[0:10] Madame President, we are recording.

[0:12] » Thank you and good evening everyone.

[0:14] Welcome to Swapmore BO Council's work

[0:16] session for September 8th, 2026. We'll

[0:20] start with roll call. Miss Garland

[0:21] » Here.

[0:22] » Mr. Theion

[0:23] » Here.

[0:24] » Miss Thompson here. Miss Zang

[0:26] » Here. Miss McCloud

[0:28] » Here.

[0:28] » Mr. Bonan

[0:29] » Here.

[0:30] » Mayor Booth

[0:30] » Here,

[0:31] » Manager

[0:32] » Here,

[0:33] » Assistant manager Ashcom

[0:35] » Present,

[0:35] » And solicitor Scott

[0:36] » Here.

[0:38] » We're going to take a few things out of

[0:39] order this evening to accommodate some

[0:41] schedules. And we're going to begin with

[0:43] the president section. And I'm going to

[0:45] make a little statement.

[0:49] Before we begin tonight, I want to

[0:51] briefly address a concern that was

[0:52] recently raised about a potential

[0:54] conflict of interest involving planning

[0:57] commission chair James Lavine and his

[0:59] law firm's representation of Swathmore

[1:01] College. We take this concern very

[1:04] seriously and therefore we've asked for

[1:06] a solicitor to review the matter and

[1:08] give us his legal opinion and some

[1:10] guidance. We also recognize that

[1:12] regardless of this legal determination,

[1:15] the circumstances could create questions

[1:17] about the appearance of a conflict and

[1:19] we want to make sure the process going

[1:20] forward is clear and above reproach.

[1:23] So, and without prejudicing prejudging,

[1:26] sorry, we're prejudicing the situation.

[1:29] James has been instructed not to

[1:31] deliberate or vote on any land

[1:32] development plan or other proposal

[1:35] submitted by Swathmore College so long

[1:37] as he remains affiliated with Troutman

[1:39] Pepper Lock and the college remains a

[1:41] client of that firm. The vice chair or

[1:44] another commission member will instead

[1:47] take the lead on these matters. We

[1:49] believe these steps are the best way to

[1:51] protect public confidence in the

[1:52] planning commission's work and council's

[1:54] ability to independently consider any

[1:56] college matter that comes before it. We

[1:58] will continue to handle this situation

[2:00] carefully and take the solicitor's

[2:02] guidance into account as we move

[2:03] forward. Thank you.

[2:08] Okay, we're going to just finish out

[2:10] under president since we're already

[2:11] here. Um, can I get a motion to approve

[2:14] the August 3rd, 2026

[2:17] work session minutes?

[2:20] » Is there a second?

[2:21] » Second.

[2:22] » Does anyone have any

[2:23] » Second?

[2:24] » Anyone have any comments?

[2:27] I think I do. I think there's a date.

[2:30] Yeah. Under president, it says um Mr.

[2:33] Boon's motion to approve the July 6,

[2:35] 2025

[2:37] council minutes were second was

[2:38] seconded. So, it should be 26. Catch

[2:41] that.

[2:43] Shame.

[2:45] » Any other comments?

[2:47] All in favor?

[2:48] » I. Any opposed? Motion passes. Um, can I

[2:52] get a motion for the approval of the

[2:54] September 2nd, 2026 special committee

[2:57] meeting minutes?

[2:58] » So moved.

[2:59] » Is there a second?

[3:01] » Second.

[3:02] » Any any comments about uh those minutes?

[3:06] » Do we vote if we weren't there?

[3:08] » Yeah.

[3:09] » Not.

[3:10] » That's right.

[3:10] » Not needed for you can, but no need to.

[3:13] It seems we got plenty of people here

[3:15] today.

[3:15] » Yeah.

[3:16] » All in favor?

[3:18] » Any opposed? Um uh

[3:22] » Abstaining. I wasn't there.

[3:24] » Okay. So we have one, two, three.

[3:27] » One, two, three extensions. Okay.

[3:31] » Noted.

[3:32] » Okay. Next, um I would like to bring up

[3:35] Aaron Hartung, a member of the

[3:37] Centennial Foundation, who will be

[3:39] presenting a very special gift to the

[3:41] burrow. And I'll let her explain what it

[3:44] is. Yes, please.

[3:50] All right. Um, my name is Aron Hartung.

[3:51] I'm uh, vice president of the Sworthmore

[3:53] Centennial Foundation. I'm here today to

[3:55] present a gift to the burrow on behalf

[3:57] of the Centennial Foundation. Um, in uh,

[4:00] 2020, we commissioned um, this piece of

[4:03] art that I will show and many of you may

[4:05] have seen. This is a a painting by local

[4:09] artist uh Robert Bonet um of the um the

[4:13] beautiful parkletits um and uh and

[4:16] greenery along Park Avenue that were um

[4:19] uh placed there in the wake of the co 19

[4:21] pandemic and allowed many uh local

[4:23] restaurants to stay in business. Uh we

[4:25] had commissioned this painting as a

[4:26] fundraiser for the foundation and now we

[4:28] are envy and sold prints of it and now

[4:30] we're pleased to present the original as

[4:31] a gift to the borrow. Thank you so much.

[4:41] Thank you. I'm sure we'll find we'll

[4:44] find a picture.

[4:46] » We'll find a beautiful place

[4:49] to place

[4:51] it.

[4:51] » Thank you.

[4:52] » Thank you.

[4:55] Put it on the chair back. You want the

[4:57] cardboard? Yeah.

[5:00] » All right.

[5:08] Thank you very much and our thanks to

[5:09] the Centennial Foundation.

[5:13] » Okay. Uh public comment. Al, do you want

[5:16] to take it from here?

[5:17] » Yep.

[5:20] » All right. First speaker for this

[5:21] evening, uh Richard Newton, please come

[5:24] to the stand. You have three minutes

[5:26] when you begin speaking.

[5:28] » Councilman Michael, microphone's off,

[5:30] please, except for Jill, please.

[5:39] Uh Rich Newton, 316 South Chester Road,

[5:43] corner of Westdale and Southchester. Uh

[5:46] as you'll be aware, the college and TCDN

[5:49] are studying the feasibility of locating

[5:52] a 100 place daycare facility on Harvard

[5:55] Avenue beside Mary Lion Hall.

[5:59] I fully support, as many of the

[6:01] neighbors do, expanding daycare

[6:04] provision within the Swathmore

[6:05] community. My concern, however, is

[6:08] whether this is the right site.

