our five programs are pretrial supervision, youth aid panel,
[0:18] the youth counseling pilot program, mediation
[0:22] and community conferencing.
[0:24] Our program save taxpayers over $400,000 per year,
[0:28] empower individuals
[0:29] and groups to resolve their own conflicts and are affordable
[0:33] and accessible to the community.
[0:35] To learn more or to make a referral,
[0:38] visit our website or give us a call.
[0:44] - The Centre Region Active Adult Center is a vibrant,
[0:46] inclusive, and happening location designed
[0:48] for active adults 55 years and over to be social
[0:51] and participate in new experiences while all
[0:53] staying close to home.
[0:54] We promote healthy aging through our many activities
[0:57] and health forums, as well as lifelong learning
[0:59] through classes and social interaction
[1:01] that suit almost any lifestyle.
[1:03] Whether you prefer line dancing followed by a walk
[1:06] or a game of bridge and a meal,
[1:07] the center is sure to have something for you.
[1:09] Visit crpr.org for more info.
[1:14] - I'd like to call the order this, this meeting.
[1:17] This works. This
[1:18] - Meeting is being recorded and summarized.
[1:22] - Okay, I'll Thank you. I'll start again.
[1:25] I would like to call the order of the
[1:28] this work session meeting
[1:29] of the Ferguson Township Planning Commission for Monday,
[1:33] September 14th, 2026.
[1:35] This meeting has been properly advertised in accordance
[1:38] with Pennsylvania Sunshine Act as a hybrid meeting
[1:41] with the option to attend virtually via the WebEx platform
[1:46] or in person here in the main meeting room.
[1:51] With, with that, we'll have a Roll Call.
[1:55] - Louis Steinberg. Here. Bill Keo. Here. Nick.
[1:59] Tony Here. Michael Radus. Here.
[2:02] Michael AK Cannot attend this evening. Ralph Wheland here.
[2:07] Shannon Holiday.
[2:13] She was there. Yeah, she's online.
[2:17] Melissa Strock.
[2:20] - I see - She just popped up there. I'm here.
[2:25] Kayla Corl here. And Lisa Strickland.
[2:30] Here, chair. We have a quorum.
[2:33] - Thank you. Next on the agenda is Public Comment,
[2:37] and as I indicate each meeting, this is an opportunity
[2:42] for people who are here, who are representing for the public
[2:46] are themselves,
[2:47] but members of the public to address, raise any question
[2:52] or issue they'd like that is not on the agenda.
[2:56] The, the item. And
[2:57] of course on the agenda today is really just one item
[3:00] and we will all have the opportunity to share thoughts
[3:05] and raise questions with regard to it.
[3:08] So at this point, I'm simply asking if there's anybody here
[3:11] from the public who would like to make a comment with regard
[3:15] to any matter other than the DA data center question.
[3:21] Okay. Oh, oh, yes ma'am. I'm sorry. Yes.
[3:26] Would if you'd like to come forward and identify yourself
[3:30] and speak to Mike so that we can all hear.
[3:39] - Hi everybody, my name is Natalie Ray
[3:41] and I'm a Ferguson Township resident.
[3:43] I just wanted to make a comment
[3:45] that I'd like more information about what's happening at
[3:47] West Aaron Drive the removal of trees.
[3:50] Looks like it's been clear cut
[3:51] and I saw an article in Center Daily Times about it
[3:55] and so just would like more information
[3:57] about what's going on there. Thank you.
[3:59] - Thank you. I'll just defer to the staff.
[4:01] Does staff have any more information to provide to us?
[4:06] - Not at this time, but we,
[4:08] we do not have a formal submission
[4:11] and we do not a formal land development
[4:13] submission for that location.
[4:15] - And I, we probably read the same article
[4:19] and the article did explain the
[4:24] idiosyncrasy, if that's the correct word of the law, in
[4:28] that if you are the owner of property, you do have the right
[4:33] to do what you want on it in terms of what's on it
[4:39] without any municipal approval.
[4:42] If you have submitted a plan for development,
[4:46] then you come under the auspices
[4:48] of the municipality in terms of compliance.
[4:51] So it's goes back, I think, to the fact that each of us,
[4:56] at each of us who is a pro a a property owner can do
[5:00] what we want on our property
[5:05] without municipal interference
[5:07] unless we are asking the municipality
[5:10] to be able to do something.
[5:11] So I think there have been two such
[5:15] incidences here in the Township, the one
[5:18] that's off Blue Course Drive,
[5:21] and then this one, which is in patent
[5:23] and in Ferrison Township.
[5:25] But we, there is nothing at this point.
[5:30] - I think just, just in terms of clarification, Louis,
[5:37] the you can do what you want on your property
[5:42] reference is related to our tree Ordinance.
[5:47] Not anything in general and,
[5:50] and in our tree Ordinance, as long as the owner
[5:53] of the property has not submitted any kind of a plan,
[5:59] they can in fact, you know,
[6:03] have it timbered because that's protected
[6:06] and governed by state law.
[6:10] - And to throw another wrinkle into that,
[6:12] you may find it difficult to believe,
[6:14] but trees are not considered real estate.
[6:17] They're a crop on your property.
[6:21] I been, this meeting is being
[6:26] - Recorded and summarized.
[6:27] - If you, if you are growing corn, you would've the right
[6:30] to harvest your corn,
[6:31] you can harvest your tree or cut your trees.
[6:34] Okay. With that it will go on.
[6:37] We have the minutes, which have been prepared.
[6:40] And is there, are there any questions
[6:42] or comments with regard to the minutes?
[6:47] I move approval. Okay, second,
[6:50] - I'll second - On favor and say aye.
[6:54] Aye. Aye. And it's repetitive,
[6:56] but I'll say, well, I won't say in every meeting,
[6:58] but they're fantastic minutes
[7:01] both in the detail and the accuracy.
[7:03] Accuracy. Thank you. Thank you. Welcome.
[7:06] A staff report board of Supervisors report.
[7:11] - I am happy to say with our active land development plans
[7:14] that Blaise Alexander Hyundai has been formally recorded.
[7:18] You may note that it has been removed from the list.
[7:23] Aside from that, I would be happy
[7:24] to take any questions on the land development plans.
[7:30] - Okay. And Miles is, we jumped,
[7:34] essentially jumped ahead,
[7:36] but are there, is there any report from Board
[7:39] of Supervisors with,
[7:41] - I apologize. That's
[7:43] - All right.
[7:45] - I, I missed the last board meeting.
[7:47] Kim, would you, do we have anything
[7:49] to report from planning and Zoning? Nothing new.
[7:52] - Okay. Thank you
[7:54] - Mr.
[7:55] Chair. Just as a comment, Toma, thank you for
[7:58] adding on a chart the street addresses
[8:01] for the different sites.
[8:03] It makes a difference. It it, I can just plug that into my
[8:07] GPS and my car gate takes me there.
[8:10] I don't have to figure out everything.
[8:12] So thank you very much for that clarification and adding it.
[8:17] - Okay. I might note, Shannon,
[8:20] you are now here is correct, although I don't know.
[8:25] You, you, Shannon. Shannon, you're, you're, you're present,
[8:28] present, is that right? Right.
[8:30] - Yeah. Yes, I am.
[8:33] Well, as you can see, I was having some,
[8:35] some technical challenges, but yes sir, I am here.
[8:38] - Very good. Good. Okay. Okay.
[8:40] So which leads to, is there A-C-R-P-C report? Report
[8:46] - I will defer to Phil.
[8:50] He attended in my stat
[8:53] because I was under the understanding
[8:55] that we would've line bash, but then it moved.
[8:59] So still,
[9:01] - Yes, I attended and there were two
[9:04] or three items on the agenda
[9:06] for the regional planning commission.
[9:09] The first one was with regard to College Township,
[9:13] and if you remember, college Township asked through A DRI
[9:18] to be able to extend the sewer service area
[9:21] to accommodate future growth of a RL.
[9:24] Well, that went through,
[9:26] that got approved at the COG meetings.
[9:30] And so now College Township was following that up
[9:34] with then a rezoning request so
[9:36] that the land is now zoned appropriately
[9:40] that the DRI has been passed.
[9:42] So we, we recommended they had the request in
[9:45] and we recommended that, that it complied with and,
[9:50] and was okay with the Centre Region Planning
[9:54] and Planning department.
[9:59] Second thing on the agenda had to do with Harris Township
[10:04] and they had two proposals in terms
[10:08] of amendments to their ordinances.
[10:11] One of 'em had to do with, with
[10:14] becoming a little more specific
[10:16] regarding shade trees in their Zoning
[10:18] Ordinance and their street trees.
[10:20] And the other had to do with
[10:23] the re the technical requirements for
[10:26] having signs development sign posted
[10:29] at the property line when a development is being proposed.
[10:34] We supported both of those.
[10:36] The third item was a, a little bit interesting.
[10:39] It is been in the news a lot about Addison Court.
[10:42] This came from the Borough and,
[10:46] and I don't understand all of the details
[10:51] surrounding this issue, but apparently
[10:56] regardless of what the Borough is going to do with
[11:00] Addison Court, and it appears they're gonna buy it
[11:02] or rent it or lease it or something to protect it.
[11:06] But along with that whole process, there was a request
[11:11] by the owner to have a change in the height requirements
[11:16] related to that building.
[11:21] Originally, he wanted, I think, to
[11:25] demolish the building and put up highrise.
[11:28] And so this is part of that.
[11:31] And for some reason that request kind
[11:34] of is hung on even though
[11:36] that's not being what's being discussed.
[11:39] And the planning commission for the Borough
[11:45] had this in front of them
[11:47] and they recommended to the Borough
[11:50] against making any changes until the
[11:55] full status of Addison Court has been established.
[11:59] And, and we know what, what, what, what is going to happen.
[12:03] And the planning commission, commission planning,
[12:06] commission commission supported,
[12:07] supported the Borough Planning Commission recommendation,
[12:11] recommendation that a hold be put on this
[12:14] or not granted until
[12:16] after Addison court discussions
[12:20] and resolution has been made.
[12:23] So those were the, those were the only items that were on
[12:26] the plan commission agenda at the region.
[12:29] Region. I will ask Shannon and their next meeting.
[12:34] Is the luncheon meeting meeting this month? Month?
[12:37] Do you want me to attend? Attend?
[12:38] Because there's a luncheon meeting. Meeting,
[12:41] - Yeah.
[12:42] I won't be able to be present for that.
[12:44] - Okay. Okay. I will do, I will do that.
[12:46] That I'll take care of of that. Thank you. Thank
[12:48] - You.
[12:49] Thank you.
[12:50] - Same thing, bill. Okay, lunch
[12:55] next on, on the agenda is unfinished business committee,
[12:59] which which leads to the, really the only matter
[13:03] before us this evening, it is the draft
[13:06] of the data center conditional use Ordinance amendment.
[13:10] The purpose today is for us to have a discussion
[13:13] with regard to it.
[13:15] Staff has drafted the proposed amendment
[13:20] to Ordinance amendment.
[13:23] And without getting
[13:28] saying anymore, other than say, certainly a lot
[13:31] of work was put into this
[13:32] and it represents, I think, think a lot of of thought.
[13:37] But with that in mind, the way in which we're going
[13:40] to proceed is staff will first make presentation
[13:45] explaining what's in the Ordinance and,
[13:49] and going over things.
[13:51] After that, the members
[13:52] of the planning commission will have the opportunity to make
[13:57] either ask questions or make comments.
[14:00] And third,
[14:01] then the public will be afforded the same opportunity
[14:06] of raising questions or making comments.
[14:12] So I guess I'll turn to Kim at this point.
[14:15] And I, I would hope that as part of the explanation
[14:20] for each person who has had the opportunity
[14:23] to see the initial draft,
[14:25] and now we've been handed a revised one,
[14:28] and I understand it's not significant,
[14:30] but if you will, some either you
[14:32] or Myas will point out the differences between
[14:35] what had been clearly previously
[14:37] and what has been it tonight.
[14:40] Yes. Thank you. Thank you. You
[14:42] - Thank you, chair.
[14:43] I am happy to present our draft by way of introduction.
[14:48] On April four 13th, part of ongoing discussion
[14:52] with the public, the commission voted
[14:54] to officially ask the board of Supervisors to direct us
[14:58] to look at this a little bit closer.
[15:00] On May 5th, the board
[15:01] of Supervisors heard her C concern brought us back
[15:04] to the planning commission June 24th.
[15:07] We had additional discussion at the planning mission level.
[15:10] Since that time, staff staff essentially collected
[15:13] as much information in this ever changing
[15:15] environment as we could.
[15:16] We've also participated in some of the regional discussions.
[15:20] We've looked at a number of ordinances, we've talked
[15:23] to those that come and talked with us.
[15:25] We've had some email exchanges.
[15:28] And then ultimately when we wrote this, we went back
[15:31] to our existing codes.
[15:32] And that's one thing I wanted to explain,
[15:35] what's divided in front of you?
[15:38] Oh, say that a little bit better with the way,
[15:41] not what's divided in front of you.
[15:42] The way that the draft Ordinance is divided
[15:46] is essentially in three sections.
[15:48] The first section was focused on conditional use itself.
[15:53] The second section is focused on what's called
[15:58] supplemental regulation.
[16:00] The difference is on conditional use.
[16:03] These are items that merit community discussion,
[16:06] community input into what can go focuses on the use itself.
[16:11] And that's what would come before this body.
[16:16] And then also get approved by the board of Supervisors.
[16:19] Again, focus on the use.
[16:20] That's what condit the conditional use part is.
[16:23] The supplemental regulations are items that need
[16:26] to be followed regardless.
[16:29] You don't really wanna put those in front of a vote
[16:31] because they're things like provide an environmental study,
[16:34] like there are more engineering type items
[16:36] where they have to be met.
[16:38] And the way this is organized, it's not unlike a lot
[16:41] of conditional uses.
[16:42] We see the conditional use is tied to the submittal
[16:46] of the land development plan.
[16:48] Every property, every development has
[16:50] a land development plan.
[16:52] The supplemental like regulations are things
[16:53] that you see along with the the land development plan.
[16:57] So just to kind of recap
[16:58] and be clear, the first part
[17:00] of the Ordinance is focused on the public input part.
[17:04] The second part is focused on things
[17:07] that are still gonna be required,
[17:09] but they're specific to data centers.
[17:12] The third part of the Ordinance are things that apply
[17:15] across the board where, so we went into the,
[17:19] the Township Ordinance and updated it
[17:22] because it wasn't specific to data centers,
[17:24] but maybe it was proper, it was prompted by this discussion.
[17:29] So kind of keep that in mind as a way to stay organized.
[17:32] As we have this conversation in general,
[17:35] you'll still see the same type of format that we've
[17:39] been discussing all along, where we focus on
[17:41] what are the different types of data centers.
[17:43] We've tweaked our definitions partly
[17:46] to match the regional conversation.
[17:47] Partly to simplify, we basically have small, medium
[17:51] hyperscale large, just a discussion in terms
[17:54] of what's different for what's in front of you.
[17:57] For the most part it's formatting
[18:00] and just a few little language clarified.
[18:04] However, on page should be on page six for everybody.
[18:09] And that is in
[18:11] section one.
[18:17] It's not hugely different.
[18:20] What we had before was with the conditional use,
[18:24] we required a number of submittals with the conditional use
[18:28] that were related to the land development plan.
[18:32] So the landscaping
[18:35] and environmental analysis, elevations
[18:39] and site plans, those are all things that really belong,
[18:43] that they're better suited in supplemental regulations.
[18:47] So what we did was we kind of met it halfway
[18:50] and instead we put language as
[18:53] a preliminary sketch of landscaping plan,
[18:57] generally indicating how the proposed developmental needs.