[6:12] It is a small, heavily treed and

[6:14] constrained site on a quiet neighborhood

[6:17] street hemmed in by the steep slope down

[6:20] to Yale and Crumb Creek. A facility at

[6:23] this scale will require removal of many

[6:26] large mature trees, generate substantial

[6:29] additional traffic from daily drop off

[6:32] and pick up likely hundreds of cars

[6:34] movement at the most congested congested

[6:38] time of day. Importantly, the site also

[6:41] appears to lie entirely within the INB

[6:44] 200 ft perimeter transition area where

[6:49] the zoning code specifically calls for

[6:52] compatibility with adjoining land uses

[6:56] and streetscapes. Our recently adopted

[6:59] comprehensive plan similarly calls for

[7:02] development to be thoughtful, deliberate

[7:04] and sensitive to the existing context

[7:08] and for appropriate transitions between

[7:10] the college and surrounding

[7:12] neighborhoods.

[7:14] So for me the question is not simply

[7:16] whether a 100 place child care facility

[7:20] can technically be accommodated on the

[7:22] site but whether this is the site that

[7:25] it should be located. I would therefore

[7:27] encourage the burough to ask the college

[7:30] to share the criteria and comparative

[7:33] site assessment that led to this

[7:36] location being considered and most

[7:40] importantly

[7:42] to reconsider whether another site

[7:44] within its extensive land holdings could

[7:47] accommodate this important facility with

[7:50] substantially less impact on the

[7:52] immediately surrounding

[7:55] neighborhood neighborhood neighborhood.

[7:56] the residential community. Thank you.

[8:00] » Thank you.

[8:07] » Next up, we have Haven Wel.

[8:11] You have three minutes to speak uh when

[8:13] you begin speaking.

[8:24] » All right. Hi, Bro Council. Uh, my name

[8:26] is Haven Winsel, 500 College Avenue. I

[8:28] suppose the residence for right now. I'm

[8:30] a junior at Sworthmore College and this

[8:32] summer I had the pleasure to work for

[8:33] the burrow on the records retention

[8:36] policy or excuse me, record retention

[8:39] project. Sorry, a little nervous. It's

[8:40] the first time I've spoken for council

[8:42] before. Um, I wanted to share a little

[8:45] bit about my experience and what it

[8:46] meant to me as well as the impact

[8:48] hopefully that it has for the bureau.

[8:50] Um, so I should mention my in

[8:52] professional interest is in cities and

[8:53] the development. And so I approached uh

[8:56] manager Dave in the spring about

[8:58] potentially helping out the the burrow.

[9:00] And he called me back sometime later

[9:01] asking what did I think about uh

[9:03] municipal record detention. I said let's

[9:06] do it. Uh

[9:09] um and so we we started uh and I thought

[9:14] and I found the project to be really

[9:15] revealing about the development of

[9:16] Sworthmore and I found it absolutely

[9:18] fascinating. Um, I'm originally from

[9:21] Oregon and so I didn't know as much as I

[9:23] probably should have about the area. And

[9:24] it was wonderful as we went through

[9:25] these files from the 1920s onward to

[9:27] learn about how Sworthmore grew and

[9:29] developed from this small cute quaint

[9:31] town to this small cute quaint town that

[9:33] still is today. Um, yeah. And so from my

[9:37] you know personal understanding learned

[9:39] a lot about the bid process how local

[9:40] government was organized and uh the

[9:42] degree like absolute collaboration

[9:44] between local brooks which is absolutely

[9:46] fascinating and working with some of the

[9:48] local you know wonderful historical uh

[9:50] society volunteers some of which may be

[9:52] present here today um that helped

[9:55] provide like a lot of context for the

[9:57] actual documents that we went through

[9:59] and a lot of things that I personally

[10:02] didn't realize to be so important such

[10:04] as street resurfacing and street

[10:06] repaving and street widening, which

[10:08] apparently comes across the local

[10:09] municipalities desk more often than I

[10:11] realized before. Um, and so I find it

[10:14] absolutely fascinating how that all

[10:15] those records paint an absolute picture

[10:17] of how the uh burrow operated. Um, and I

[10:21] thought many of the town discussions

[10:22] that those records captured in the

[10:24] 1950s, the 1970s, the 1990s, and onward

[10:27] about parking meters and traffic and

[10:29] development are still discussions that,

[10:30] you know, come up today even now. And my

[10:32] hope is that these records, you know,

[10:34] they're a little bit more organized, can

[10:35] be used for future discussions, and

[10:37] hopefully eliminate some of these some

[10:38] of these points going forward. Um, and

[10:41] hopefully this will help Lisa her filing

[10:43] going forward uh as well that I wanted

[10:46] to say thank you for this opportunity to

[10:48] learn. Um, and I'm very appreciative to

[10:51] uh all the folks that we worked with,

[10:52] the local historical society,

[10:55] uh, and Elise for this opportunity and

[10:57] to help everyone out.

[11:00] » Thank you so much.

[11:07] A did a great job.

[11:08] » Yeah, thank you.

[11:12] » Next up, we have a Scott Draper.

[11:18] » Scott, you have three minutes when you

[11:20] begin speaking.

[11:31] Good evening. I'm Scott Draper. I have

[11:34] two parts to cover tonight. The first is

[11:36] my public comment that will be followed

[11:38] by sharing public comments from 10

[11:40] residents.

[11:42] I stand today as both the business owner

[11:44] of Easy Composting and a proud resident

[11:47] of this burrow for 30 years. The

[11:50] opportunity to serve this community for

[11:51] the past year has been the highlight of

[11:54] my career. the capstone of my mission to

[11:56] create business platforms that enable

[11:59] communities to be better together. I've

[12:02] been proud to see program participation

[12:05] to witness a significant leap towards

[12:08] our zerowaste goals and to work

[12:10] handinand with neighbors some of whom

[12:12] have and or will speak today toward a

[12:16] shared mission to make our community

[12:18] stronger and greener. I am passionate

[12:21] about what I do and I hope that easy

[12:24] composting has played a small role in

[12:26] making caring for our earth a little

[12:30] easier for residents of Swathmore.

[12:35] And while I'm proud of what we've done,

[12:37] I can also say that we can do better

[12:40] here tonight and in sitting and

[12:42] listening in previous Burough meetings.

[12:45] I've heard the voices of residents and

[12:47] council members providing important

[12:49] feedback, insights into areas where easy

[12:52] composting can improve to better serve

[12:54] our community.

[12:56] Over the past weeks and months, I've

[12:59] taken these insights, consulted with

[13:01] trusted experts in the field and arrived

[13:03] at a plan of action to move easy

[13:06] composting forward and Swathmore forward

[13:09] in our goal of zero waste.

[13:13] Community feedback is very important to

[13:15] us. It was recently highlighted that

[13:18] in-person communication was an area in

[13:21] need of improvement. I'm excited to

[13:23] announce our new locally based route

[13:27] manager, Dawn,

[13:31] will be available to meet with Burough

[13:33] staff and residents within 48 hours

[13:35] notice. Additionally, we're seeing bins

[13:39] left out after routes have started. This

[13:42] is understandable with composting being

[13:43] a new program. To make it easier for

[13:46] residents to remember, we're providing

[13:48] residents with notification reminders

[13:50] for collections. To sign up, just email

[13:54] hello@ easycomposting.com.

[13:57] To tonight's attendees and council

[14:00] members, thank you for giving Easy

[14:02] Composting the opportunity to serve you

[14:05] this year. And on a personal note, as a

[14:08] 30-year resident, thank you for the

[14:10] privilege of allowing me to play a small

[14:13] role in the history of this town, I am

[14:16] eager to hear your thoughts and am

[14:18] committed to working with council

[14:20] members, burough staff, and any and all

[14:23] members of this community to ensure that

[14:25] we provide a service Swathmore residents

[14:28] can count on for years to come.

[14:35] May I provide the comments from the

[14:37] residents?

[14:38] » Yeah, sure.

[14:41] » This is Margaret B on Fairview. While

[14:44] serving on the Swathmore EAC, I learned

[14:48] about easy composting from a fellow

[14:50] member who recommended their service as

[14:53] an easy, affordable, and environmental

[14:56] solution to ensuring compostable waste

[14:59] didn't end up in landfills. Their

[15:01] service was always friendly, effective.

[15:04] The few times I had questions or issues,

[15:07] I received quick and friendly email

[15:09] responses that helped fix the situation.

[15:12] I was thrilled when the burrow

[15:14] officially created a composting service

[15:16] with Easy Composting.

[15:18] Their service continued to be friendly

[15:20] and effective. I hope the burrow will

[15:23] take seriously my endorsement of easy

[15:26] composting as well as the environmental

[15:28] need for composting in general.

[15:33] Jack G on strap statement. We've used

[15:36] easy composting since before Swathmore's

[15:39] burrow wide program began and our

[15:42] experience has been consistently

[15:44] positive. The curbside service is

[15:47] reliable and convenient, and we've

[15:49] appreciated the responsive customer

[15:51] service and connection to a local

[15:53] provider. Please feel free to share this

[15:56] with Burough Council as firsthand

[15:57] feedback about our experience with the

[16:00] program.

[16:06] Maria M on Ruckers. You've made it easy,

[16:10] affordable, and pleasurable for a

[16:12] beginning composter like me to start

[16:14] making a difference in Swathmore. Always

[16:16] great communication with questions, etc.

[16:19] Always friendly pickups. Thank you,

[16:24] Julia M on Chestnut.

[16:27] We've been very happy with Easy

[16:28] Composting for several years now, even

[16:31] before it became the Burrows program.

[16:33] It's been easy and convenient with

[16:35] responsive service. We strongly support

[16:37] M curbside composting in Swathmore.

[16:43] Cesaly V on Elm, I read the Swathmore,

[16:47] but I don't get into the weeds when it

[16:49] comes to some local controversies.

[16:51] I gathered from your letter to the

[16:53] editor a couple weeks ago that the issue

[16:55] arose over where easy takes the food

[16:57] waste to be composted. Sometimes these

[17:00] folks think everything can be done hyper

[17:02] locally. It's okay that the farmers at

[17:06] the Saturday market drive here from

[17:08] Lancaster County. I understood from your

[17:11] letter that Delo that the Delo facility

[17:14] would not make the necessary commitments

[17:16] in writing. So you go to and that

[17:19] you have clients in other locations etc.

[17:21] I support the Berto's contract with you

[17:24] and have enjoyed excellent service with

[17:26] Easy since 2023.

[17:29] As another sub subscriber said, I also

[17:32] much appreciated Easy coming by the day

[17:36] after I failed to put my bucket out

[17:38] early. You have responded promptly to

[17:40] every email I've sent. My regular trash

[17:44] rarely has any food in it, so it doesn't

[17:47] smell or attract pests.

[17:49] » Scott, I'm just going to ask that you

[17:50] maybe summarize a little bit more and

[17:52] wrap it up.

[17:54] » Just trying to quote like

[17:55] » I understand.

[17:57] » I literally have

[17:58] » Yeah, why don't you send it to us if you

[18:00] will?

[18:00] » Okay. Can I just There's like one I want

[18:02] to end with if that's possible.

[18:03] » Yeah.

[18:04] » Okay. Um,

[18:08] I'm fine with including me as a

[18:10] supporter of easy compost arrangement. I

[18:12] think your explanation will prevail.

[18:15] » All right, I'll skip a few and I'll get

[18:17] to the

[18:17] » Yeah, let's wrap it up.

[18:18] » Okay, thank you. Um, Susanna H on

[18:21] Swathmore. Happy to lend my support

[18:23] here. We strongly believe that

[18:24] composting is an essential part of

[18:26] caring for the place we are privileged

[18:28] to call home. Not only does composting

[18:30] significantly decrease the amount of

[18:33] trash sent to landfills, it regenerates

[18:35] food scraps into compost, which

[18:38] nourishes the earth without chemicals

[18:40] that could harm humans, as well as all

[18:43] the living organisms we share this space

[18:46] with, from foxes to bees to earthworms.

[18:48] We've composted with Easy Composting for

[18:50] years, even before the burrow contracted

[18:52] with them. And we've always been pleased

[18:55] with the level of service. It's

[18:57] important for this service to continue

[18:58] with a local company committed to the

[19:00] burrow and its residents.

[19:02] » Thank you very much.

[19:08] » Uh Jane Billings,

[19:11] you have three minutes. When you take

[19:12] the stand

[19:18] » Who is

[19:22] » Really the parklets and and uh co was

[19:26] enough to send me spiraling back to uh

[19:29] uh memories. But we did a great job. We

[19:31] we stopped it. Um I'm passing out some

[19:34] stuff about the peace bowl. I'm actually

[19:36] here on what I hope is a

[19:37] non-controversial matter. Um and um uh

[19:41] Sean Ering is actually with me as well

[19:43] with the representatives of sport

[19:45] Rotary. Uh I'm the past president for

[19:47] two years of Rotary. Pretty much went

[19:49] into that after I retired. Great

[19:51] organization. Um and one of our

[19:54] unofficial committee of Sean, myself,

[19:56] our current president Lonnie um and

[19:59] another member of our club uh to install

[20:01] a peace pole in a public place in the

[20:04] burrow. There actually are some peace

[20:06] poles already in the burrow. Um, but our

[20:09] local voter district um is hoping to put

[20:12] peace polls in a public place where they

[20:14] can be seen pretty much on an everyday

[20:17] basis. And after some searching and

[20:20] discussing with other people, we have

[20:22] picked a location that you can probably

[20:24] see. It's by the um oak tree sort of on

[20:27] the far side of Central Park. Uh we

[20:30] checked in with the Centennial

[20:32] Foundation because, as you know, they've

[20:34] done so much work in the park. We

[20:36] checked in with uh the horicultural

[20:38] society because they've done most of the

[20:40] plantings and we checked in with Doug

[20:42] who just did the most amazing renovation

[20:44] of the of the um veterans memorial just

[20:47] to make sure that nobody thought it was

[20:49] a funky location or they didn't want to

[20:50] do it. Um so the peace polls uh all are

[20:54] engraved with languages that are that

[20:58] all say may peace prevail on earth. Uh

[21:00] we are planning eight languages and they

[21:03] will include English, Lape, Swahili,

[21:06] German, Spanish, Chinese, and Japanese.