[19:01] And it refers to the chapter, again,
[19:03] this language will be tweaked.
[19:04] This is a continuing conversation,
[19:06] but I just want everyone know I'm not,
[19:08] I wanna fast on this is this is what the change is.
[19:12] And then I, instead of saying submit environmental,
[19:16] environmental and community impact.
[19:18] So first of all, there's not really standards in our code
[19:20] yet for what that means.
[19:22] So it, I changed it to a preliminary analysis
[19:25] and general statement of anticipated environmental
[19:28] and community impact.
[19:29] And then I added, but substantive enough
[19:33] to facilitate meaningful discussion
[19:34] of the proposed conditional use.
[19:37] So meeting that we're sure we're asking for these things.
[19:39] Same with the site or the elevations,
[19:41] understanding it's at the sketch level when
[19:44] it's for conditional use.
[19:45] So it's enough to facilitate conversation here, enough
[19:50] to determine if it's valid for a conditional use.
[19:54] But then with the understanding
[19:55] and the paragraph underneath it that when
[19:59] say it does get approved, then when they come back
[20:01] with the required land development plan,
[20:04] those things will be submitted in their full
[20:07] entirety that meets the code.
[20:09] The landscaping again.
[20:11] And we'll further define this process, what we mean
[20:14] by this environmental and community impact analysis.
[20:18] And then again, more specific elevations and site plans.
[20:23] And that's actually a clarification I'd like to go back
[20:26] and do with other parts of the code
[20:28] or other conditional uses
[20:30] because you're asking someone to do full engineering
[20:32] before they even know if the use is gonna be allowed.
[20:35] So that, that's the big, not that big if you think about it.
[20:39] But it is, it's impactful for the process.
[20:42] So that was the change then to say
[20:45] that a little slightly more precisely to save time,
[20:48] because staff has a beautiful PowerPoint presentation
[20:51] and in particular they're gonna focus on lighting noise.
[20:55] And you will see that we're hitting say, lighting, noise,
[21:00] def definitions, screening, construction,
[21:05] even the decommissioning.
[21:07] And with that, I'm going to turn this over to Steph.
[21:15] - Thank you very much, Kim.
[21:16] So a quick refresher for those who may not be familiar
[21:20] with the conditional use process, a conditional use is
[21:24] what is set aside for a use that is a permissible
[21:27] and legitimate use within a Zoning district.
[21:29] Something that is allowed
[21:32] but does require closer examination from
[21:34] the board of Supervisors.
[21:37] The use must meet express standards
[21:39] and criteria set forth in the Zoning Ordinance
[21:42] and be reviewed in a Public Hearing.
[21:45] Basically just a little bit more review
[21:47] with additional specific conditions.
[21:50] The way that we have organized, as Kim went
[21:55] into in a little detail there,
[21:57] we have three general updates in this draft Ordinance.
[22:01] We have the conditions,
[22:02] we have the supplemental regulations,
[22:04] and we have the Township wide regulations.
[22:08] As said a minute ago, the conditions are going to be things
[22:11] that are data center specific as well as project specific.
[22:14] They are going to be the main things discussed in a Public
[22:17] Hearing and the things that are going to change from project
[22:22] to project, the supplemental regulations,
[22:24] these are also data center specific,
[22:26] but they are much more performance based.
[22:28] They're much more engineering focused.
[22:30] They're not project specific.
[22:32] The reason they're separated is basically every project's
[22:34] going to have to meet these.
[22:36] We also have the Township wide regulations, which are going
[22:39] to be the things that as we were reviewing the concerns
[22:42] with data centers, we proposed updating
[22:46] throughout the whole Township.
[22:52] - Throughout the, the data center Ordinance draft,
[22:56] we focused on, on specific types
[22:59] of data data centers.
[23:01] In previous discussions, we have demonstrated
[23:04] that there are different types of data centers
[23:07] that require different types of approval.
[23:10] So For this specific Ordinance,
[23:15] we have drafted a, a three,
[23:20] three major scales of data center, which are small
[23:23] or accessory data centers.
[23:25] These are small accessory data centers.
[23:27] We are defining them to be essentially server rooms
[23:32] or a small accessory structure as not,
[23:36] that does not require any,
[23:39] any other accessory structure such as generators
[23:42] or HVAC systems to be installed.
[23:44] So let's say a company wants
[23:46] to install a server room servers in their,
[23:49] in their, in their business.
[23:51] And those servers will not require additional infrastructure
[23:55] other than that's that, that already exists.
[23:57] That supports the, the, the business.
[23:59] Then these are considered small data centers.
[24:03] When a data center to that scale
[24:06] requires additional infrastructure such as generators,
[24:10] HVAC systems or cooling towers, we are going
[24:14] to require the same level of, of, of, of
[24:20] we're gonna, they're gonna have the same level
[24:22] of requirements as a medium scale data centers,
[24:25] which jumps me back with, which takes me to medium
[24:27] to large scale data centers.
[24:29] These are large, medium,
[24:32] and large scale data centers of data centers are in between
[24:35] 5,000 to 999,000 square feet.
[24:40] So these data centers are going to be approved
[24:43] and going to be permitted only within the industrial
[24:46] and the light industrial
[24:47] and IRD district for
[24:51] hyperscale data centers
[24:52] and medium scale data centers
[24:54] through large scale data centers are going to be,
[24:56] are gonna go through the conditional use process,
[24:59] which was already explained by miles.
[25:02] Similarly, hyperscale data centers are going to go
[25:05] through a conditional use hearing.
[25:06] And those we have determined
[25:09] and defined to be any data center that is
[25:12] beyond 100,000 square feet
[25:14] and is on only going to be approved
[25:17] and within the industrial district.
[25:24] So
[25:25] - Before, before you move ahead, Mr.
[25:27] Chair, chair, how, how are, how do you wanna, wanna handle
[25:32] if, if, if there's some questions about what best percent
[25:37] do we deal with that now, now?
[25:39] Or do we deal with that with that at a later, later
[25:42] - Discussion, bill from the chair,
[25:45] obviously I'll accept any suggestions from the board,
[25:48] but my preference would be
[25:49] to let staff make its presentation and then proceed
[25:52] and you have notes and wanna go back to something later.
[25:57] But it, it, I think it will be a more fluid way
[26:02] of pro pro proceeding if staff can make its presentation
[26:07] without, without being interrupted for questions.
[26:10] - Okay. Well then I'll hold my questions.
[26:13] - Thank you Mr. Chair.
[26:16] So more in depth with data center accessory use
[26:20] and hyperscale.
[26:23] As I mentioned, looking at the picture on the left side,
[26:27] a a, a proposal for a data center such
[26:31] as a small server room
[26:33] would not require any conditional use hearing would be a
[26:38] would be treated to be a Zoning permit application
[26:41] that would go straight for staff review.
[26:45] A data center of a medium large
[26:48] to hyperscale would definitely require here a hearing from,
[26:52] from the Township.
[26:53] And it will be, it would go
[26:55] through the conditional use approval
[26:56] and it will require all
[26:58] of the supplemental regulations including Township,
[27:02] Township wide regulations will be applicable to
[27:05] those data centers.
[27:10] In this, in this level, we,
[27:15] in this Ordinance, we drafted ordinances regarding noise.
[27:20] We currently have a noise Ordinance in the Township
[27:23] because a lot of the regulations within data centers have
[27:28] to refer back to the noise Ordinance.
[27:30] We had to make sure that the
[27:32] or the noise Ordinance was to, was to, to,
[27:36] to the level that required a, that would meet the,
[27:41] that would meet the requirements of a data center.
[27:43] So in noise Ordinance, we have included elements such as
[27:50] sound modeling, vibration requirements,
[27:52] and natural sound barriers.
[27:54] For the noise studies specifically, we are requiring
[27:59] that the applicant of a data center prepare
[28:02] and propose a, a present, a pre
[28:05] and post construction noise to establish a baseline for
[28:09] what, what the current noise levels exist in the,
[28:13] in the property and what the projected noise levels will be
[28:17] for when the construction is complete.
[28:19] And the, and the, and the data center starts operating
[28:23] for some modeling it, some modeling will be the process
[28:26] by which the applicant will present it to the Township, a,
[28:30] a, a computer
[28:31] or a, a digital presentation of the, of the noise
[28:37] or how the noise spreads into from the,
[28:40] from the point from the data center and abroad.
[28:42] So we are going to be seeing a visual image of
[28:46] how the noise propagates from the data center
[28:49] to the neighboring properties through this sound modeling.
[28:52] So vibration is also a, a vibration.
[28:56] The vibration Ordinance will have certain level of vibration
[29:00] that the Township will require to
[29:04] for the applicant to meet.
[29:06] And all of those elements, including the, the noise studies
[29:09] and sound modeling and vibration will have
[29:11] to follow the international standard organizations
[29:14] baselines that were established.
[29:16] So that, so in, in that way that we will,
[29:20] those are the standards to which we are going to hold any,
[29:23] any of the applicants.
[29:25] So for sound barriers, we also establish on top of the,
[29:29] on top of setbacks we have established that a any applicant
[29:33] for, for us from medium to hyperscale data center, we have
[29:37] to establish a Setback of at least 1000 feet.
[29:41] And the sound barrier composed of vegetation
[29:45] of a 50 feet in, in width.
[29:52] In the Ordinance that we, that we drafted, we have included
[29:56] and addressed concerns regarding regarding low noise,
[30:01] noise, tunnel noise.
[30:02] And we also have, have prepared, prepared provisions
[30:07] for acoustical analysis require requirement
[30:11] for the current Ordinance as, as it's written,
[30:14] written is not, not, does not not be addressed any,
[30:17] any concerns, concern below low,
[30:19] below frequency tonal noise, noise.
[30:21] So we, we make sure that the new, the draft
[30:24] included elements that would address those things.
[30:28] For, for low frequency noise.
[30:34] For low frequency noise, we have included element.
[30:37] We have incorporated element that would address a way
[30:39] to scale and c wave to scale to make sure that when a,
[30:43] a noise, when a noise produced by a, by a data center
[30:48] is measured through a a scale,
[30:50] the equivalent C scale level should not, should not be,
[30:55] should not be 10 decibel above the, the, the a scale,
[31:02] the a weighted noise measurement.
[31:05] So the, and then we also included Atherton requirement,
[31:09] which is an additional penalty to whether when a tunnel,
[31:13] when a tunnel noise is found to exist in a
[31:16] or is, is found to be emitted by a data center.
[31:20] An additional penalty of five decibel will be applicable to
[31:24] to, to meet the Township Ordinance
[31:27] and all of those to establish a tunnel
[31:31] to establish whether a tunnel noise exists or not.
[31:34] The Ordinance also as as written, is requiring that the,
[31:39] the applicant hire a, a, a,
[31:44] a engineer or a professional specialized in the acoustical
[31:48] engineering to establish whether Atherton noise, atonal
[31:52] noise is being emitted.
[31:54] And once that is determined,
[31:56] then the applicable five decibel penalty is applied.
[32:03] - Thank you p. In terms of the lighting requirements
[32:08] that we have for data centers,
[32:11] we have 'em divided into those four conditions
[32:14] and supplemental regulations.
[32:16] The conditions create an allowance for the vast size
[32:20] and challenges of lighting.
[32:23] The supplemental regulations ha include a
[32:28] correlated color temperature for those
[32:31] who are less familiar.
[32:33] That's the warmth for coolness of the light.
[32:37] On the right side there we have a graphic that shows the
[32:41] 3000 kelvin maximum that we have
[32:46] for outdoor lighting.
[32:48] That maximum comes from dark sky ordinances that
[32:53] make things easier for nocturnal wildlife.
[32:57] It creates less light pollution
[32:58] and it's less disturbing to people living in the area
[33:02] as well as requirements
[33:04] for automatic lighting controls at night.
[33:07] Something that like when people are walking
[33:09] by will activate things will light up as opposed
[33:12] to emitting constant light all the time.
[33:17] In terms of requirements for utilities,
[33:22] there are requirements for written documentation stating
[33:25] that there is sufficient capacity from the public water
[33:27] utility provider, from the public sanitary sewer system,
[33:31] from the electric utility provider
[33:32] and the internet utility provider.
[33:36] This empowers the utility providers
[33:38] to have a clear step in the process
[33:40] to communicate with the applicants.
[33:43] We also make allowances saying that for the data centers,
[33:48] there's no surface water extractions
[33:50] that the water source must be from the public water utility
[33:54] provider and the water must go out
[33:57] through a public sanitary sewer system.
[34:00] This is how we currently have the Ordinance written
[34:03] for all other industrial uses
[34:06] for the wastewater going out.
[34:11] The other requirements
[34:13] that are included in the draft Ordinance are bulk
[34:16] requirements including Setback
[34:18] and height requirements with a $1,000 Setback for any
[34:23] equipment or part of the building
[34:25] to the nearest residential use
[34:29] square foot, I apologize, feet thank you.
[34:35] As well as a 45 foot height limit in terms
[34:39] of waste, there's requirements for any necessary state
[34:44] or federal permits for any hazardous waste as well
[34:46] as the submittal of an electronic waste plan
[34:49] for any electronic waste.
[34:50] There's a requirement to submit a decommissioning plan,
[34:54] including details of site restoration
[34:58] should they achieve the site as well
[35:00] as any waste disposal in that process.
[35:03] There's also a requirement to work
[35:05] with local emergency services to ensure
[35:08] that they have access
[35:09] and have established emergency procedures and with any use.
[35:14] We have also included the parking requirements in chapter
[35:17] 22 Chair.
[35:20] That's all we have to present for now.
[35:22] Please let us know what questions you have.
[35:25] - Okay. Thank you.
[35:28] All three who have made presentations
[35:32] we're, as I indicated
[35:34] before, we're going to start by with the members of the,
[35:37] of the planning commission.
[35:40] I want to make a preliminary comment for members
[35:43] of the planning commission understand this,
[35:45] but so that the public realizes it
[35:48] under current Pennsylvania law
[35:51] prohibiting data center is not as a permitted use,
[35:55] is not an option.
[35:57] We, we need to provide,
[36:00] or I shouldn't say this, it is imperative that,
[36:03] that we provide in our
[36:04] or Ordinance a data
[36:09] as a committee use in some, in some district,
[36:15] if we did not, would be considered exclusionary Zoning as
[36:20] defined by, by our Supreme Court.
[36:22] And that would lead to a terrible
[36:27] situation which would permit,
[36:28] permit the developer the option of,
[36:31] of probably would putting their data center
[36:34] wherever they wanted within the municipality.
[36:38] I think by the preparation of this Ordinance
[36:43] and the presentation of today as the first draft, we have
[36:47] crossed a hurdle
[36:49] and that, in my opinion,
[36:54] from a prior life, in my opinion,
[36:57] we now are protected against a claim of exclusionary Zoning.
[37:03] And so I I think having,
[37:06] this is a very important first step.
[37:09] Have we said that now turn to the members
[37:13] of the planning commission for questions or comments.
[37:17] And I don't have any particular suggestions how to proceed.
[37:21] So it's up to you folks.
[37:25] I, I could could start,
[37:27] we could go down the road.
[37:32] Miles chair, I believe Ms. Holiday has her hand raised.
[37:35] Oh, okay. Then as a Shannon, you're a good person.
[37:39] Just to get us started, go right ahead.
[37:43] - Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
[37:47] Thank you very much staff
[37:50] for providing this very thorough study.
[37:55] I think you all did a very good job with gathering
[37:58] and doing the research and gathering the data.
[38:01] That's, that's a sufficient amount of data to present to us
[38:06] as we were going through.
[38:09] While I do understand Mr. Chair, Mr.
[38:13] Chairman, that you know, we can't, you know, due to the law,
[38:18] we can't just exclude things on us.