[21:10] I think that was eight. If it wasn't,

[21:11] I'll miss one. Um the German actually

[21:14] you're probably going to hear a little

[21:15] bit more about this town used to have a

[21:17] relationship with a town in Germany that

[21:19] started after the war and um we're

[21:22] hoping to get a little more information

[21:23] about that. And we also uh the Japanese

[21:27] connection is very important. These

[21:28] peace holes were started after World War

[21:30] II by a survivor from Japan um and uh

[21:34] pretty much in response to Hiroshima and

[21:36] Nagasaki and there are now 250,000 of

[21:39] them worldwide. So we're hoping to kind

[21:42] of fasttrack this a little bit. Um we

[21:44] would like to get this in the ground. Um

[21:47] we're not going to make International

[21:48] Day of Peace September 21st. Uh but we

[21:52] would like to get it in the ground by

[21:53] November at the very latest and they do

[21:56] take a while to make. So, if council has

[21:59] no questions or approves of it, it would

[22:01] be great if we could get approval

[22:03] tonight.

[22:05] I don't know if everybody has any

[22:07] questions.

[22:08] » I think we can do that.

[22:09] » Okay.

[22:10] » Yeah.

[22:11] » Thanks.

[22:11] » Thank you, Jane. That's really nice. It

[22:13] is. It's really nice.

[22:16] » I was going to have a second

[22:17] inscription. More peace all the time,

[22:19] but um we're going to go with me. Peace

[22:21] prevail on earth. It's it's uh pretty

[22:23] remarkable to think about them all over

[22:24] the world.

[22:26] Thank you.

[22:26] » And as I understand it, this would be at

[22:29] no cost to

[22:30] » No cost. Right. Correct.

[22:32] » And it's maintenancefree and it's not

[22:34] going in the grass because Brian Tipping

[22:36] assured me that they would destroy it

[22:38] with their weed whackers. Not

[22:39] intentionally, but if it was in the

[22:41] grass. So, this will go with some um

[22:44] pavers around it and um in the the sort

[22:48] of more the planted area.

[22:50] » Thank you.

[22:53] Next up, we have Rhyma Aaron.

[22:59] You have three minutes when you begin

[23:00] speaking.

[23:07] It's Evan. I guess I have to work on my

[23:10] handwriting.

[23:12] I'm here to talk about artificial turf,

[23:15] but I want to take a brief historical

[23:17] detour first.

[23:19] Lead paint has many advantages which can

[23:22] be broken down into two basic

[23:24] categories, convenience and performance.

[23:28] Lead makes paint dry more quickly. It

[23:31] makes paint more resistant to moisture

[23:33] that causes corrosion and rusting. It

[23:36] increases paint's durability and

[23:38] maintains fresh, vibrant colors. Not

[23:41] surprisingly, the lead industry heavily

[23:43] marketed the addition of lead to paint

[23:45] and promoted it as a wonder ingredient.

[23:49] However, the dangers of lead paint were

[23:52] well known by the end of the 19th

[23:53] century. German health laws banned women

[23:56] and children from working in factories

[23:58] processing lead paint as early as 1886.

[24:02] Uh Sherwin Williams, the paint company,

[24:05] reported on the dangers of lead paint in

[24:07] 1904.

[24:09] True to form, the US, so often

[24:12] interested in putting money ahead of

[24:14] public safety, didn't ban lead paint in

[24:16] residential buildings, public buildings,

[24:19] toys, and furniture until 1977.

[24:23] Why this change in judgment? Because the

[24:26] scientific establishment determined that

[24:28] lead paint causes damage to the nervous

[24:30] system, kidney failure, stunted growth

[24:33] in children, reproductive problems. to

[24:36] list only a few of the serious

[24:38] consequences of lead paint exposure.

[24:41] Today, in 2026, the artificial turf

[24:44] industry heavily markets their product.

[24:47] Why? Two basic categories: convenience

[24:50] and performance. You put down the turf

[24:52] and it doesn't get muddy. It stays fresh

[24:55] looking, its colors vibrant. It is

[24:58] marketed as state-of-the-art, the wonder

[25:00] turf that all competitive athletic

[25:02] programs should have. The scientific

[25:05] community has another view. An article

[25:08] on the website of the National Library

[25:10] of Medicine reads as follows. Numerous

[25:13] studies have shown that chemicals

[25:15] identified in artificial turf are known

[25:17] carcinogens, neurotoxicants,

[25:20] mutagens, and endocrine disruptors. It

[25:23] is also widely known that artificial

[25:25] turf increases risk to children. They

[25:28] are lower to the ground where toxic

[25:30] chemicals settle. They are more likely

[25:32] to put their hands in their mouths. They

[25:34] have immature detoxification systems, so

[25:37] their bodies cannot cope with powerful

[25:39] chemical agents. They produce more heat

[25:42] per mass than adults, and they sweat

[25:44] less. This intensifies their risk to the

[25:47] extreme heat generated by turf. Here in

[25:50] Swarmore, we face a test. Do we turn our

[25:54] backs on science, equivocate about

[25:56] risks, and choose the equivalent of

[25:58] exposing lead paint to our children and

[26:01] our environment? The people of Swarmore

[26:04] are watching the Sparrow Council. Thank

[26:06] you.

[26:07] » Thank you.

[26:16] Uh, next we have a Barbara

[26:20] uh, Draven.

[26:21] » Dreb. Yep. That's one of

[26:23] » Three minutes when you uh come and vote.

[26:31] » Barbara Jing, 323 North Swathmore.

[26:35] Uh, I've passed out

[26:37] copies of routine exclusions that exempt

[26:41] insurers from paying any liability

[26:43] claims related to PAS, Forever

[26:46] Chemicals, and other chemicals used in

[26:49] artificial turf and other products.

[26:52] These exclusions raise a major question

[26:55] whether the bureau or the school

[26:57] district would have any liability

[26:59] coverage for any potential future claims

[27:02] related to these chemicals from

[27:05] Cunningham Field adjacent to an

[27:07] elementary school and residential

[27:09] neighborhood or any artificial turf

[27:12] fields on school district property. When

[27:16] you read the exclusions, you see that

[27:18] they do not require that PAS forever

[27:21] chemicals or other specific chemicals be

[27:24] proven to be present on the site, but

[27:27] they are broadly written to include any

[27:30] substance that may exhibit or

[27:33] demonstrate the same or similar harmful

[27:36] properties as PAS.

[27:41] as the Swathmore Burough may soon

[27:44] consider changing the zoning on

[27:45] Cunningham Field after first turning

[27:48] them down to permit the college to

[27:50] install multiple tops types of turf on

[27:54] the fields and on the walkways. The

[27:56] bureau would be permitting the

[27:58] proliferation of PAS forever chemicals

[28:00] and other chemicals in close proximity

[28:03] to residents, the school, school staff,

[28:07] athletes, spectators, people working in

[28:10] the vill and frequenting the town

[28:12] center.

[28:14] The Delaware County Planning Commission

[28:15] has told Swathmore residents that they

[28:17] have never seen a proposal with this

[28:19] many different kinds of artificial turf

[28:22] products to be installed in close

[28:24] proximity to an elementary school and

[28:27] homes. They encourage residents to get

[28:29] all the details the impact of the

[28:31] interaction of these chemicals and child

[28:33] and resident health. And since they

[28:35] always categorize artificial turf as

[28:38] hardcape to get details on how the

[28:41] massive runoff could be handled to avoid

[28:44] flooding. In the event of a suit when

[28:47] there is no liability coverage, how will

[28:50] the burough solicitor and the council

[28:52] explain why the bureau would ever

[28:54] reszone Cunningham Field to allow

[28:57] proliferation of a huge volume of

[28:59] chemical particles next to our

[29:02] elementary school and residential homes.

[29:08] All

[29:13] right. Next up is Neil Young.

[29:18] You have 3 minutes when you begin

[29:19] speaking.

[29:29] talk tonight about composting. Uh but as

[29:32] I will maintain, I don't think the issue

[29:34] is comp composting. The issue is

[29:36] governance. Um you know, we approved

[29:38] $150,000 of expenditure without any

[29:41] clear goals, measurable criteria, um or

[29:44] any sort of notion of what the program

[29:46] was supposed to achieve. Those are basic

[29:48] functions of government. Um, you know,

[29:50] I'm a fierce but measured critic of this

[29:52] council and it's okay to make mistakes

[29:55] and it's okay to respond to new

[29:56] information, but entering into a

[29:58] contract without first deciding how

[30:00] you'll measure success is is

[30:02] embarrassing.

[30:04] We should before entering it, spending

[30:05] the money, you should count should come

[30:07] to the public and said, "This is what

[30:08] we're trying to accomplish. Here's how

[30:10] we'll measure it. Here's what success

[30:12] looks like and here's what it would

[30:14] cause us to reconsider."

[30:16] You say those questions you want to ask.

[30:18] And so without meaningful metrics uh

[30:20] measured in advance almost any result

[30:22] can be defined as success. Satisfied

[30:25] customers a pound of food waste diverged

[30:27] from landfill. Um you know an arbitrary

[30:30] 30% figure site is a success. Um it's

[30:34] all post fact and I think taxpayers need

[30:37] a much simpler question answered. If we

[30:39] had $150,000 of dollars to spend which I

[30:42] don't think we do but if we did what

[30:45] would be the best use of that taxpayer

[30:46] funding? And I'd argue um the best

[30:49] result here would be to return that

[30:50] money to the taxpayer and let people

[30:52] choose for themselves how to um sustain

[30:54] the environment. So nobody asked these

[30:57] questions before the unanimous vote last

[30:59] year. So when SR comes up and the

[31:01] seniors come up asking for a couple of

[31:03] thousand or a couple hundred bucks,

[31:05] every penny is scrutinized. So why

[31:07] wasn't the same standard applied here?

[31:11] And I think this is what the bigger

[31:13] issue is. There's a growing perception

[31:15] uh in the community that highly

[31:16] organized committed groups and and very

[31:18] wealthy landlords like the the college

[31:21] have disproportionate influence uh over

[31:23] the over the public discourse because

[31:24] they have this council here and so they

[31:27] get a seat at the table. Um so when

[31:29] you're at the table, everyone else is on

[31:31] the menu. Um and so once these you know

[31:34] ideas and schemes and notions gain

[31:36] momentum, it stops being about what's

[31:38] right for the public and it becomes

[31:40] about the politics. So we've seen that

[31:42] with composting and now we're seeing it

[31:44] with with development. So enthusiasm for

[31:46] the vague notion of of town center north

[31:49] seems to be dominoes are falling into

[31:52] well that means we have to tough over

[31:54] cunning field and it feels like the

[31:56] political momentum is now replacing

[31:58] sound judgment. So I urge you uh once

[32:01] again to recommit to a much higher

[32:02] standard of governance um much more

[32:06] consideration of public input, much more

[32:08] objective evaluation, much more

[32:10] transparency and much more willingness

[32:12] uh to question your own assumptions. And

[32:14] I think most importantly, we need to

[32:16] stop confusing uh the interests of small

[32:18] minorities and local minorities with the

[32:19] needs of a broader community. Um so

[32:22] again, I encourage you to listen more

[32:24] broadly, govern more objectively and

[32:26] serve more of the community. Thank you

[32:27] for your time.

[32:28] » Thank you. Anyone

[32:33] else who wishes to speak for public

[32:34] comment?

[32:37] » Okay, no further public comment.

[32:39] » Thanks, Al.

[32:41] Okay, we're going to do um the planning

[32:43] and zoning committee next because we

[32:45] have a member of the planning commission

[32:47] here, John. That's you. Um so, do we

[32:51] want to take a a minute so we can set up

[32:52] this uh projector? Okay, we're going to

[32:55] be in recess for 2 minutes, 3 minutes,

[32:57] however long it takes.

[32:57] » Five minutes. 5. Thank you.

[32:59] » Okay. Um the planning commission and uh

[33:04] planning zone each met this uh past

[33:07] month will be in a little bit later. The

[33:10] largest area of discussion at our two

[33:13] meetings was the PC's revised rever

[33:16] version of what we sent to the planning

[33:20] commission uh regarding uh outdoor

[33:24] commerce. The biggest difference is

[33:26] whether the burrow should require

[33:28] parklets to have curb pipe flat

[33:30] platforms or allow the parklets to be at

[33:33] street level. There is general agreement

[33:35] about the need for improved aesthetics

[33:37] compliance with ADA and the need for

[33:40] crash barriers. Members of the planning

[33:42] and zoning have concerns about the cost

[33:44] of platforms, who pays for them, and

[33:46] whether the cost might kill a park

[33:48] program. uh planning commission provided

[33:51] no cost analysis previously and we were

[33:55] working with $30,000 of for modular

[33:58] units. We recently received just this

[34:01] afternoon and that's what John will be

[34:03] discussing uh some more refined cost

[34:07] estimates as we move uh further into

[34:11] this evening's agenda. uh planning on

[34:13] zoning also discussed restrictions on

[34:15] artificial turf and has sent related

[34:18] questions to our solicitor and the

[34:19] zoning officer before taking the next

[34:21] step of engaging the uh planning

[34:24] commission in discussion. More on this

[34:26] later and the college has not submitted

[34:29] a proposal regarding Cunningham Wheel

[34:31] nor has it provided uh us nor Satna with

[34:35] a dividing line between the Cunningham

[34:37] Field project and the town center north

[34:40] boundary. The lack of a plannable bouch

[34:42] will probably cost us our place in line

[34:44] regarding transtorian it developed in

[34:47] Swathmore by SEPTA to defer the

[34:50] development of Town Center North Septa's

[34:53] needs for clarity and its planning

[34:55] schedule. Uh the PC will meet on the

[34:59] 16th uh at 7:00 and planning and zoning

[35:03] on the 17th at 7:00.