[38:23] I do have, I do have a few concerns if, if, if, if, if,
[38:27] if I may, I,
[38:33] I, being a Hurricane Katrina survivor
[38:40] have been diagnosed with severe anxiety disorder.
[38:45] Not for the most part.
[38:47] I'm gonna be honest, I was a little offended,
[38:49] especially when they told me about depression.
[38:51] I, I'm pretty happy be person,
[38:53] but regardless of what's going on in my life,
[38:57] but nevertheless, that was what was the diagnosis was
[39:03] in addition, life happened a bit more as I lived out here
[39:07] and I was found myself in a, in a situation
[39:10] where I was very ended, suffered, triple the questions have
[39:15] in the right ear, but this ear is
[39:18] extremely sensitive to sound.
[39:21] And in addition to that, as, as most of you all know, I walk
[39:24] with a cane now because of the,
[39:27] because of being off balance since having my
[39:31] Strock surgery, a major surgery as will
[39:37] and have a titanium plate put in, in sort
[39:43] my, I'm saying of that to say,
[39:45] because this is my build ordinarily
[39:50] if regardless of my tone right, when I'm speaking,
[39:56] there are times
[39:58] and it is episodic when I'm talking with someone
[40:03] and it's based on the acoustics of the building
[40:08] or wherever we are.
[40:09] Sometimes the person, they may be talking low,
[40:13] but their voice bounced off the wall and hit my in the ear
[40:17] and it makes me fool to do like this.
[40:20] And I'm like, and and the more they talk,
[40:22] the boy, the boy hurt.
[40:24] It is like a, it is like a not, it is like a,
[40:27] it's kind really pain, but it's, it is an a, if you will
[40:32] because it's like, it's a, did somebody have a, oh
[40:35] what you call it, what you call that, that you holler
[40:38] through looking thing
[40:42] that you, that you talk to.
[40:44] It is like somebody had one of them.
[40:46] I directly in my hip, even though they're not,
[40:48] they may not be building.
[40:51] This is, this is why I'm saying this.
[40:53] I thought about that when we were go on.
[40:58] And I also thought about people
[41:01] who may be on the spectrum, right?
[41:05] There are vibrations that a person
[41:09] who has a maybe a DA like myself
[41:15] or who may be on the spectrum or a DHD
[41:19] or a DD, just certain things that some people may have
[41:25] an an, an extraordinary sensitivity to
[41:30] that ordinarily we may not have a sensitivity to.
[41:37] And it could, it could cause it could cause steming,
[41:40] whether it's a child or whether it's an adult, right?
[41:45] I'm saying that to say what I think about,
[41:48] even though I understand that there's a noise Ordinance,
[41:53] you know, there's the natural sound area,
[41:55] there's the noise sub, there are vibration requirements
[42:00] and, and so forth.
[42:02] The, I I understand an al analysis,
[42:06] my concern will remain whether
[42:09] or not with all of these things in place,
[42:15] whether or not that might still affect people like Shannon
[42:19] Holiday who's hearing impaired
[42:23] extra sensitive in this ear.
[42:24] And here's the other thing, it is, I don't work hearing aid,
[42:29] but it's a wall of hearing aid, right?
[42:33] People who are hearing aid is even more sensitive
[42:36] to the sound extra hard.
[42:40] Those are sensitive to the sound.
[42:42] But just wonder how might these things affect the group
[42:46] of people who I am taught, who I just mentioned.
[42:50] That is my concern.
[42:52] My concern is, and I know it is false, you know,
[42:56] it may be farfetched, it may not be farfetched,
[42:58] but one factor concerns me
[43:02] because I never just made it about Shannon.
[43:05] I'm always looking out,
[43:06] I'm always making it about the greater good, the, you know,
[43:09] for the good or a beat.
[43:11] And I'm just really concerned.
[43:13] I, I'm wondering whether, what if
[43:16] that have a negative effect on kids, right?
[43:20] Because they feel the vibration, those
[43:23] who may be on the spectrum
[43:24] or those who may have some sort of hyper diagnosed, hyper
[43:30] sensitivity in some way,
[43:32] or somebody like me who's here in repair,
[43:35] but has an extraordinary sensitivity in my right ear,
[43:39] which doesn't, I mean my left ear,
[43:40] which doesn't require hearing date, right?
[43:44] So I just wonder about all of these things
[43:47] and if we should experience some
[43:53] disturbance within ourselves, people
[43:56] who are on the spectrum stem as, as a result
[43:59] of the data center, depending on, on the size of
[44:03] the vibrations over have you,
[44:05] or with the light, you with the controls on light.
[44:08] I'm wondering whether
[44:10] or not the other would be some sort of
[44:15] exception that could appease.
[44:19] But if we don't have a, I know we, we gotta have one,
[44:24] but if we don't have data, none of that to worry about,
[44:28] but we don't know.
[44:30] And so my concern is that what if what works in
[44:35] for people, would there be an exception
[44:37] or an adjustment of her exception
[44:39] or an adjustment made despite the things that
[44:43] that was laid out to today?
[44:45] That's not my concern. That, that's my question.
[44:49] - Thank you. I don't know if has comments,
[44:54] comments or certain thoughts
[44:57] and comments will be taken into consideration.
[44:59] Thank you. Thank you. Any other, any other members
[45:04] of planning commission?
[45:05] Planning commission have questions or comments? Or comments?
[45:12] - We talked about the hundred square feet. Square feet.
[45:16] My concern is down the line when they get the same,
[45:19] same amount of generation power, smaller area has,
[45:24] has, have we looked at,
[45:25] at what's happening happening 3, 5, 10
[45:28] years down below the line.
[45:31] - The current scale require requirements that we have here,
[45:35] here for impact required require the same
[45:40] condition use process for data center center between
[45:44] 5,000 GFGA to the
[45:49] 9 999 9,000 9 990 99 9.
[45:52] The biggest difference between these two is the district
[45:55] that they are permitted in the IRD versus industrial.
[45:59] But if they can meet the conditional use requirements
[46:04] with future technology, then so the,
[46:07] the only way they would be able
[46:08] to bypass the conditional use process is if they were able
[46:11] to both have a data center
[46:14] that is less than five dozen square feet as well
[46:16] as not have any accessory structures.
[46:19] So that's no generators, that's no water towers
[46:22] and ideally very limited impact on the surrounding area.
[46:27] - But it would be possible in the future
[46:30] for a hyperscale center to go into the IRD
[46:34] if it's a smaller building.
[46:37] - But Mike, I I think that that definition of wood side,
[46:41] it is based on the size as opposed to
[46:46] what its capacity to do.
[46:49] Am I correct? That's correct.
[46:51] So I mean, if you could put into the 20,000 square feet,
[46:55] what today would take a hundred thousand square feet,
[47:00] that would bring it into a, a different category.
[47:04] Even though it has the capacity of
[47:06] what today would be a bigger one. Is that clear?
[47:10] - But we could get the noise
[47:11] and the vibration in that smaller building then
[47:15] that's now at a hundred thousand square fair.
[47:20] - The noise and vibration are
[47:23] the noise vibration studies are all required for, for all
[47:27] of the, the data centers starting from
[47:31] 5,000 square feet.
[47:32] So they will all go
[47:34] and be treated the same way
[47:35] as if there were large scale data centers.
[47:38] In that, in that, in that regard,
[47:40] the only difference is which district there are
[47:43] permitted to be in.
[47:47] - And I, the other thing is my old age, I got very cynical.
[47:52] The person who's doing it notes here,
[47:57] who does the sound modeling
[47:59] and the sound, my, my cynicism is if the company,
[48:05] the applicant is hiring the person,
[48:08] they may get the answer that they want.
[48:10] So my concern is
[48:12] that we don't say it's an independent person
[48:14] or someone agreeable to the Township.
[48:18] - I understand the concern, the Pennsylvania
[48:23] Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, when,
[48:27] when they approved an engineer to do a study, we hold
[48:31] that engineer specifically whether a firm hired
[48:34] by the applicant or by anybody.
[48:37] The engineer's license is on the line to show, to be,
[48:42] to be compliant, to be ethical and,
[48:45] and show accurate results.
[48:47] Because if an engineer is, is hired to do a a job,
[48:51] they're not going, they know
[48:53] that their license is on the line.
[48:54] Right? They're not going
[48:56] to be appeasing anybody in, in any regard.
[49:00] Additionally, there are, we put in place
[49:05] provisions in the Ordinance for the Township to,
[49:08] to have the right to hire a third party in case
[49:14] for any reason that the board and the planning commission or
[49:19] or residents may find necessary to hire third party in,
[49:24] in any study that that, that that has been done.
[49:27] - Okay, great.
[49:34] - I have a question about the slide that's up now.
[49:37] Actually, there was a note on page four of the memo
[49:41] underneath this graphic that said it needs to be considered
[49:45] that the IRD district is intended for compatibility
[49:48] with office and surrounding residential and is
[49:50] therefore not suitable for large scale higher
[49:53] impact data centers.
[49:55] And that we have IRD for large scale data centers.
[49:59] So it just was curious if you could explain the rationale
[50:02] behind leaving large scale data centers as part of the IRD
[50:07] - Kim - Probably should have said hyperscale.
[50:10] Hyperscale to differentiate. Differentiate.
[50:15] Thank you for pointing that out. Pointing
[50:16] - That out.
[50:17] - Thank you. So that, that was that typo.
[50:19] That typo, correct.
[50:23] - Okay. Thank you. - Okay.
[50:31] Any questions over to my web? To my web?
[50:34] - Yeah, I've got a I've got your question
[50:37] and I don't know who to ask really, but,
[50:39] but the, the water data uses isn't,
[50:44] isn't, it isn't changed.
[50:48] Use, use cooling is my understand. Right? Right.
[50:50] So it shouldn't, shouldn't have to go go through
[50:54] to UAA towards to a treatment plant.
[50:58] Is there anything that would
[51:01] prevent them from injecting that?
[51:05] It it is un it's unchanged water.
[51:08] It's what comes outta the ground.
[51:09] It's used to cool the equipment.
[51:11] Could they inject that back into the ground?
[51:15] And I mean, you know, the, the,
[51:17] the region has talked about doing that with,
[51:19] with our wastewater.
[51:22] Is there anything in the Centre Region
[51:25] that would prevent them from injecting that back in a,
[51:29] in a well in an injection?
[51:31] Well,
[51:33] - I'd like the opportunity to speak
[51:35] with the Township engineer on the specifics of that.
[51:38] However, this is in line with the,
[51:43] with the state recommendation on handling wastewater as well
[51:47] as the, from data centers as well as the Chester County
[51:51] and Allegheny County sample data centers.
[51:55] But I would be, I'll absolutely dig into the
[52:00] specifics of what the water coming
[52:01] out of the data center looks like.
[52:03] - Yeah, because you know, UAA,
[52:05] I mean the center region's problem isn't
[52:08] that we don't have enough water.
[52:10] It's the discharge of the water because, and,
[52:14] and it's not even that we can't treat it.
[52:16] The problem is that when it leaves UAJ, it's too warm
[52:20] to put into Spring Creek,
[52:21] which is a high quality trout stream.
[52:24] And so that's, that's really our,
[52:26] our limit in the Centre Region is how do we dispose
[52:30] of the water that that comes outta UAJA
[52:33] and the, the boroughs treatment plant.
[52:38] It, I I just struck me, it's like
[52:40] they don't really change this water.
[52:42] They don't, they use it for cooling
[52:45] and then why couldn't they put it right back in the ground?
[52:49] No, no. Net loss
[52:50] of water, Ralph.
[52:54] One of the things that I've heard in terms of this,
[52:59] the, the water needs
[53:01] and cooling is that in some cases
[53:06] they're looking at the water cooling process
[53:11] as having direct contact with some of the hardware.
[53:16] And the issue of picking up chemicals in
[53:20] that process there is, there's actually some, some
[53:25] sites where they're talking about having
[53:30] in the near future, the actual hardware
[53:35] boards be able to be submersible so
[53:39] that the water that the,
[53:41] the cooling happens right within the machine as opposed to
[53:46] having to go to air conditioning as you know,
[53:50] or water in some way.
[53:53] So it appears to me that the technology,
[53:57] which is like changing yesterday,
[54:01] has already thought about this whole business of
[54:04] what to do with water.
[54:07] And they're coming up with, with
[54:11] solutions in terms of cooling that involve the water,
[54:16] actually having some contact.
[54:19] I don't know what, I'm not a scientist
[54:22] with the actual hardware
[54:25] and in that case, picking up some of the chemical residue.
[54:30] That is why, you know, one of the things that
[54:33] has come up lately lately,
[54:42] - Lisa, - Just, just, I just had just have a couple
[54:45] questions I guess, I guess before we get into that today,
[54:47] I'll start, I'll start with with water.
[54:49] Water maybe, maybe 'cause we're just talking about about,
[54:54] so there weren't like absolute metrics
[54:59] and the water, water piece like a, a proposed water
[55:02] or electric electricity consumption.
[55:05] So is that that something that could be part
[55:09] of the conditions?
[55:13] - The closest example that I saw for
[55:16] that was requirements for
[55:21] changing topics slightly electric utility
[55:24] of if they consume a certain amount of power,
[55:27] then there are these additional requirements that
[55:30] a certain amount of it might be solar.
[55:32] But in terms of putting hard caps,
[55:40] I think we're very limited in
[55:44] what we can impose
[55:46] - And I Right.
[55:47] And I wouldn't say that, you know, the board would be in a,
[55:51] a place to impose caps on that.
[55:53] But I guess, you know, with the noise
[55:59] it was suggested to have a third party come in, you know,
[56:02] and, and maybe there's something else mentioned somewhere
[56:05] about an environmental impact study.
[56:07] Kind of like we do a traffic study,
[56:08] you have a third party consultant do that.
[56:11] So I'm just curious if that could be part
[56:13] of the condition is having a third party
[56:17] and this goes I see.
[56:19] Can, but I think the difference here is we're deferring
[56:22] to the utility
[56:23] - Itself, whereas if the noise, there's no noise utility.
[56:28] So that's where we're requiring a, a professional study.
[56:32] Whereas here the water company's okay letting their
[56:36] expertise take care of it.
[56:37] Power company's okay. Electric company with their expertise
[56:42] - Think - That's how we're proposing it at the
[56:44] moment. That's why we're talking.
[56:45] - Right? Yeah. And it is just a question, you know,
[56:47] that I was thinking because I was thinking that it's a,
[56:50] it's in a position, you know, it's a burden on the utilities
[56:54] to, to imagine what the usage will be
[56:58] and say yes.
[57:00] 'cause in the language in here it says it won't impact
[57:02] current use or future needs.
[57:04] It seems, it just seems so broad
[57:06] and so I yeah, sorry, part
[57:10] - Remember that's taken from, to obtain a Zoning permit,
[57:13] you have to have so many certificates
[57:16] or letters of approval from other outside entities.
[57:20] So we were kind of thinking along the, we actually toyed
[57:22] with what section you can put that in
[57:25] if anyone wants to explain that further.
[57:27] But that, that was kind of the idea that things are,
[57:29] that are really beyond the Township purview, pushing those
[57:33] to those that sort of own the problem.
[57:37] - Yeah, I would just throw it out as maybe something to,
[57:42] you know, for when this gets to the board for the board,
[57:44] consider okay, having in there, there,
[57:47] because then that was another question on page six that had
[57:52] this, I was looking at the language from mining and querying
[57:55] because it in my mind is kind of a little symmetrical.
[57:59] So in these conditions it says must provide,
[58:03] this is on page six in in section one, number four,
[58:06] it must provide proof
[58:08] and compliance that in summary the data center won't
[58:13] endanger the public health
[58:14] and safety if located were proposed.
[58:19] And so I was wondering what that would look like
[58:22] because in the mining inquiry it just says if the board
[58:25] determines, so it just might be
[58:30] something to consider moving forward with
[58:33] that language if you're like,
[58:43] and then just on the Zoning district's,
[58:49] I'm cons, I would have concerns about the large
[58:55] scale data center being in the IRE.
[58:59] So I think when we were talking about it,
[59:02] it was all industrial.
[59:03] And I understand the industrial zone is very small,
[59:07] but to have a large scale, I'm, I would have
[59:12] concerns like why not make in my mind why not have small
[59:16] and medium in IRD
[59:20] and large scale
[59:22] - 5,000 to almost a hundred thousand is too big of a
[59:25] - Range.
[59:26] Yeah. When it is, you know, in our case we have
[59:30] so many neighborhoods surrounding our IRD districts,
[59:35] so we just, so it's something to, you know,
[59:39] because we're crafting this now, so we have the ability
[59:42] to do things for every month so that, you know,
[59:46] if we wanna say small in IRB, medium,
[59:48] large hyperscale in industrial
[59:51] would've been the way I would've started.
[59:53] You start there.
[59:57] - I think we were there and we condense but go back because
[1:00:01] - I think you're right.
[1:00:02] Yeah, that's, I mean it's, it is difficult
[1:00:04] because of the way our Zoning Ordinance has the, the bulk
[1:00:08] and area categories.
[1:00:10] And so I assume this would be maybe even using a new one
[1:00:14] of those categories.
[1:00:18] So, but that gives a lot of flexibility as to
[1:00:21] what you're putting in there.
[1:00:23] So
[1:00:28] - May I jump in and just ask a question
[1:00:29] based on what you said?
[1:00:31] We don't really de define medium and large, do we?
[1:00:36] We we've defined small and we've defined hyperscale,
[1:00:41] but medium to large is
[1:00:44] between 5,090 9,000.
[1:00:48] So which goes to what Lisa's question is,
[1:00:53] if we def, and I'm just pulling number out,
[1:00:56] but if we define medium has five to 30,000
[1:01:00] or whatever it was, and large from 30 to 99 9,
[1:01:05] it just seems that there's ambiguity there
[1:01:09] and we're not, by not making that distinction,
[1:01:14] we don't really make the,
[1:01:16] before that, that opportunity of distinguishing between
[1:01:21] something between small and large.
[1:01:27] - The PowerPoint doesn't show it because we're,
[1:01:30] because of the purpose of industrial,
[1:01:32] because of where we, where we are proposing
[1:01:36] of the medium enlarged to be permitted conditional use.
[1:01:40] However, the Ordinance itself defines
[1:01:44] and separates a medium to large scale data center
[1:01:48] from the definition, the medium data center is anything
[1:01:52] between 5,000 and 20,000 square feet.
[1:01:56] And a large scale data center starts to be
[1:01:59] 20000.1 2001
[1:02:04] to 100 to 99,999.
[1:02:09] - And for those, looking at the draft Ordinance,
[1:02:12] that is on page 13 at the bottom,
[1:02:16] - So are, and I don't want to put any words in Gmail,
[1:02:20] but I, since we now know that
[1:02:25] if one wanted to, one could pose small
[1:02:29] and medium in or or medium
[1:02:33] because apparently small can all districts were accessory,
[1:02:37] which is interesting.
[1:02:39] But if you had medium in, in an IRD and large
[1:02:44] and hyperscale is what you're saying, press
[1:02:47] - Industrial - In industrial.
[1:02:53] - Well, I, I mean I ask where those numbers came from.
[1:02:56] Are are they relative to anything or did,
[1:02:59] or did we just pull outta the
[1:03:01] - Here?
[1:03:02] So these numbers there, there's no specific as, as Ralph
[1:03:06] and everything, and Bill has mentioned
[1:03:09] before, the industry is constantly changing.
[1:03:13] What today, what what is
[1:03:15] considered a hyper skilled data center today may not be
[1:03:18] what's considered tomorrow
[1:03:19] or what was considered two months ago.
[1:03:22] So this is the opportunity.
[1:03:24] These numbers were, yes,
[1:03:27] they were established based on the medium of
[1:03:29] what we've seen in, in throughout the ordinances
[1:03:32] that we've read, the articles that we've read.
[1:03:35] But it also presents an opportunity for us as a Township
[1:03:39] to determine what are we, what size do we want
[1:03:42] to be considered large or medium scale.
[1:03:45] If we decide that anything that is in this range has to go
[1:03:50] to this district because we consider that to be large, then
[1:03:53] that's what we are going to put in the Ordinance.
[1:03:55] And that decision is gonna come here with the,
[1:03:58] with the commissions and with the, with the public.
[1:04:00] And we are gonna receive all the input.
[1:04:03] And as a reminder, this Ordinance is a draft, so
[1:04:08] is going to be subject to changes.
[1:04:10] And the reason why we provided this is
[1:04:12] because staff went, staff thought researched
[1:04:17] and this is what we were able to find.
[1:04:19] Now we are looking for input from everybody to be able
[1:04:23] to contribute and to improve
[1:04:24] and to make these ordinances know better, I guess
[1:04:28] for, for the Township.
[1:04:29] So this is, this is,
[1:04:31] this is basically the purpose of this meeting.
[1:04:38] - Okay. Bill,
[1:04:41] - I appreciate this last discussion
[1:04:44] because I was clearly confused as I read
[1:04:48] through some of the documents, like on page five
[1:04:53] it specifically talks about,
[1:04:56] - Are you talking five of well, five of the order of five,
[1:05:01] - No, well, we've got two page five.
[1:05:08] We have to, anyway, I think we need to clarify.
[1:05:17] We received two charts
[1:05:23] and, and they did not differentiate
[1:05:27] between medium and large.
[1:05:30] But then when we go into the document itself,
[1:05:34] we find there is a, a determination medium up
[1:05:38] to 20,000 square feet that made it confusing.
[1:05:44] Okay. Because on the, on one part
[1:05:47] of the documentation you gave us,
[1:05:49] there's no definition difference.
[1:05:51] It's five to 99,000
[1:05:56] and that's much too broad for what we're dealing with.
[1:06:01] But then later on there's a reference to 20,000.
[1:06:05] So I think we need to, you know,
[1:06:09] - Yeah, for clarification for communication as we,
[1:06:13] when we start to get Public Comment, go
[1:06:15] by the Ordinance draft, the memo is meant to just be a,
[1:06:19] like a table of content.
[1:06:20] Got it. Because it is too much.
[1:06:23] - And I go by the Ordinance, I understand that,
[1:06:25] but it needs to be consistent.
[1:06:27] Yes. And you know, because that becomes a public document.
[1:06:32] Yes. And and that's what I, that's part
[1:06:34] of what I was looking for.
[1:06:35] Thank you. In the Ordinance,
[1:06:39] are we not permitting the applicant
[1:06:44] for the medium, large and
[1:06:48] or hyperscale to produce their own energy
[1:06:52] to produce their own power?
[1:06:54] I I, by the, by the wording, are we requiring
[1:06:59] that the applicant must use the grid
[1:07:03] and not provide their own power?
[1:07:07] - We include generators as part
[1:07:11] of the accessory used things that may be included in terms
[1:07:16] of electrical consumption.
[1:07:21] On page 10 to 11,
[1:07:24] we require written confirmation from the
[1:07:26] electrical utility provider.
[1:07:29] But do not, we don't explicitly say that,
[1:07:33] we don't explicitly say that you
[1:07:37] must get it from the electric utility provider, but
[1:07:39] - There is a, and that's exactly, that's exactly the section
[1:07:41] that I'm referring to because we, we,
[1:07:43] we say they must get certification from the electric
[1:07:47] provider end of of statement.
[1:07:53] I can't, I can't tell you Kim, you're pointing at something.
[1:07:57] - Yeah, top of page 11
[1:07:59] where we do say get confirmation from the electric utility
[1:08:02] provider, but then B alternative
[1:08:05] or off grid energy generation, including solar, wind,
[1:08:08] fossil fuel, or nuclear energy generating systems shall be
[1:08:14] considered separate
[1:08:16] and are subject to Township state federal requirements.
[1:08:19] Right. Trying to put some catchalls,
[1:08:21] but yeah, I hear what you're saying. So
[1:08:25] - I I'm just saying that, you know, we need
[1:08:26] to get a little consistency with some of that, some of
[1:08:29] that wording because the implication in the first part
[1:08:33] saying that, you know, they, they have
[1:08:35] to have permission from the power supplier
[1:08:38] and don't say anything else.
[1:08:39] I think we've got a reference at that point that,
[1:08:43] that the option of of providing their own is there,
[1:08:52] It was brought up about the, the consultants
[1:08:57] or the engineers to do the approvals of, for example,
[1:09:02] sound and vibration and all of those things.
[1:09:06] And you know, typically we have
[1:09:11] the consultant, we have the applicant
[1:09:16] provide that technical expertise
[1:09:19] by hiring their own engineers to do that.
[1:09:22] However, I think Mr.
[1:09:24] Rads has brought up a good point
[1:09:27] and I recognize that the engineer,
[1:09:31] whomever hires him, puts his license on the line.
[1:09:35] But could we have some wording in there that says, that says
[1:09:41] the applicant
[1:09:43] and the Township shall agree upon
[1:09:47] an appropriate firm to provide that analysis.
[1:09:51] Can we say that just as kind
[1:09:56] be, because the alternative is if
[1:10:01] they hire somebody
[1:10:03] and then some question comes of their results,
[1:10:08] then we hire somebody
[1:10:13] at our expense
[1:10:17] and at very large hourly wage
[1:10:21] to look at the data and review it.
[1:10:24] I would rather have some input upfront
[1:10:29] that, that we've, we've vetted the firm as well.
[1:10:35] And so just, just a thought there,
[1:10:43] going back to the issue of square footage
[1:10:47] for our definitions
[1:10:50] of the different sizes, miles,
[1:10:54] in any of your research, did you find any other source
[1:11:00] that defined them by any other metric other than square foot
[1:11:07] in, would you like to take this one?
[1:11:10] Yeah.
[1:11:14] - Definitions of data centers across the board have
[1:11:18] different metrics that they use to say this is a data center
[1:11:23] or this is a medium large or, or hyperscale.
[1:11:27] If you recall in our first meeting we had a table
[1:11:32] indicating even a co-location as a type of data center,
[1:11:36] a AI data centers.
[1:11:40] All, all of those elements, including co-location,
[1:11:43] AI data centers are not in, when it comes to Zoning,
[1:11:48] they don't have any, any, any reference
[1:11:51] to which we can like put it in a, in a,
[1:11:55] in a place co-location data center is a type of data center
[1:12:00] that is used by different
[1:12:03] companies in one specific building.
[1:12:04] So if you look, if you go to Google
[1:12:07] and search types of data centers, you will find one of those
[1:12:10] to be co-location.
[1:12:11] Some of them AI data centers
[1:12:13] or even campus data centers, they use different metrics that
[1:12:18] in terms of Zoning are completely irrelevant and we, and,
[1:12:22] and, and will not be enforceable in terms of Zoning,
[1:12:26] which is why we found different sources that
[1:12:30] even though they didn't go in depth into the type
[1:12:33] of data center to be like co-location, they had elements
[1:12:36] that could be defensible in terms of Zoning.
[1:12:39] And those elements are scale, like the area that they,
[1:12:43] that they occupy
[1:12:45] or the, the, depending on the type
[1:12:48] of the size is sometimes also correlated to the,
[1:12:51] to the energy consumption.
[1:12:53] So that was also a different element that we,
[1:12:55] that we grabbed and we, we, we were able
[1:12:58] to tie into the type of data center depending on,
[1:13:02] on the size and, and, and energy usage.
[1:13:05] Those two elements really are the only ones
[1:13:08] that we could find that would determine
[1:13:10] or define the tip a scale
[1:13:12] of data center other than co-location
[1:13:15] or the type of infrastructure
[1:13:17] or how many, how many servers it has
[1:13:20] or what type of switch it uses.
[1:13:24] This is, these elements are not defensible,
[1:13:27] are not enforceable
[1:13:28] and would not make much sense
[1:13:30] to include in a Zoning Ordinance.
[1:13:34] - Good. I mean, thank you for, for, for that response.
[1:13:38] In terms of, of looking at it, I am concerned about one
[1:13:42] of the things that Mike mentioned in terms of,
[1:13:45] because the science is moving so fast
[1:13:49] with this whole concept, I'd like
[1:13:53] to see two things.
[1:13:55] One is I'd like to see some metric
[1:13:59] that addresses the fact that today
[1:14:04] they can pro they can provide 10 million of something
[1:14:09] of a product with the, with the space they have,
[1:14:15] but five years from today that same space
[1:14:20] can then provide double that amount.
[1:14:23] And does that have any impact on, on what we wanna do?
[1:14:28] Maybe if, if there were something that, that, that could
[1:14:33] comment in our Ordinance with regard
[1:14:37] to the change in the science and,
[1:14:41] and I mean we're, we're in, we're in
[1:14:45] pristine territory here.
[1:14:48] This, this is stuff that hasn't been typically
[1:14:52] arrived at in Zoning and Zoning ordinances.
[1:14:57] And, and I am concerned about
[1:15:01] how fast the science is moving
[1:15:04] and that, that we can't be, I'd rather not be in a position
[1:15:09] to have to recall our Ordinance
[1:15:13] every 12 months to update something in or other in it.
[1:15:18] If we can avoid that, it may be that the science is moving
[1:15:22] so fast that we can't avoid it.
[1:15:27] - Is it possible to put something about
[1:15:30] the size is being reviewed every five years
[1:15:33] or something for Yeah, I don't know if that's legal or not,
[1:15:37] - You know.
[1:15:38] Well, there's nothing that,
[1:15:38] there's nothing that prevents it.
[1:15:40] And I guess if in response to this though, we're speaking
[1:15:45] of a Zoning Ordinance as opposed to
[1:15:51] what's, what's happening within that structure,
[1:15:55] which isn't really, at this point,
[1:15:58] in my mind, isn't a Zoning.
[1:16:00] So if it could produce, I don't know anything. Right.
[1:16:04] But I mean, if, if it can double its capacity,
[1:16:09] but it's, it's still in the, when it's not doing anything
[1:16:14] structurally, I don't see that as a Zoning issue
[1:16:19] as long as it's still meeting all of the, all
[1:16:21] of the other requirements, the, the sound
[1:16:24] electric, whatever, everything else.
[1:16:26] So I, I don't see how
[1:16:31] the advancement of technology
[1:16:35] necessarily affects the Zoning.
[1:16:41] - But, And, and I, I understand that Louis,
[1:16:43] because we've been doing this kind of stuff for a long time
[1:16:46] and you've been in it, in the weeds in your previous life.
[1:16:52] But that doesn't mean to say that we can't start
[1:16:56] to look at some of this stuff
[1:16:58] because in my mind we are,
[1:17:02] we are in a space with these AI centers that
[1:17:08] we've never really, the, the science is becoming part
[1:17:11] of the issue in the discussion
[1:17:14] and not just the square feet.
[1:17:18] It is impacting a much larger environment
[1:17:22] than we typically have had to deal with
[1:17:34] on page 10
[1:17:37] of the hor.
[1:17:47] Yeah. Yeah. I'm looking at the old one.
[1:17:52] I don't know where it is in the new, it talks about
[1:17:56] no water utilized by the facility shall be discharged,
[1:18:00] released, or otherwise exported from site, except
[1:18:03] through a connection to a public sanatory sewer system.
[1:18:06] And, and, and Ralph brought that up,
[1:18:11] I asked the question because it occurs in other industrial
[1:18:15] environments where they truck their water
[1:18:20] to some disposable site.