[35:06] Um,

[35:08] and uh, we can get back to general

[35:11] comments on planning and zoning in a

[35:13] second. I want to move right into

[35:15] outdoor commerce, give a little bit more

[35:17] background, and turn it over to John.

[35:20] And I thank the planning commission for

[35:22] all of its hard work. Um

[35:25] so um as I said the biggest difference

[35:28] is you know whether we require curb uh

[35:33] height platforms

[35:35] and there are differences in opinion on

[35:38] this. One's not right, one's not wrong.

[35:40] They're different different emphasises.

[35:43] Um and um

[35:47] after we had much discussion at our

[35:50] meeting, which we only had the planning

[35:53] commission's text a few hours before our

[35:57] uh meeting, we thought it would be

[35:59] appropriate to talk to Swathmore Town

[36:01] Center merchants and restaurant tours as

[36:04] well as public works about the planning

[36:06] commission's revised approach. Um, and

[36:11] this will take us probably a week or

[36:14] two. So, we're not going to be asking

[36:16] for any, you know, uh, decisions made in

[36:20] this cycle, but we want to try to keep

[36:22] them all all moving. Um

[36:25] and um

[36:28] at this point as I said we just got

[36:31] today some you know interesting

[36:34] additional

[36:36] uh quantification of potential cost. Uh

[36:40] subsequent to that, members of the of

[36:42] the committee uh met with our uh

[36:47] uh PC liaison and talked about this and

[36:51] what we hope that this is the next step

[36:54] in discussion about what these costs

[36:57] are, how they could be met or not, and

[37:00] uh take it from there. So, John, I'm

[37:02] going to turn it over to you. Um and uh

[37:07] now we can have a discussion on where we

[37:10] are on this topic.

[37:12] » Great. Thank you, David. Uh I'm John

[37:15] McCallum. Um I am a um as David

[37:19] mentioned, I'm a member of the SWAT

[37:21] planning commission. Um so just glad to

[37:24] be here to be able to talk through some

[37:25] of the thinking behind um our latest

[37:28] draft of this ordinance. And oh, you

[37:31] know what? I think this

[37:35] You turn that off, too.

[37:40] » So close everybody.

[37:43] » It's all my fault.

[37:45] » Most things are.

[37:46] » I understand.

[37:50] » Exactly.

[37:53] » While that while that's back up and or

[37:55] about to be back up and running.

[37:57] » Yeah. But it's uh

[38:01] so um we as a commission um met last

[38:05] Wednesday on 2nd and recommended the

[38:08] latest draft be uh sent back to to

[38:10] council for uh debate and um uh and

[38:15] working of course through um planning

[38:17] and zoning um along the way. So we did

[38:21] receive a draft back in May. Um that

[38:24] draft had uh sort of two different

[38:26] parts. one was the ordinance form and

[38:29] the other was uh in more of a resolution

[38:32] form. What we did for our work was

[38:34] actually to consolidate the two in one

[38:37] uh coherent ordinance. Uh the ordinance

[38:40] we uh affectionately know as 1020.04

[38:45] uh use of sidewalks and streets in town

[38:48] center. Uh I believe that's a a renaming

[38:51] from um I can't remember what it it's

[38:55] 1020.0 4. Um, but what we're looking to

[38:58] do here is actually uh adapt what we

[39:01] received from PNZ. Um, and we folded in

[39:04] most of that into the front end of this.

[39:06] And we've structured this in such a way

[39:08] where we talk more generally about

[39:10] commercial use in the public right away.

[39:13] And then we drill down eventually onto

[39:15] parkletits. I I I I know we want to get

[39:18] to parkletits uh very quickly, but this

[39:20] is really a comprehensive look at all of

[39:22] uh permitted commercial uses within the

[39:25] public right away. I'm not going to read

[39:26] through all this uh clearly it's um uh

[39:30] not necessary to for tonight, but I

[39:32] encourage you all to get your eyes on

[39:34] the draft if you haven't seen it uh thus

[39:36] far. But you know this covers everything

[39:38] from the burough's um uh position uh and

[39:43] uh this use of the public realm as a

[39:46] privilege for uh for those uh those

[39:49] commercial proprietors and uh you know

[39:52] the need for any fixtures or any other

[39:54] improvements to be temporary and be

[39:56] removable should uh should the bureau

[39:58] need them to be removed for any any

[40:00] reason. Um and so on. So that then it

[40:04] sort of starts generally and then we get

[40:06] into use of sidewalks uh display of

[40:09] goods where is merchandise um and uh and

[40:13] or outdoor seating. Um and uh there is

[40:17] one provision in there that talks about

[40:19] the requirement to maintain a a pathway

[40:22] a clear pathway free of any uh any

[40:24] fixtures, displays or seating that is at

[40:27] a minimum of 5t. Previously that was 4

[40:30] ft. Um I think we we uh we along with

[40:33] P&Z have have gotten comfortable with

[40:35] the 5t. The rationale there is that two

[40:37] people can kind of comfortably pass one

[40:40] another on the sidewalk. It's a standard

[40:42] with for ADA turnaround all that. Um so

[40:47] um in addition um

[40:51] we also include outdoor commercial

[40:53] product display and sales limitations.

[40:56] Um and I think that's uh that's pretty

[40:58] straightforward. Again, I encourage you

[40:59] all to read the draft. Um, I think for

[41:03] tonight's purposes, we want to get to

[41:04] the discussion points here. We do under

[41:07] general outdoor dining regul uh

[41:10] regulations

[41:11] um uh we do uh permit year round um

[41:16] dining uh regulations. So, year round

[41:19] use. So, that is something that's put uh

[41:22] explicitly within this um within this

[41:25] ordinance. Um, and then we do uh also

[41:29] prohibit any enclosed or roof

[41:31] structures.

[41:33] Talked a little bit about furniture, the

[41:35] need for them to be durable, maintained,

[41:38] uh visual consistency. You know, we're

[41:41] we're really trying to kind of clean up

[41:43] and make much more clear uh what we're

[41:45] requiring of uh retailers and merchants

[41:48] within uh within the public right away.

[41:54] Um I'm going to move directly then to

[41:56] parklets. So then we really drill down

[41:58] specifically on parklets and um again

[42:02] this is really intended to be a

[42:03] comprehensive solution and uh one that

[42:06] we would really prefer not to be pulled

[42:08] apart um but is really driven by the

[42:11] priorities of uh ensuring safety,

[42:15] ensuring accessibility and ensuring uh

[42:17] the quality of the public realm. That's

[42:19] really what's driving our thinking

[42:21] behind carpets. And to the point of

[42:24] safety, um I'm going to just bring up a

[42:28] diagram here so we're not just staring

[42:29] at a text.