[1:18:22] In other words, they don't use the public system.
[1:18:27] They, their water is contaminated.
[1:18:29] Their fluid is com contaminated
[1:18:32] and it can't go into the local sewer system for treatment
[1:18:37] because it is far more advanced than
[1:18:39] what the system can handle.
[1:18:41] So they truck it to a appropriate site.
[1:18:46] So it would be my thought that, that we might want to,
[1:18:51] to allow for that
[1:18:54] or not allow for it, one or the other.
[1:18:57] But clearly there are examples now
[1:19:02] where sites are trucking their treatment water
[1:19:08] to other places for appropriate treatment.
[1:19:12] So we might want to address
[1:19:13] that in a little different way in that particular section
[1:19:25] under our electricity consumption.
[1:19:28] There's been an awful lot, lot of talk statewide wide,
[1:19:32] and I don't know what, what the status is of this is,
[1:19:36] but the governor, governor in assets in terms of,
[1:19:39] of impact on local fees, local
[1:19:44] electrical fees, and like I said, I don't know
[1:19:48] what the status is,
[1:19:49] but the governor has alluded to the fact that
[1:19:55] the impact of the center
[1:19:59] cannot impact local
[1:20:04] fee increases.
[1:20:07] And we don't say anything about that.
[1:20:11] And, and I'm wondering whether we want to have that within
[1:20:16] the, the Ordinance.
[1:20:19] - Well, I agree with you on that.
[1:20:21] That is part of the condition of the, whether water
[1:20:25] or electrical consumption, that it not only be that it,
[1:20:30] there is the capacity that it,
[1:20:32] but it would not impact upon the rate of,
[1:20:37] of all other consumers of that, that utility.
[1:20:42] I, I think that is important as for it to be considered.
[1:20:48] I I've had that note also.
[1:20:52] And I, I guess question I have in terms
[1:20:57] of that, and this may be, so
[1:21:01] in the weeds we say that if,
[1:21:06] if it is desired to have an alternative
[1:21:09] or off grid energy generation that's
[1:21:13] considered a separate use, would
[1:21:15] that be considered an accessory use?
[1:21:19] It would have to be an accessory use
[1:21:21] because it can't be another primary use.
[1:21:27] So, so I think that's, it should,
[1:21:32] so I think it might be appropriate
[1:21:34] to consider whether we would want
[1:21:36] to say it shall be considered as a
[1:21:42] separate access or simply as an accessory use
[1:21:45] and subject to Township, state and federal requirements.
[1:21:49] But, but I also feel that there's a need to be concern.
[1:21:53] And, and I think Bill, in with regard to that, if the
[1:21:59] developer were providing alternative off grid energy
[1:22:02] generation, that would make it simple for the utility to say
[1:22:07] that there is sufficient capacity.
[1:22:10] 'cause it's not gonna, it, it would be zero additional
[1:22:13] or whatever capacity it is.
[1:22:15] But if, if so I think, you know, still getting
[1:22:19] that approval, it makes it easy.
[1:22:21] And I, last point, I have in response to questions,
[1:22:25] this concept of engineer,
[1:22:27] and I understand my, your cynicism or skepticism,
[1:22:38] I used to deal a lot with appraisers
[1:22:41] and the higher level
[1:22:45] of appraisal was called MIA
[1:22:48] and there were those thought that meant made
[1:22:51] or MAI made as instructed.
[1:22:56] So, but I don't know how else what we can do about that
[1:22:59] because I, if they say I want, we would a,
[1:23:04] to be our sound engineer, we say we want B, are we going to
[1:23:08] where, where are we?
[1:23:11] But, but, but I think your point is well taken.
[1:23:15] We, I don't know that we have a choice if,
[1:23:17] if they're coming forward with a licensed
[1:23:23] engineer, I think we have to accept that
[1:23:27] and shame on them
[1:23:29] and shame on us if we find that
[1:23:31] that person was not honest with us.
[1:23:36] But I don't know how we, I don't know how we can, I mean,
[1:23:39] I guess we could, but it, it, I I've not seen it.
[1:23:43] I mean, we don't, when an engineer comes in
[1:23:46] with a a site development, we don't, we don't question
[1:23:51] that person's qualifications be, I mean, they're working,
[1:23:55] they're employed by the, the developer
[1:23:58] and they come forward with the plans
[1:24:00] and we're not saying, well,
[1:24:02] are those really legitimate?
[1:24:05] Because he is trying to help his, his client.
[1:24:09] I think we need to accept the,
[1:24:16] the appropriateness of documentation
[1:24:20] that is sealed by a
[1:24:24] or sealed by appropriate people, whether it be
[1:24:29] civil engineers or sound engineers,
[1:24:33] - But sweet bill put it mutually agreed upon.
[1:24:36] - But how do you, what I, that's really saying
[1:24:40] that they would have to agree on ours.
[1:24:43] - Well, there's or vice versa.
[1:24:45] - There's gotta be a, a list of state approved.
[1:24:49] Again, it doesn't matter what
[1:24:52] - Well, well, I think that's right.
[1:24:54] Yeah, they, I, but,
[1:24:56] but state approved is if I'm licensed by the state
[1:25:00] of Pennsylvania to be a civil engineer,
[1:25:07] it, we require that on our plans.
[1:25:11] I mean, I just can't have somebody coming in
[1:25:13] and say, I'm gonna do it.
[1:25:15] And just as I think we would still have the same requirement
[1:25:18] for any, well, any other expert's gonna be licensed
[1:25:23] by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Well,
[1:25:26] - I, I think we, I think we'd have a hard time saying that,
[1:25:30] you know, if somebody comes up with an engineer or,
[1:25:32] or whatever, a service that's gonna do a, you know,
[1:25:36] a traffic study
[1:25:37] or whatever to say we don't, if, if they're licensed,
[1:25:43] we're not gonna say, well, we don't like 'em.
[1:25:47] - But that's what I, that's what, that's what we're saying.
[1:25:50] - But we do, we do, for most of the plans that we get
[1:25:53] that aren't nearly as, as, as technically
[1:25:59] like this particular one, we have an engineer who we pay
[1:26:05] to review whatever that engineer's
[1:26:09] group submits.
[1:26:11] So there is already a Township review.
[1:26:16] The, the level of that review varies depending on
[1:26:20] what is necessary.
[1:26:21] But, but we do have,
[1:26:23] but the Township cer clearly doesn't employ
[1:26:28] or necessarily want to employ through contract
[1:26:33] somebody as specialized as the vibration or the sound
[1:26:38] and some of that kind of stuff.
[1:26:41] If we were mutually approving, you know, vetting them,
[1:26:45] I think that would just say to us
[1:26:48] and the public that there was an attempt to,
[1:26:51] to protect all of our interests.
[1:26:55] We're gonna start to hear about all
[1:26:57] of the horror stories coming out of the country
[1:27:02] of these centers and what's happened in those areas.
[1:27:07] And, and there were engineers in all of them.
[1:27:11] And, and so
[1:27:15] - Do they have to be licensed by the state of Pennsylvania
[1:27:17] or could I bring in somebody licensed in North Dakota?
[1:27:21] - I think to practice in Pennsylvania,
[1:27:23] you have to be licensed in
[1:27:24] - Pennsylvania.
[1:27:26] I, I would think and,
[1:27:27] and I, the last comment I'll have on that,
[1:27:29] and we then maybe we, we should move on.
[1:27:31] I don't want us to be assuming any liability.
[1:27:35] - That's the other issue.
[1:27:37] - I mean, if we're saying this, we agree with this
[1:27:41] and if they screw up, are we as liable as, I don't know
[1:27:45] that we are or not, but, but we're,
[1:27:47] we're putting our ourself out there.
[1:27:49] Okay, Kim, Mr.
[1:27:51] - Chair before far away.
[1:27:54] - I, I wanted to say please
[1:27:58] - Excuse, excuse me, Shannon, before,
[1:28:00] before your comment, Kim is in the middle
[1:28:02] of making a, a statement. Go ahead Kim.
[1:28:04] - Thank you. Briefly wrote a note about
[1:28:07] what you said about accessory still back under
[1:28:10] electricity consumption.
[1:28:12] So made the note about accessory
[1:28:14] and then just a note on the impact on local fees,
[1:28:19] that is potentially an,
[1:28:20] an appropriate Township level discussion,
[1:28:23] but I, I would offer not in Zoning
[1:28:25] or Aldo, that could be not in a governmental agreement
[1:28:28] or something at the, the manager level and above and so,
[1:28:35] - So long as it can be covered. Yeah,
[1:28:37] - So, so kind of starting a separate list of items,
[1:28:39] just like we have the items that apply across the board,
[1:28:42] not specific to data centers
[1:28:44] and starting a fourth list of items like that.
[1:28:46] Thank you. Thank
[1:28:51] - Shannon.
[1:28:52] Did you have another comment that you wanted to make? I
[1:28:54] - Just have five questions that I'd like to present
[1:28:59] and, you know, know that's, it's, it I I don't even expect
[1:29:04] any immediate response to, to them.
[1:29:06] I just want 'em on record.
[1:29:08] And this, this is based on, on notes I took,
[1:29:11] if the discussion was, was, was taking place, if I may
[1:29:17] - Go right ahead, - It possible
[1:29:22] for us to require developers who are
[1:29:28] submitting applications to, to, to develop data centers, to,
[1:29:33] to, to use solar power as opposed to using,
[1:29:38] using electricity from,
[1:29:41] from our utility resources first.
[1:29:44] That's the first question. Second question is,
[1:29:47] can we put limitation on the type of data centers
[1:29:51] that will be allowed in, in our order
[1:29:54] and within person Township.
[1:29:57] So in other words, colocation data centers, can we maybe
[1:30:03] have a restriction on not allowing colocation data centers
[1:30:06] to be in fer and Township for an example or I,
[1:30:10] or you know, just certain types.
[1:30:12] Okay, so the next one is, can we issue a mandate on the type
[1:30:16] of generators that data center is used
[1:30:19] and require them to use noiseless generators?
[1:30:24] Then the next question is, the fourth question is whether we
[1:30:29] quantify how many data centers will be allowed within the
[1:30:34] specificity of Township within the Township.
[1:30:38] And the last question is, it is more
[1:30:42] that it is more, it's kind of like a statement,
[1:30:45] but it's, it's still something that I,
[1:30:47] that could be responded to.
[1:30:50] I think we should consider what,
[1:30:56] what would a
[1:31:01] definition truly constitute in
[1:31:08] a data set of operating and providing clean air?
[1:31:14] Because the only thing that I've been able to
[1:31:18] find when I research, you know, and
[1:31:21] or hear of testimonials from the existence
[1:31:25] of these data centers is that they emit fuel
[1:31:30] and green gass, which loose the air considering the fact
[1:31:34] that some people are autoimmune compromised.
[1:31:38] You know, may they have cancer, may it be a cancer survivor
[1:31:42] or what have you, or may have the gene
[1:31:45] and not know that they are vulnerable to have cancer.
[1:31:48] So these are my questions
[1:31:51] and with that being said, I agree, I I
[1:31:55] that concludes my questions.
[1:31:57] - Thank you. Like to now, now? Oh yeah,
[1:32:01] - A few.
[1:32:02] - A few. I'll go. I - I'll try to be great.
[1:32:04] - I I'll go right ahead. I'm sorry. I'm sorry Nick. I,
[1:32:09] - My first question is for staff.
[1:32:10] Staff, is there any, any other industry whose
[1:32:13] square footage, footage is regulated?
[1:32:15] Regulated, particularly in the IRI where we say, say
[1:32:19] regardless of those lot, lot size,
[1:32:21] you're gonna use this much square, this much square footage,
[1:32:23] you're then you're bumped up to industrial.
[1:32:24] Industrial? Or is this the only instance
[1:32:27] where we proposed proposal?
[1:32:29] - Our, the first one that I,
[1:32:30] that I call is personal care homes.
[1:32:32] Care homes. Those are distinguished size, size between
[1:32:36] small, small and large.
[1:32:37] Large. I would have to double
[1:32:40] - Check they large, large, they moved to a different zone.
[1:32:42] Zone would be permissible in that zone. Okay. Yes, yes.
[1:32:46] - Places of assessment, - Percent large scale, large social
[1:32:51] - Ralph Paul adult places assembling beliefs are
[1:32:54] also distinguishing by size. Size.
[1:32:56] - Okay. My concern is I might open up some litigation sound,
[1:32:59] sound, I exclusion engineer, but if other, other industries,
[1:33:01] they're also regulated like that.
[1:33:04] If that's the case, then going off of your comment
[1:33:08] before, I think I propose we should include language in this
[1:33:11] Ordinance to just put large data centers 20,000 feet
[1:33:16] up to 99,000 9 9 9
[1:33:18] and just make that permissible on in the industrial zone.
[1:33:23] That's something that I'd like to see in the language if
[1:33:26] that's agreeable to the, the rest of the committee course.
[1:33:29] - Yeah, well the other thing to consider there is,
[1:33:34] I mean you've also, yeah, you can build a data center,
[1:33:37] but what, what's our impervious coverage?
[1:33:40] I mean, you're also gonna be limited on a lot size as to
[1:33:43] how big a building you can put
[1:33:45] because of a limit on impervious
[1:33:47] and I don't recall what they are.
[1:33:49] - B was 50%.
[1:33:51] Yeah, 40% building or 50% impervious. I, I believe.
[1:33:55] - Yeah. So it's gonna take a, it is gonna take a big lot
[1:33:59] to put anything of any size on.
[1:34:03] - Yeah, I was going to say,
[1:34:05] and with your comment, can we look at incorporating
[1:34:08] with these, you know, kind of more structured definitions
[1:34:11] of small, medium, large minimum lot sizes because mining
[1:34:16] and corn does have minimum lot size
[1:34:20] and then a specific impervious
[1:34:23] coverage maximum.
[1:34:26] So I think, and obviously it'd have to be really specific
[1:34:29] for each type that we're talking about here,
[1:34:32] but I think that might help with this, especially
[1:34:36] with those large setbacks.
[1:34:38] I think looking at what that would require,
[1:34:41] and then the only other comment I had was I was wondering if
[1:34:44] it might be, we keep saying data center
[1:34:47] and I'm just concerned that we only have this one term
[1:34:52] and I think there's other terminology
[1:34:54] and so if we can just add, consider adding a sentence
[1:34:57] that says all other had something
[1:35:01] like this term encompasses all forms of data centers.
[1:35:05] There was, you know, server farms, you know,
[1:35:09] different processing facilities, you know,
[1:35:11] whatever fits under that usage
[1:35:16] definition that we have there.
[1:35:18] So, so that the name is not an obstacle in the future.
[1:35:25] - Okay. - If I may one more of course might be a,
[1:35:28] a moot point, but how does this amendment interact with
[1:35:31] and of the discussion about proposed
[1:35:34] shared land use agreement with the other townships?
[1:35:37] Does that obligate other townships
[1:35:40] to have similar ordinances
[1:35:42] or to have a different one that's like complimentary if
[1:35:47] that's not the discussion at this level
[1:35:48] of plain personal, that's fine. I don I don't,
[1:35:51] - I don't think, I don't think it does.
[1:35:52] I mean we have ours, but if we have a shared group
[1:35:57] and if, if it were to be something were to
[1:36:00] be developed in College Township, they're gonna have
[1:36:04] to meet the requirements of college Township.
[1:36:07] - Well, so the other townships are still at liberty
[1:36:08] to write whatever Ordinance they'd like,
[1:36:10] even if we have a shared use agreement.
[1:36:13] - The shared use agreements have to be, it's a formal,
[1:36:19] it is a formal agreement, it's written up with,
[1:36:21] with another municipality and says,
[1:36:23] and what it usually is is a trade-offs that where,
[1:36:26] where another, the other municipality says, okay,
[1:36:29] we'll take your data center
[1:36:31] but you have to take our share of, you know, it it,
[1:36:34] it is a swap back and forth
[1:36:36] and it has to be in place beforehand.
[1:36:38] It's you, you can't just say, you know, well,
[1:36:41] well we have an agreement with Patent Township if,
[1:36:44] if we don't, and it's specific to help me out.
[1:36:49] It's specific to this use versus that use.
[1:36:55] I think my comment Nick, in relation to this is
[1:37:00] looking forward right now
[1:37:05] it's in the municipalities, all of 'em in the Centre Region
[1:37:11] to protect themselves
[1:37:13] and we're kind of in a protect ourselves mode with regard to
[1:37:19] the design and us having our own standalone Ordinance.
[1:37:24] College Township has its
[1:37:28] patent Township is in a shared use agreement
[1:37:31] with College Township.
[1:37:39] It's my vision that this whole discussion
[1:37:44] really needs to be that the region
[1:37:49] has a similar Ordinance
[1:37:53] to cover the all five municipalities
[1:37:56] because we share so much of the resources.
[1:38:01] The water isn't Ferguson townships, it's the regions
[1:38:07] and, and the electricity coming in.
[1:38:11] We've got the university and its capacities and
[1:38:16] and we share in in a lot of things.
[1:38:20] So it's my thought that that
[1:38:25] eventually there may be enough consensus
[1:38:29] between the townships
[1:38:32] to actually have a regional position with regard
[1:38:37] to data centers, but we can't start there.
[1:38:41] I think we have the obligation to protect Ferguson Township
[1:38:46] independent of all the others and,
[1:38:50] and I think that's what this is doing
[1:38:55] for us at the moment.
[1:38:58] - I understand. Okay. That's the priority.
[1:39:01] - I also, I also heard a, a discussion about a week ago
[1:39:09] where farmland
[1:39:13] of course is being used in some states as
[1:39:18] good source of location.
[1:39:20] It's in the middle of nowhere, it's flat
[1:39:23] and all of those things, the amounts
[1:39:27] of money being offered to purchase
[1:39:33] farmland in this country is huge.
[1:39:39] Walking away as a farmer getting up
[1:39:43] and milking cows seven days a week
[1:39:45] or whatever, looking at a hundred fold,
[1:39:51] what they would get for their farmland is the kind
[1:39:55] of money being thrown around nationwide
[1:39:59] to buy properties and, and so it's significant
[1:40:04] and that's why I think it's imperative that we do
[1:40:08] what we're doing right now and that is protecting ourselves.
[1:40:13] We're fortunate in this Township to have some protections
[1:40:18] of our farmland that a lot of places don't have
[1:40:20] because they don't even have Zoning. Okay.
[1:40:25] - Yes sir. Sorry Mr. Chairman, my last point,
[1:40:27] and again this might be out of the purview
[1:40:29] of the planning commission, perhaps the Township has never
[1:40:31] had an a situation where there was a lack
[1:40:34] of faith in an engineer's report.
[1:40:36] It's going back to the discussion about engineers, tons
[1:40:38] of money being thrown around, heaven forbid someone's bribe.
[1:40:42] Perhaps we need to have some sort of written protocol.
[1:40:45] Maybe it's something the board of Supervisors needs
[1:40:47] to discuss for dealing with some bad lack
[1:40:50] of faith in an engineer's report
[1:40:52] and how to, how to resolve that.
[1:41:01] Yeah, I don't, I don't know what so route is to take to that
[1:41:03] or who to even propose it to, but just
[1:41:07] because it hasn't happened here.
[1:41:08] - Just, just to one thing out consistent with
[1:41:12] what other areas possibility of providing
[1:41:17] the developer be responsible for the cost of our
[1:41:22] employing some an engineer to review, not to do
[1:41:27] but to, to review the plans or something like that.
[1:41:31] Just is just a thought. Okay.
[1:41:36] Is there insurance that
[1:41:40] somebody can take out?
[1:41:42] Errors in omissions
[1:41:43] or, well, the engineer's gonna have errors what we
[1:41:48] commonly would refer to as malpractice,
[1:41:50] but errors in omission, I mean clearly
[1:41:53] that would be a requirement.
[1:41:56] Okay. You people have been very patient.
[1:42:00] I didn't have, there's no order,
[1:42:02] but if you would like to come forward
[1:42:05] and identify yourself, make your comment
[1:42:08] or raise your question and we will move forward.
[1:42:12] Ho, if your thoughts
[1:42:16] and comments would be similar to thoughts
[1:42:21] or comments that have already been made, if you would simply
[1:42:25] let us know who you are and that you do agree with
[1:42:29] or whatever so that we don't have a lot
[1:42:31] of repetition. Yes sir. Thank
[1:42:34] - You.
[1:42:35] I appreciate the opportunity.
[1:42:36] My name is Dave Craig, I'm a resident of Burson Township.
[1:42:39] I represent Greenleaf Manor,
[1:42:41] planned residential neighborhood, very close to here.
[1:42:44] I appreciate all of you learning a lot about this topic
[1:42:47] and working to make this place a nice place to live.
[1:42:51] I think that's what we're all trying to do here, right?
[1:42:53] Is just to protect having this be a nice place to live.
[1:42:57] So similar, just I'll throw out four topics,
[1:43:02] I don't need an answer, but I think
[1:43:03] they're good things to talk about.
[1:43:06] The first is just the concept of these size categories.
[1:43:10] I think you were right to,
[1:43:11] and the group has been right
[1:43:12] to think about differentiating further
[1:43:14] and maybe push some of these
[1:43:17] larger things into more towards the industrial side
[1:43:21] and just not discount the size.
[1:43:23] So when we say zero to 5,000 square feet,
[1:43:26] the picture there was of a closet that looked to me
[1:43:30] to be about eight or 10 square feet.
[1:43:34] 5,000 is a lot more than that, right?
[1:43:35] If I had a 5,000 square foot home,
[1:43:37] I would be very happy and very rich.
[1:43:38] That's a very big building.
[1:43:40] And if you filled that all up with industrial equipment,
[1:43:44] it would make a lot of noise, it would consume a lot
[1:43:47] of power, it would consume a lot of water.
[1:43:48] So don't discount when we say small,
[1:43:51] that small is pretty big.
[1:43:53] So let's think about those categories.
[1:43:56] I also have concerns about, so that's 0.1, 0.2,
[1:44:01] I have concerns about the narrow language
[1:44:03] that we're talking just about data centers.
[1:44:06] I appreciate what you said about can we use other terms
[1:44:09] and anticipate other terms
[1:44:11] because data center is just one term, it's just one type
[1:44:16] of factory that's popular
[1:44:17] to talk about right now, but just a factory.
[1:44:20] So what if somebody wants to build a cement plant
[1:44:23] or a lumber yard or some other type of factory?
[1:44:27] Can they make as much noise as they want?
[1:44:29] Can they consume as much electricity and water as they want
[1:44:32] because they're not building a data center?
[1:44:35] Or if they find some other terminology, oh,
[1:44:38] this isn't a data center, this is a computing center,
[1:44:40] this is a AI center, whatever.
[1:44:42] Just wanna make sure that somebody building any type
[1:44:45] of factory would be held to these standards
[1:44:49] to keep this a nice place to live.
[1:44:50] And not put out dirty pollution, not put out noise,
[1:44:54] not consume water, not consume an egregious amount
[1:44:57] of electricity for any kind of factory, right?
[1:44:59] Not just data centers. That's 0.2, 0.3.
[1:45:04] I happen to know a lot about noise.
[1:45:05] I've talked to staff about noise and vibration.
[1:45:07] I work for a company that does this kind of stuff
[1:45:11] I've mentioned before and I still have concerns about the
[1:45:13] fact that the primary measurements we're talking about here
[1:45:17] are an a weighted sound measurement.
[1:45:21] I really believe that's the wrong thing to be measuring.
[1:45:24] A weighted sound heavily focuses on sound between
[1:45:29] 1000 and 6,000 hertz.
[1:45:32] These are loud high frequency noises.
[1:45:35] There's things like sirens, you know, high frequency noises,
[1:45:40] the noise that's gonna be emitted by a data center
[1:45:43] by any other kind of factory
[1:45:44] or by college kids having a party
[1:45:47] or by a car driving by with its base pumping.
[1:45:50] It is going to be low frequency noise that's going
[1:45:53] to bother people, that's gonna shake their homes,
[1:45:56] that's gonna disrupt pets, that's gonna disrupt wildlife.
[1:45:59] It's not gonna be noise in the killer hertz range.
[1:46:03] It's gonna be noise in the tens to hundreds of hertz.
[1:46:07] So why are we using a measurement that specifically
[1:46:13] discounts that kind of noise
[1:46:15] and focuses on high frequency noise instead?
[1:46:18] I think we're fundamentally measuring in the wrong thing.
[1:46:21] What should we measure? Well there's things in there
[1:46:23] mentioning C weighting.
[1:46:25] So C weighting is a little bit broader, right?
[1:46:27] A weighting is very narrow.
[1:46:28] It's from 1,006,000 hertz roughly,
[1:46:31] and things outside that are heavily discounted.
[1:46:34] C weighting is a little bit broader.
[1:46:37] And then Z weighting is total encompasses everything,
[1:46:41] the entire sound spectrum.
[1:46:43] So I really think we should be looking at C
[1:46:46] or Z weighting as a primary measurement.
[1:46:50] I know there's some stuff written there saying the C
[1:46:52] weighted measurement can't be more than 10 decibels more
[1:46:55] than a weighted measurement.
[1:46:56] There's some language in there,
[1:46:58] but we're kind of like a couple steps away from the truth.
[1:47:02] Like we should just be measuring the full sound spectrum
[1:47:05] instead of measuring a narrow portion of it
[1:47:07] that probably doesn't matter.
[1:47:10] And then having some auxiliary clauses to like add to that.
[1:47:14] I think we're measuring the wrong thing.
[1:47:17] And then my fourth point, when this all started,
[1:47:20] I know a lot, there was a lot
[1:47:21] of information gathering different other communities there
[1:47:24] instances, things like that to use
[1:47:26] as reference materials, which is great.
[1:47:29] Some of the language was presented from Chester
[1:47:31] and Montgomery Counties.
[1:47:34] The, again, a weighted measurements, which I again,
[1:47:36] I think is the wrong thing, but their measurements were,
[1:47:39] their limits were 45 decibels
[1:47:43] during daytime hours, 40 decibels
[1:47:46] during nighttime hours.
[1:47:49] So 45 and 40, the proposed language here
[1:47:54] is 55
[1:47:55] and 50 10 decibels higher,
[1:47:59] 10 decibels equates to human ears,
[1:48:04] 10 decibels is twice as loud.
[1:48:08] So my question is, why was it decided
[1:48:10] that Ferguson Township residents deserve to be exposed
[1:48:15] to noise twice as loud as
[1:48:19] what is allowed in a more urban area like Philadelphia?
[1:48:23] I think that's an interesting question.
[1:48:26] That's all. Thank you.
[1:48:28] - Thank you. Okay,
[1:48:39] - Mr.
[1:48:40] Chairman, I'd just like to point out this is,
[1:48:41] I think the third time this gentleman has brought up the
[1:48:43] same point and it seems like haven't really given him any
[1:48:46] resolution yet as to whether
[1:48:47] or not we're gonna change those decal limits.
[1:48:50] I think he deserves something from us on that.
[1:48:54] - I think Kim, Kim, you you want to,
[1:49:00] - I'll just briefly
[1:49:02] and Pedro has a more detailed explanation.
[1:49:04] We did meet, we have looked at that.
[1:49:08] If you look at what we have now, that is much less,
[1:49:10] we went down 10 points that would've been down to 20 points.
[1:49:14] What we're combating is you have, what we have now is
[1:49:18] even if it is outdated, it is consistent with
[1:49:21] what you see at a national level.
[1:49:24] So if you were to do a sound study of all these existing,
[1:49:27] like whatever we have right now,
[1:49:29] everybody is then gonna have to drop their decibels,
[1:49:33] drop their sound from their existing baseline.
[1:49:37] So this was kind of meant to be sort
[1:49:39] of like an incremental change.
[1:49:41] But lemme let Pedro talk. We did consider this,
[1:49:45] - Yes, we did have, as in, as Kim mentioned, we did meet
[1:49:49] with Mr. Craig and he gave us a lot of information
[1:49:52] that we actually incorporated in this Ordinance.
[1:49:56] And compared our, our Ordinance,
[1:50:01] our draft Ordinance compared to any other Ordinance,
[1:50:05] to be completely honest, is a great improvement.
[1:50:10] And you can obviously be improved even further.
[1:50:14] What we currently have for decibels in our current Ordinance
[1:50:18] as it's written, is 55 for residents show
[1:50:22] and 62 decibels in the eight weighted scale for,
[1:50:27] for industrial, the Ordinance also,
[1:50:31] this is also an opportunity that we took for us
[1:50:33] to improve the, the, the township's noise Ordinance
[1:50:37] where it was ambiguous, whether 65 or 62
[1:50:41] and 55 were applicable to which district, which boundaries
[1:50:46] or this new Ordinance clarifies and cleans up that language
[1:50:50] and makes it, it makes it obvious
[1:50:53] that the 55 is within the border of, of, of,
[1:50:57] of residential and, and industrial
[1:51:00] or any other, any other board
[1:51:02] or any other district bordering a residential district.
[1:51:05] And these numbers are to be held for the tap, for the,
[1:51:10] or for the district that's receiving the noise.
[1:51:14] And so point that we added was that within the, the,
[1:51:19] the, the scale of measurements on a weighted scale,
[1:51:24] we did incorporate language for c weighted scales where
[1:51:29] regardless of, of where you are measuring,
[1:51:31] of which band you're measuring the noise from the, the, the,
[1:51:35] the A weight, the c weighted scale cannot be larger than 10
[1:51:40] decibels compared to its equivalent a weighted scale.
[1:51:44] So which means if the, if the all of those areas,
[1:51:49] all of those areas of low frequency where a, a, a,
[1:51:53] a weighted scale cannot capture, but a
[1:51:55] but a c weighted scale does capture those numbers with
[1:51:59] that differential that we put in place.
[1:52:02] Anything above a difference of 10
[1:52:05] vegetables would be considered not approval by, by,
[1:52:08] by this Ordinance.
[1:52:09] But obviously we can continue receiving more feedback on
[1:52:14] things that might be, that we can improve this Ordinance.
[1:52:17] And another thing
[1:52:18] that we incorporated in this Ordinance was the tonal element
[1:52:24] where if there's, is this, if it's being determined
[1:52:27] that there's a tone in this
[1:52:29] or a tone is, is a variation,
[1:52:34] sharp variation of the noise in when there's a steady
[1:52:38] continuous noise
[1:52:39] and there's a sharp, like if, if this is was a a a if this
[1:52:44] this normal noise that we are making here
[1:52:47] and then maybe a sound like the door is constantly banging,
[1:52:51] that will be captured by that tone of noise
[1:52:53] and who's to determine that whether a noise is tonal or not.
[1:52:57] The Ordinance also we, that we place here that counts for
[1:53:00] that which, and an engineer will be able to determine that.
[1:53:03] And once that is determined, then a cap
[1:53:06] or a an additional penalty of five decibel will be imposed
[1:53:10] into in, in whatever development, in whatever application
[1:53:15] that we are receiving on the Township.
[1:53:17] So if you look into the, the way
[1:53:22] noise is measured across the industry, there is no consensus
[1:53:27] of which scale is better than the other.
[1:53:29] And I believe Mr. Craig, I'm, I'm not sure if, if I'm wrong,
[1:53:33] correct me, there is no consensus in, in the entire industry
[1:53:38] for to say C is better than anything else.