[42:32] Um this is a sketch um that we prepare

[42:37] to to lay out the requirements of a

[42:39] typical parklet. Now, in this case, this

[42:41] is a a parallel parking spot. Um and uh

[42:46] in terms of safety, there's really three

[42:48] components to it. The first is safety

[42:50] from vehicles. We're talking about

[42:52] people dining in in literally in the

[42:55] road directly adjacent to a travel lane.

[42:58] And one thing that we have yet to see um

[43:01] really effectively thus far since the

[43:03] introduction of park lights is a

[43:05] significant barrier that uh provides a

[43:08] certain measure of buffer uh from

[43:11] vehicles should they lose control or

[43:13] otherwise stray out of that travel lane

[43:15] and impact a part. So what we're uh

[43:18] suggesting here in in our draft is a

[43:20] significant um sign significant

[43:24] vehicular barrier um but one that can be

[43:26] a planter uh something of significant

[43:28] weight. We give some perform performance

[43:30] criteria in our text uh to to specify

[43:34] what the weight of that is um and uh

[43:37] dimensional criteria. We do think that

[43:39] that barrier can can uh be right at the

[43:42] edge of the travel lane um because we

[43:44] really do want to maximize as much of

[43:46] that parklet platform as possible. But

[43:48] these would be significant um barriers

[43:51] again should uh should the worst happen

[43:54] and it uh it it provides measure of

[43:57] safety for the people dying on the

[43:58] platform. The second layer of uh

[44:01] security here is this guardrail uh that

[44:04] you can see on three sides of the

[44:06] parklet. And uh this is to ensure that

[44:09] people aren't um aren't falling off by

[44:12] accident. The platform falling into the

[44:14] travel lane. This would be a 42-in high

[44:17] typical um guard rail that you would

[44:20] find anywhere else uh where you're

[44:22] needing to uh to keep people from

[44:24] accessing a different area. So um that

[44:27] has its own performance criteria. We've

[44:29] included that in in the ordinance. Um

[44:31] thirdly, we are um we are including a a

[44:36] requirement for wheel stops at either

[44:38] side of the parklet platform. We have

[44:41] parking spaces often times adjacent to

[44:43] these parkletits. We don't want people

[44:46] accidentally straying too far forward or

[44:48] backing up into the platform could cause

[44:50] a real issue of safety. So, uh just

[44:52] simple wheel stops 3 ft minimum off the

[44:55] edge of the of the park platform.

[44:57] um we do feel like those can encroach

[45:00] within the adjacent uh um parking

[45:03] spaces. That's yet not clarified in the

[45:06] text, but that's something we can

[45:07] address. Um

[45:10] so that really sort of covers things

[45:11] from a safety standpoint. From an

[45:13] accessibility standpoint, and this

[45:15] really gets directly to what uh David

[45:17] started to introduce uh is the platform.

[45:20] Um we have found uh in in uh all of our

[45:24] work looking at precedents for platforms

[45:27] or for uh parklets that platforms are

[45:29] commonly accepted uh and encouraged by

[45:33] municipalities to ensure uh barrierfree

[45:36] access to uh parkletits. Uh we find it

[45:40] problematic um today's condition where

[45:43] uh parkletits those dining areas are

[45:45] actually sunken down in the bed of the

[45:47] street. uh it presents a step down. Um

[45:50] but it also means you know the surface

[45:53] of the street is intended to be the

[45:56] surface of the dining uh the dining

[45:58] area. Whatever slope you have for that

[46:00] street that cross slope that's what you

[46:02] have for the for the dining surface. We

[46:05] really feel like it's a problem from an

[46:07] ADA accessibility standpoint. And

[46:10] introducing a platform

[46:12] literally levels the playing field. It

[46:14] levels the surface. It it gives us

[46:16] control to create as level as possible.

[46:19] It may not always be achievable given

[46:22] the um the existing conditions that we

[46:24] have throughout our town, but at least

[46:26] we're doing the best that we can. We're

[46:29] making a a good measured steps to uh try

[46:33] to rectify um a potentially inaccessible

[46:36] condition. Um, so, um, you know, we we

[46:41] we've, uh, discussed openly about other

[46:44] ways of satisfying ADA regulations.

[46:47] Would it would it work to have an

[46:49] accessible table along the sidewalk,

[46:52] allowing the parklet perhaps not to need

[46:54] to be accessible? or could we introduce

[46:58] um uh ramps that get uh folks in

[47:01] wheelchairs or who are otherwise

[47:03] mobility challenged down to the lower

[47:05] level of the of the uh parklet. We

[47:08] really feel like any one of those

[47:10] solutions are kind of um episodic and

[47:14] not um really showing a conviction

[47:16] behind uh creating and achieving a

[47:19] barrier-free environment. And I think we

[47:21] all agree we want as inclusive and

[47:23] barrierfree environment as we possibly

[47:25] can achieve for our um for our public

[47:28] realm within reason. Um and it's our uh

[47:33] our take and now the commission's take

[47:35] um as recommended last week

[47:39] that uh the platform solution given its

[47:42] ubiquity should be achievable. Um, do we

[47:45] have the answer to make it uh to to uh

[47:48] ensure that it's affordable?

[47:51] Um,

[47:52] uh, right now we think we we've come

[47:55] certain some way. Um, but, uh, I think

[47:58] there's more work to do. But I think

[48:00] what's important is that we set our

[48:02] sights high. We uh, we have some measure

[48:05] of aspiration behind um, what we're

[48:08] trying to achieve in the public realm.

[48:10] and to to sort of acknowledge that what

[48:12] we have today is not acceptable. Um, but

[48:16] that uh we want to achieve that that

[48:18] that safety, that accessibility, and

[48:21] that general quality of the public realm

[48:23] that we think this this uh bureau really

[48:26] deserves. Um, and we don't think it's

[48:28] really that big of a lift. This is

[48:32] common across the country, and I think

[48:35] this is something we can figure out. So,

[48:37] um, there's been back and forth. We've

[48:39] uh I know Doug who's joined me or Doug

[48:41] Karnsburgger has has done quite a bit of

[48:43] work looking into the planters

[48:45] themselves. Um he's found a a great

[48:48] source out of Iowa for um for a number

[48:52] of these planters to be provided. Um I'm

[48:55] not going to quote the cost because

[48:56] frankly I can't remember the exact cost

[48:58] but uh to be purchased uh delivered

[49:02] installed uh using a forklift and um

[49:06] those would be uh uh provided as that

[49:09] sort of vehicular barrier uh component

[49:11] of this design. The platform component

[49:14] of the design we have started to work

[49:16] through an idea that um I'll try to

[49:20] bring that up. I'm sorry guys.

[49:24] That's sort of outlined in these

[49:26] sketches. So, um

[49:30] park plates are in the public realm.