[1:53:42] However, those, those scales can be applied
[1:53:46] for specific types of, of noise that is most common to the,
[1:53:50] and depending on the geography of of of, of
[1:53:53] where you are measuring, right?
[1:53:55] This is a Township being a Zoning Ordinance.
[1:53:59] The most common noises that that, that,
[1:54:01] that could be enforce,
[1:54:03] that could be common in the Township are cars,
[1:54:07] our generators, our our all of these industrial noises
[1:54:11] that Mr. Craig mentioned.
[1:54:13] Which is why if you look into any
[1:54:15] or most Zoning ordinances across the country, you will see
[1:54:19] that the most common used scale is a weighted scale.
[1:54:24] However, we acknowledge that
[1:54:26] a weighted scale doesn't capture all of the noise,
[1:54:28] which is why we incorporated at this, attempted
[1:54:32] to incorporate sea weighted scales
[1:54:35] and tone weight, internal noise
[1:54:37] attenuations in this Ordinance.
[1:54:40] So I believe this has already improved just for the draft.
[1:54:44] This already is an improvement to
[1:54:45] what the Ordinance currently is.
[1:54:48] And as we receive more
[1:54:50] and more feedback, we can continue to improve
[1:54:52] and incorporate more things to
[1:54:55] continue improving this Ordinance.
[1:54:57] - Okay. I believe,
[1:54:59] and correct me if I'm wrong,
[1:55:00] that the question is why are we at 55 and not 45?
[1:55:04] Is that the point you were making?
[1:55:06] - Yes. That question was sort of answered by Kim, where
[1:55:10] as we look into the ordinances across from all of those
[1:55:14] that we saw, there is, there is no
[1:55:17] cer there is no specific number that like 40, 40 decibels
[1:55:22] for this, for for residential or 50 or 65.
[1:55:25] There's no consensus in the number.
[1:55:28] And we saw that 55 was already a,
[1:55:33] was already what's in the Ordinance, what the previous board
[1:55:36] of supervisor had had approved.
[1:55:38] So we incorporated that same number with, with the penalty
[1:55:42] of five decibels in case of a tone.
[1:55:44] However, this is not a set number that the, the staff chose.
[1:55:49] Therefore that has to be, this is not,
[1:55:51] this is not what's happening here,
[1:55:52] which is why we having this meeting
[1:55:54] when these decisions will be made by the board,
[1:55:57] this decision will be made as we receive feedback that if
[1:56:01] the, the board suggests, no, we don't want 55 lower to 50
[1:56:05] to 40, we are gonna do that because this is a canvas
[1:56:09] or this is a blanket or a starting point for the,
[1:56:12] for, for the Ordinance.
[1:56:13] We have to start somewhere and then we receive feedback
[1:56:17] and we make change.
[1:56:20] - And, and when we're,
[1:56:21] we're talking about this particular thing, are we limiting
[1:56:27] the standard to our
[1:56:31] industrial zone
[1:56:32] or are we saying that the standard is now
[1:56:37] every zone in the Township?
[1:56:40] - As in the noise level? Yes.
[1:56:42] The noise level as we proposed in Ordinance,
[1:56:45] I don't think you can see it, it's on page.
[1:56:49] Page 15 is measured at the boundary
[1:56:54] of, of the, of the property boundary.
[1:56:58] So being 60 for commercial
[1:57:01] and 62 for industrial
[1:57:03] and residential, depending on the, the daytime is 50 for,
[1:57:08] for daytime and, and 55 for daytime and 54 nighttime.
[1:57:19] And the previous previous Ordinance Ordinance did,
[1:57:21] did not have this,
[1:57:24] does not current current have currentness Ordinance does,
[1:57:27] does not have have this, this reduction
[1:57:30] of de dele 55 fives as specified night nine at all.
[1:57:34] At all. Which we believe we thought was an improvement
[1:57:38] to what we currently have.
[1:57:39] But it can, if it can be improved further,
[1:57:41] then this is why we are here.
[1:57:43] - And, and I guess in relation to that,
[1:57:50] My next question would be do we have a sense of
[1:57:54] what the impact will be by changing
[1:57:59] this in, in some
[1:58:03] of our other zones?
[1:58:04] In other words, do we're changing it with,
[1:58:09] with a, with an emphasis on the, the industrial kind
[1:58:14] of area and the whole discussion,
[1:58:17] but I routinely see complaints
[1:58:21] and hear about complaints all the time.
[1:58:25] Somebody's running a leaf blower at seven o'clock at night
[1:58:30] and that goes across
[1:58:33] property lines at significant decibels.
[1:58:36] And so I I wanna make sure that, that we're,
[1:58:42] we're not having an
[1:58:46] unintended consequence with regard to
[1:58:52] our setting of these decibels, you know, across the board.
[1:58:56] Okay. Unintended consequences frequently come back
[1:59:01] to, to really hurt good intentions.
[1:59:07] And, and I think
[1:59:08] that when one is designing something like this,
[1:59:11] I think one has to pass the, the wording
[1:59:17] by the unintended consequences person
[1:59:22] to, to take a look
[1:59:23] and see what is the consequence of this
[1:59:26] in other environments
[1:59:29] - For specifically this draft, there's a different section
[1:59:34] that deals with noise produced by
[1:59:40] electrical equipment that isn't, that isn't considered
[1:59:44] property like, like a fixed prop element of the property.
[1:59:49] Okay. So because we were attempting to amend the, the,
[1:59:53] the noise Ordinance for the purpose
[1:59:55] of incorporating data centers
[1:59:58] and all other industrial noises, we did not
[2:00:03] amend or we did not propose an amendment to ch to ch
[2:00:07] to change the, the decibel levels for like leaf blowers
[2:00:11] or alarm or if that is a different section of the Ordinance
[2:00:14] that is on I think,
[2:00:15] well 10.38 or something. I
[2:00:19] - Believe.
[2:00:20] I I appreciate it and the concerns have been raised.
[2:00:23] You've heard 'em and I'd like to move on at this point.
[2:00:27] This gentleman has been very patient.
[2:00:29] I'm not sure, I haven't been willing but I, go ahead.
[2:00:32] Go right ahead sir. Thank
[2:00:34] - You.
[2:00:35] My name is Bob Hershey
[2:00:37] and I live in Fer Township for the last 21 years
[2:00:41] I was a consulting hydrogeologist in the Centre Region
[2:00:45] and across the state.
[2:00:47] So my interest is in the water
[2:00:50] and I guess I have a concern on page 10, item A,
[2:00:55] I'll just read the sentence.
[2:00:56] I have issued approval shall not be granted
[2:01:01] for a day at the center proposing the use
[2:01:03] of groundwater wells springs
[2:01:06] or direct withdrawals from surface water,
[2:01:10] surface water courses.
[2:01:12] I guess my question is twofold.
[2:01:14] First of all, do you have the authority to do that?
[2:01:17] I don't believe you do.
[2:01:19] Second of all, why would you restrict it?
[2:01:23] Why wouldn't you allow somebody
[2:01:25] to provide their own groundwork
[2:01:30] and, and piggybacking on that, the discharge
[2:01:35] that was already brought up, if,
[2:01:37] if they're gonna withdraw gravel water, use it for cooling
[2:01:41] and put it back in the gravel water,
[2:01:43] why would you allow that?
[2:01:47] And the parallel to that would be heat pumps
[2:01:50] or gravel water geothermal wells.
[2:01:53] I don't think you restrict those people withdraw water,
[2:01:57] use it for cooling or heating
[2:02:00] and then put it back in the ground wire.
[2:02:02] So I think you want
[2:02:04] to make sure you don't put yourself in a position
[2:02:06] where you could be sued
[2:02:08] because I think you may have taken some
[2:02:10] authority you don't have.
[2:02:14] - Thank you Mr. And I can we refute do a, a comment
[2:02:18] and B, given Ms v's professional experience,
[2:02:23] certainly something that should be run by our solicitor.
[2:02:28] - And one other note too,
[2:02:29] because you started getting involved in the electricity,
[2:02:33] it's kind of a parallel situation.
[2:02:36] Do you have the authority as a Township to designate
[2:02:40] how they get their power?
[2:02:43] I don't know. That's a question.
[2:02:45] And, and, and if you do, fine.
[2:02:48] If you don't, you're gonna get sued.
[2:02:49] And I pay for the lawyers to defend.
[2:02:53] - I think, I think the Ordinance does provide
[2:02:57] that there is the opportunity for all alternate sources
[2:03:01] of electric, solar, et
[2:03:05] - Cetera.
[2:03:06] But you can't force that.
[2:03:08] - No, no, we definitely, we definitely could not force that.
[2:03:10] - Which I think answers the question that was asked earlier.
[2:03:13] - It yes. That that you you are correct.
[2:03:17] We definitely cannot enforce that.
[2:03:18] - Great. Okay. Thank you.
[2:03:23] - I just didn't need to, didn't to
[2:03:27] - The language says the applicant shall ation the
[2:03:31] electricity utility verifying my
[2:03:33] position specific, which provide
[2:03:37] - It also provide or initial
[2:03:41] provided that you could use.
[2:03:43] So other, other sources that's Yeah, yeah.
[2:03:48] So, so they can, yes
[2:03:53] - Ma'am.
[2:03:54] - Hi, I'm, I'm Rita Lowe
[2:03:55] and I'm a resident here in the, in the Township.
[2:03:59] And first I wanna thank all of you for the amazing amount
[2:04:03] of work you've already put into this
[2:04:04] because that's why I came to, I really wanted to know what
[2:04:08] what has been thought of along the way.
[2:04:11] But you've, you've done so much already,
[2:04:14] which I'm really thrilled to see.
[2:04:16] And I also wanna thank Ms. Holiday.
[2:04:20] I don't know if she's still there.
[2:04:21] - She, she, she's there. She just took her
[2:04:24] - For bringing up the health risks.
[2:04:27] I I, I'm here, I'm sorry. Yes, yes.
[2:04:32] I'm a healthcare provider
[2:04:34] and I happen to live with someone who has hearing loss.
[2:04:38] So I know all too well
[2:04:40] how difficult some of these issues are.
[2:04:42] And one of the things that stuck out in my mind was on page
[2:04:45] six, number four
[2:04:50] must provide proof
[2:04:51] and compliance thereof
[2:04:53] that the data center will not endanger
[2:04:55] public health and safety.
[2:04:57] What sort of proof would you be looking to receive?
[2:05:05] What kind of document would prove something that health
[2:05:08] and safety was not a problem?
[2:05:13] So what I was thinking is in all the different
[2:05:17] consultants and experts
[2:05:20] and research that you do, wouldn't it be prudent to
[2:05:25] consider having a physician who's familiar with these issues
[2:05:31] and or an audiologist who would, who would know even
[2:05:35] before you started talking about all the decals
[2:05:38] and what environment is good for this person or that person
[2:05:42] or this in infirmity
[2:05:44] or that potential problem they would know
[2:05:47] and be able to advise you without having to guess.
[2:05:53] So I mean I think that all of the different topics
[2:05:56] that you have focused on are great,
[2:05:59] but when this holiday brought up the health
[2:06:03] and safety issue that sort
[2:06:05] of got lost in all these other topics
[2:06:08] and I think it really does deserve its own special place in
[2:06:12] your thinking and your planning.
[2:06:15] And again, I do appreciate what you've already done.
[2:06:19] It's amazing. So thank you.
[2:06:21] - Thank you ma'am. Mr. Chair and
[2:06:23] - Thank - You.
[2:06:24] Could I just comment on
[2:06:26] that while we're looking at number four on page six,
[2:06:30] if we look at that sentence must provide proof
[2:06:33] and compliance thereof
[2:06:34] that the data center will not endanger.
[2:06:37] I'd like to change
[2:06:39] or consider having the word
[2:06:43] endanger change to impact.
[2:06:46] Ah, endanger is a, is a,
[2:06:54] that's clearly a safety, you know that
[2:06:57] whereby we're really talking about
[2:07:01] our a DA residents and so on.
[2:07:05] And so the issue of impact
[2:07:07] I think is more appropriate than in danger.
[2:07:12] Well, let's take that a step further.
[2:07:15] I I don't think that's enforceable.
[2:07:18] I don't think that that whole sentence there is
[2:07:22] B belongs in the Ordinance.
[2:07:23] How, how do you do that?
[2:07:25] How do you provide proof
[2:07:27] and compliance that it will not
[2:07:30] affect the public health and safety?
[2:07:34] - I agree. Where, where's what document is that?
[2:07:37] Yeah, I agree completely with you.
[2:07:39] I I don't think that all that is is ambiguous
[2:07:43] and doesn't help and can't be proved.
[2:07:46] I mean how are you gonna provide proof? Yeah, you
[2:07:49] - Can't, the compliance part I, I assume
[2:07:51] that any development would've to comply with
[2:07:53] what other public, whatever safety laws already exist
[2:07:57] - In the town, Jim.
[2:07:58] - So at least in the interim,
[2:08:00] Lisa mentioned this a little bit earlier, she said
[2:08:03] that usually it says something like the
[2:08:05] board determines that.
[2:08:07] So we'll find a way
[2:08:08] to make it congruent with the rest of it.
[2:08:10] But I took out must provide proof
[2:08:12] and compliance thereof. Okay so
[2:08:15] - Thank you - Allude to the direction we're going
[2:08:20] but yeah, so that's been noted.
[2:08:23] We'll figure out how to soften that
[2:08:25] but at least the ideas there
[2:08:27] to at least incorporate all the things you're talking about.
[2:08:30] What's that impact? Go ahead.
[2:08:31] - Yeah, I was just gonna say I would look at that mining
[2:08:33] and quarrying one that has almost the exact same language
[2:08:37] but doesn't have the must provide proof
[2:08:42] and with the like the initial,
[2:08:47] the initial purpose statement is really well written in
[2:08:51] that mining reporting one.
[2:08:52] So if you look at that I think that might be helpful.
[2:08:55] - Thank you - David. Ma'am
[2:08:59] - My name's Ashley Craig, I'm also from Greenleaf Manor.
[2:09:04] I'm actually moving on to number five right after the proof
[2:09:07] and compliance section.
[2:09:09] And I know that you had added the A, B
[2:09:11] and C since the draft went out yesterday or the day before.
[2:09:17] I guess my question is Mostly
[2:09:22] related to e kind of B as well,
[2:09:26] not being familiar with the land development
[2:09:31] plans that are submitted.
[2:09:33] How specific do you get in saying
[2:09:35] what you want in the environmental
[2:09:37] and community impact analysis
[2:09:40] if you don't have any provisions?
[2:09:42] I feel like it's really important to include maybe some
[2:09:47] topics to include but not limit to addressing.
[2:09:51] So things like, like at a minimum address these topics
[2:09:56] in this analysis in the community impact analysis.
[2:09:59] So like wildlife, heat islands,
[2:10:03] I don't see anything about heat
[2:10:05] or temperature in these in the Ordinance.
[2:10:09] Odor, noise, smoke, dust, litter, glare.
[2:10:12] I just wanna make sure that whatever environmental
[2:10:16] and communi community impact analysis is done includes those
[2:10:20] topics and maybe even the preliminary analysis in general
[2:10:24] statement as well.
[2:10:27] And then beyond just talking about that,
[2:10:30] is the analysis also to require that the applicant speak to
[2:10:35] what measures are going to be employed to mitigate
[2:10:38] or eliminate any of the negative impacts that the set,
[2:10:42] those analysis bring up to the table on people
[2:10:47] you know on wildlife, on agriculture.
[2:10:50] So I just wasn't sure,
[2:10:52] you know the current ordinances in place, how
[2:10:56] specific are they in saying like
[2:10:57] what does this analysis require?
[2:10:59] Because if it doesn't,
[2:11:01] I feel like why not offer at a minimum
[2:11:03] what topics should be addressed.
[2:11:06] And also I'm not really sure like what it says,
[2:11:08] you know there's a preliminary analysis
[2:11:10] and general statement to be have a meaningful discussion
[2:11:15] and then maybe the conditional use will be approved.
[2:11:17] How often is the conditional use approved
[2:11:21] and the Zoning permit denied?
[2:11:23] I just, I guess I just wanna make sure that the environment
[2:11:26] and the community impact are
[2:11:30] taken seriously documented
[2:11:33] and I don't know
[2:11:35] how thorough the current ordinances are in DES describing
[2:11:38] what should be included in that analysis.
[2:11:41] So a little bit of education on my part, I don't know
[2:11:44] but like if there isn't, you know, that level
[2:11:47] of granularity, I feel like it'd be important
[2:11:50] to suggest topics to cover.
[2:11:54] So that's it.
[2:11:56] - Thank you Mr. Mr. Chair? Yes ma'am. Thank you.
[2:12:00] That was very helpful. I took a lot of notes in what he said
[2:12:03] and also very savvy on your part.
[2:12:06] The, our solicitor called out that exact line,
[2:12:10] the the environmental community impact.
[2:12:12] So that was part of the reason why we made this change.
[2:12:17] So, and that's also why it's clunky language
[2:12:19] 'cause it was just the fact just today.
[2:12:22] But her point was well do we have any other spot in our code
[2:12:27] where we already addressed that?
[2:12:28] Where we already have standards?
[2:12:30] Not really, we just knew we wanted to get there.
[2:12:33] So this what your feedback that's,
[2:12:36] I was just thinking yeah again that's why we're here
[2:12:37] because that's what, that's very helpful.
[2:12:40] And then also related to,
[2:12:42] you were talking about the education on the, the process
[2:12:45] that was her other point.
[2:12:46] And there are other parts of the other conditional uses
[2:12:49] that Laura use as well, but maybe shouldn't
[2:12:51] and that's the conditional use versus land development plan.
[2:12:56] Every development you see that that's most
[2:12:58] of the business we have here is a land development plan
[2:13:01] which is kind of the, I call it the birth certificate sort
[2:13:05] of, but for each property in theory
[2:13:08] that they all have this land development plan
[2:13:10] and then the Zoning permit is issued off of that.
[2:13:13] But in some cases where the use it, it's,
[2:13:19] it should have more public input, it is a conditional use
[2:13:23] and that's what we've got here.
[2:13:25] But so we automatically said when you submit your,
[2:13:29] the previous drafts and when you submit your conditional use
[2:13:31] application include your land development plan.
[2:13:34] But that's, that's where it gets really messy.
[2:13:36] 'cause then you've got a cart horse problem.
[2:13:39] So that was part of what she was calling out was why,
[2:13:43] you know, why are you asking for the most detailed piece
[2:13:48] right at the beginning where we're deciding if it's even
[2:13:50] appropriate where it's this neighborhood discussion.
[2:13:53] So, so again that was the reason for kind of like
[2:13:57] for the language that we used,
[2:13:58] understanding this could be written probably a little bit
[2:14:01] better but the idea was to show that give us enough
[2:14:04] that we can understand what we're looking at.
[2:14:07] It's, it's similar to when you have a brand new subdivision.
[2:14:11] And I don't mean to be split a land, that's a lot.
[2:14:14] I mean like a total green field.
[2:14:16] Usually there's like a sketch plan,
[2:14:18] a preliminary discussion right at the beginning
[2:14:21] where we still kind of had the paintbrushes,
[2:14:23] the big paint brushes out.
[2:14:24] You're not really doing the specific survey
[2:14:28] and all, all the way at the end.
[2:14:31] So if that, so thank you
[2:14:35] and I hope does that help offer a little clarity?
[2:14:38] - Yeah, just make sure that the analysis in court in
[2:14:43] yeah there's some definition around which be
[2:14:46] at a minimum discuss, you know, presented by the,
[2:14:52] - I appreciate that also the, the wet measures, you know,
[2:14:56] the mitigation measures as well is very helpful.
[2:15:00] Okay, thank you.
[2:15:09] - Hello again, my name is Natalie Ray
[2:15:12] and I am here to talk as a citizen
[2:15:15] or I live in Ferguson Township
[2:15:17] but I'm also a researcher
[2:15:18] that studies communities navigating data centers.
[2:15:21] I really appreciate the work that's been put into this,
[2:15:24] the openness for vision and this whole process.
[2:15:26] So I really wanna thank everybody up here,
[2:15:28] everybody in the room online
[2:15:30] because this is really important.
[2:15:32] I just have a couple questions that don't need
[2:15:34] to be addressed at the moment.
[2:15:36] Just like curiosities
[2:15:37] and kind of like things that I've been thinking about.
[2:15:40] One thing that stood out and was discussed was
[2:15:42] the growth square footage.
[2:15:44] That was the first time actually that I've seen,
[2:15:46] and I'm not saying that I've seen in everything
[2:15:48] but the ratings of data center size, I've usually seen it
[2:15:53] by energy usage and I understand that the capacities change
[2:15:57] and so even
[2:15:58] that may not be like a really strong static measure of like
[2:16:01] how big these data centers can even be.
[2:16:04] And so I was just curious if there was,
[2:16:06] and this is again hypothetical, I'm not saying
[2:16:08] that this is exists, a way to indicate and I,
[2:16:12] and I don't know what's allowable
[2:16:13] and the all legal aspect of it,
[2:16:15] but it just stood out to me that
[2:16:17] what you're talking about is not only about the size,
[2:16:21] like the footprint of the building
[2:16:23] but also the intensity of the energy that,
[2:16:27] and so if there's like an energy density ratio
[2:16:29] or something like production size,
[2:16:32] like production like gigawatts per
[2:16:35] size or something like that.
[2:16:36] If there's like a better way to get at what you're trying to
[2:16:40] categorize, maybe dunno if that exists,
[2:16:43] but just throwing it out there in terms of,
[2:16:47] I really appreciate people who brought up the concerns about
[2:16:49] health and safety and like making that prominent
[2:16:51] because I think that it's really hard to try to enforce
[2:16:55] but I think is imperative to talk about.
[2:16:59] I'm just curious about the use of an advisory board
[2:17:02] or like a panel of specialists like you mentioned
[2:17:04] audiologists or health experts in these conditional
[2:17:08] use conversations.
[2:17:09] Again, not sure about process,
[2:17:11] but it just stands out that a different amount of
[2:17:13] or layer of expertise alongside like what's enforceable
[2:17:18] to give comment on the health impacts
[2:17:20] whenever these conversations are had in terms of water.
[2:17:25] I just wanted to note there was a guardian article
[2:17:27] that was published today that talked about PFAS
[2:17:29] or the, I'm not gonna say the name correctly,
[2:17:32] but that type of water pollutant
[2:17:35] as increased within the AI industry.
[2:17:37] Not saying necessarily that it was related to data centers,
[2:17:40] but that's one of those things
[2:17:41] that are those emergent categories of pollutant
[2:17:45] or things that we didn't know about maybe
[2:17:47] or not as known about in the past like five
[2:17:49] or 10 years that I'm sure we're gonna be more concerned
[2:17:53] about in the next 10, 20 years.
[2:17:55] And so, you know, if we're not measuring it
[2:17:58] or we don't know about it, that it's kind of like hard to
[2:18:03] say what's gonna happen with that.
[2:18:04] But people are already concerned about that,
[2:18:07] especially when you're talking about withdrawing water,
[2:18:09] putting that water back into the groundwater if you don't
[2:18:12] know if it's contaminated with those pfas.
[2:18:16] And then the last thing, it just struck me,
[2:18:17] the conversations that were had about like wanting
[2:18:20] to get the language right and I'm not a lawyer at all,
[2:18:23] I know there's a law professor at Penn State, Hannah Wiseman
[2:18:27] who studies this as well.
[2:18:30] We had a conversation recently.
[2:18:32] But one thing that stood out to me is that
[2:18:33] because I don't know about the language, what got
[2:18:36] to me in this process and it sounds like we want
[2:18:38] transparency in the process
[2:18:39] or we want transparency in that data.
[2:18:41] Like you're saying like, oh like the
[2:18:43] license and the engineer.
[2:18:45] What I'm trying to get at is if it's possible at all
[2:18:48] to have this data about the noise levels
[2:18:51] or those measurements not confined
[2:18:53] to the private relationship of an engineer municipality
[2:18:56] or even the engineer and the developer,
[2:18:58] but like publicly available that way that
[2:19:00] that like individuals who wanted to, you know,
[2:19:03] look at the data themselves.
[2:19:05] You have Penn State researchers, I'm may slayer
[2:19:07] that wanna know like is are people living up to
[2:19:10] what they said they would
[2:19:12] and if there's any way to make the water
[2:19:14] those non-operational, you know, it's all transparency
[2:19:19] and the big tech is not very transparent.
[2:19:24] Yes. But I would imagine
[2:19:26] 'cause it's drawing on municipal water supply that we
[2:19:28] as municipality might wanna know about,
[2:19:30] is there any like reporting that has to be made public?
[2:19:34] And that's basically I think what everything I had
[2:19:37] just really, again, appreciative
[2:19:39] of everybody here and thank you so much.
[2:19:41] - Thank you Ms. Ray. Any anybody else
[2:19:44] wanna make any comments?
[2:19:48] Well, do you have a hand? Oh yes. Whoever.
[2:19:53] SG is Sharon.
[2:19:57] Oh
[2:20:02] you did?
[2:20:02] Yes. Who is it? Sharon, Gerald. Alvin,
[2:20:06] - Yeah.
[2:20:07] Okay. Okay, can you hear me?
[2:20:09] - Yes. - Okay, great.
[2:20:11] Okay, so I wanna also reiterate that it's great
[2:20:16] to be able to hear all the things
[2:20:17] that you guys have been considering
[2:20:19] and how much time you've been putting into this,
[2:20:22] especially when it's all a moving target
[2:20:25] and evolving so rapidly.
[2:20:28] A lot of things that were said that I agree with,
[2:20:30] but I just wanna bring up three things.
[2:20:32] I think one is things that I felt are important
[2:20:36] that I would not want us to lose sight of would be also
[2:20:41] considering or making some type of, if we can, some type
[2:20:43] of limitation or comment about the impact on the environment
[2:20:47] with the greenhouse gases
[2:20:48] and the pollution impact on
[2:20:53] respiratory diseases.
[2:20:55] And I think that that, you know, you guys have touched on
[2:20:59] that as far as like the community impact statement,
[2:21:02] maybe having the advisory board
[2:21:04] that talks about health impact, et cetera.
[2:21:07] I think the second thing is
[2:21:12] some assessment or responsibility not to
[2:21:16] but these companies not to increase
[2:21:19] and impact the cost of, of the development
[2:21:23] and upgrading the power system
[2:21:29] to increase the cost of electricity
[2:21:31] to homeowners in the area.
[2:21:33] I think that's another thing that's really important.
[2:21:37] And then the final thing was, again, another resource
[2:21:42] that maybe you guys have already tapped into, thinking again
[2:21:46] about who's in the, you know, talking about collaboration
[2:21:50] between the townships and things.
[2:21:53] But there was an article published
[2:21:55] or printed earlier this spring and I guess re-edited in June
[2:22:00] and it was a, a law professor
[2:22:05] Mike Helbig, H-E-L-B-I-N-G talking about,
[2:22:11] yeah, the, the title was about
[2:22:13] how Pennsylvania towns are protecting themselves from the
[2:22:16] noise, heat, and utility costs of massive data centers.
[2:22:21] I just found that my husband just found that tonight,
[2:22:23] so I haven't had a chance to read it.
[2:22:25] But I mean obviously, I mean, I, I,
[2:22:30] like I said, I dunno if that's something
[2:22:31] that you guys were aware of
[2:22:32] or have even maybe used as a resource
[2:22:36] is from the Penn State Institute
[2:22:37] of Energy and the environment.
[2:22:40] That's it. Thank you.
[2:22:42] - Thank you, thank you. I wanted, I wanted
[2:22:44] to take this opport everybody everybody
[2:22:47] participated tonight.
[2:22:48] Tonight. I think there think, there've been a lot of, lot of
[2:22:53] thought thought and there's been a lot of comments.
[2:22:56] Comments and I know that know has, has been scribbling,
[2:23:00] hopefully not scri writing.
[2:23:02] Writing oh, an awful lot down.
[2:23:05] And I think, I think it certainly,
[2:23:06] certainly when it comes time to time to a motion motion,
[2:23:11] certainly certainly want to see the review
[2:23:14] and to the draft Ordinance.
[2:23:17] I'd like to, in my college
[2:23:21] by quoting one of my favorite, my favorite philosophers,
[2:23:24] philosophers, Ted Lasso.
[2:23:27] And this past Wednesday, he said,
[2:23:30] we can't let let the perfect get in the way of the good.
[2:23:34] And I think it is important for us to move forward.
[2:23:37] We need to make as, make this as good as we can,
[2:23:41] but we don't wanna be discussing this a year from now.
[2:23:45] And so that is my final thought. It
[2:23:50] - Yeah.
[2:23:51] One final thought from me, Kim.
[2:23:55] I can honestly say to you that
[2:24:00] this document, as it has been presented as a draft,
[2:24:06] clearly exceeds what I expected as a draft.
[2:24:12] Your staff has done a wonderful job and,
[2:24:15] and I'm not exactly sure what I expected,
[2:24:20] but whatever it was, this is better than what I expected.
[2:24:25] And and it clearly incorporates,
[2:24:30] you know, a lot of the things that have been discussed
[2:24:34] leading up to tonight.
[2:24:36] And as chair said, you
[2:24:41] all have been taking voluminous notes as we've been talking.
[2:24:45] And so good job
[2:24:48] thank you about
[2:24:53] - What's that?
[2:24:54] Can I'll entertain a motion to Adjourn. So moved.
[2:24:58] - Second. I'll take a
[2:25:32] - Give thanks for literacy.
[2:25:34] Literacy means a life of increased safety achievements
[2:25:37] and community participation For more than 50 years,
[2:25:41] Mid-State Literacy Council has empowered thousands
[2:25:44] of residents with literacy skills improving
[2:25:46] their family's lives.
[2:25:48] Literacy builds our community.
[2:25:50] Help us celebrate literacy
[2:25:52] and support Mid-State Literacy Council by volunteering
[2:25:55] or donating to our give thanks for literacy campaign,
[2:25:59] www.stateliteracycouncil.org.
[2:26:08] - Did you know that CNET has over 30 years
[2:26:10] of program archives available to the public
[2:26:12] for a requested donation of $20?
[2:26:14] You can receive a DVD
[2:26:15] or digital copy of any program in our library going
[2:26:18] back to 1988.
[2:26:20] The senior archives include high school graduations
[2:26:22] and award nights, school district concerts
[2:26:25] and sporting events, school library, write
[2:26:28] and illustrate your own book awards.
[2:26:30] Memorial Day in Bosberg and the Central Pennsylvania
[2:26:32] Festival of the Arts Military history lectures.
[2:26:35] So will round tables and many more.
[2:26:38] And don't forget about the meetings.
[2:26:40] We have an expansive archive of local government as well
[2:26:42] as Beon and State College area school board meetings.
[2:26:45] CNET has been covering the Centre County community
[2:26:47] for over three decades, and we have the tape to prove it.
[2:26:50] Visit CNET one.org to browse our archives
[2:26:53] and you can call or email us.
[2:26:54] Order your own DVD or digital copy today.
[2:26:57] Nothing good on tv.
[2:26:59] You're just not watching the right channels.