[49:32] They need to be uh um easily assembled,

[49:36] easily disassembled, should they need to

[49:39] be removed. Um and or just should a

[49:43] portion of it need to be removed. So,

[49:44] the idea here is actually to create

[49:46] something that's modular. Uh in this

[49:49] case, we've as a test case taken a

[49:51] parking space that's 6 feet by 18 feet

[49:54] uh long. It does account for the space

[49:57] that's required for those vehicular

[49:58] barriers. And uh it it uh uses a module

[50:02] of 3 ft by 3 ft. So uh these these are

[50:06] panels that you put down uh in uh on the

[50:09] road. They're leveled with adjustable um

[50:12] pedestals uh that are structural and

[50:15] would support each each module. And then

[50:17] together they're all ganged together as

[50:19] the parklet platform. They can be um uh

[50:23] built with the handrailing as well and

[50:26] um built offsite in a shop um and

[50:30] delivered to the site and assembled

[50:31] pretty quickly. Uh so what you see here

[50:34] is basically just sort of a a codified

[50:36] plan in the upper left that labels the

[50:39] modules and then we break down each

[50:40] module uh in terms of its detailing. It

[50:44] can be done by a a general contractor.

[50:46] Does not have to be a very expensive

[50:49] prefab like you know similar to what we

[50:51] had been looking at earlier. David um

[50:54] does not need to be $30,000 uh dollars.

[50:56] We actually have a general contractor on

[50:59] sitting on the planning commission which

[51:00] is very convenient. a good good builder

[51:03] uh Steve Mitten who uh worked through an

[51:06] estimate um on this scheme and uh I

[51:09] think in his uh in the middle of his

[51:12] pricing he he came out to about $12,500

[51:17] um estimated based on his experience,

[51:20] just an estimate, but um in that range

[51:23] for something like this, which again

[51:25] could be done by a general contractor um

[51:29] and uh and assembled uh conventional

[51:33] wood uh wood members and hardware that's

[51:36] readily available. So this is one

[51:39] approach. Um, thus far the draft uh

[51:42] ordinance that we have is not mandating

[51:44] an approach to this, but uh it could

[51:47] serve as an example and if we wanted to

[51:49] take it the next step and and um you

[51:52] know organize an effort to um to uh uh

[51:56] construct multiple um uh parklets um and

[52:02] uh and really organize that as an effort

[52:05] um and help to organize the financing.

[52:07] That's something that we could talk

[52:08] about. We do uh value deeply the

[52:12] apartments. Um I think it's really

[52:14] timely that we saw uh that painting from

[52:17] Aram earlier. Yes, we want to encourage

[52:20] that vibrancy within our town. It's not

[52:22] just a value to the merchants. It's of

[52:24] value to our town center and to to us as

[52:28] residents. So we want to encourage that.

[52:30] We acknowledge that it's an additional

[52:32] cost, but uh that doesn't preclude the

[52:35] need to really um approach this with um

[52:39] with a deliberate um uh set of

[52:44] aspirations that um really has, you

[52:47] know, that that requires a certain level

[52:49] of quality and and safety for our town

[52:51] center. So, I'll I'll I'll leave it at

[52:53] that and maybe open it up questions or

[52:55] conversation. I know the platform

[52:58] probably is is maybe one subject, but

[53:01] feel free to ask talk about it.

[53:05] Thank you, John. Uh I

[53:08] we didn't quue it up for council to

[53:11] really review the entire proposal

[53:14] uh as I said in my introduction uh this

[53:18] evening, but uh we really wanted to

[53:23] uh start kicking around ideas about

[53:27] parkland versus no parkland amongst the

[53:30] members up here. get us some more

[53:33] guidance uh to raise concerns about um

[53:38] you know costs etc. Um you know

[53:44] you know you mentioned that Doug had

[53:46] some

[53:48] uh cost what the vehicular barriers

[53:50] might cost. Doug can you share that with

[53:54] us? the Iowa contractor that

[53:59] goes.

[54:01] » Thank you. The the crash barriers that

[54:05] John referred to are manufactured in

[54:07] Iowa, two other places in the Midwest.

[54:10] So far, we have two bids or two quotes.

[54:12] The the lowest of them is approximately

[54:16] $8,200

[54:17] for 10 of them, which would amount to

[54:22] three crash barriers on the two Park

[54:24] Avenue sites and four crash barriers

[54:27] total on what was that cost? Sorry.

[54:31] » 8,200

[54:31] » 8,200. And to that, the question of how

[54:35] they get moved, that needs to be

[54:37] included. Uh the rental of a forklift

[54:40] at6 $650

[54:43] has been quoted u by ENF Heartscaping

[54:47] which did the work of memorial. So

[54:51] combine those two numbers and you're

[54:52] close to $9,000 for the for the 10

[54:56] barriers. Uh I'll just embellish a

[54:59] little to say that these these need to

[55:01] be filled with gravel and top soil and

[55:04] plants. So they come to us weighing uh

[55:08] 950 lb. When they're filled, they're

[55:12] 1,500 lb. So the the weight here is the

[55:16] important thing to remember. 1,500 lb of

[55:19] dead weight for each of these three

[55:21] planters. There's 4,500 lb. So that's a

[55:24] significant

[55:26] barrier to keep the car truck from

[55:29] entering into the zone. And that's what

[55:32] we're trying to achieve here. This is

[55:33] not a unique solution. You can go to

[55:36] media and see it at the silver pig on

[55:39] the sidewalk. They have the same

[55:42] at the silver pig.

[55:45] » A sterling

[55:49] is

[55:51] I haven't been there. I just took a

[55:52] photograph of it. So I show you that.

[55:54] But any case has it, Laura Marion has

[55:57] it, and Philadelphia has a useful

[55:59] solution. So we're not inventing

[56:01] something here. We're using precedent.

[56:04] And the key idea here is that they're 2

[56:06] ft deep, 4 ft long. It's that 2ft

[56:09] dimension that allows the depth of the

[56:12] parklet to remain between 5' 6 and 5 and

[56:16] 6 ft in depth. So I think it's it's an

[56:19] elegant structural solution. And I would

[56:22] just emphasize because this is something

[56:24] that I've spent a lot of time looking at

[56:27] is that we need to provide this

[56:29] protection in our bureau. We've we've

[56:32] skated without such protection for the 6

[56:34] years since co but I'm I'm aware that

[56:38] accidents happen and I've been involved

[56:40] in one of those accidents professionally

[56:42] and the bureau does not want to go there

[56:45] as far as allowing u the possibility of

[56:48] an accident in this situation. So even

[56:51] in terms of priority, I think it's the

[56:53] number one priority to protect the

[56:54] bureau's interest as we address the

[56:58] other issues that John mentioned.

[56:59] » Thank you, D.

[57:00] » Thanks, Dad.

[57:01] » Um, so,

[57:04] you know, as I

[57:06] said at the top, we weren't really

[57:09] queuing this up for the council to do a

[57:12] whole die. We wanted to get some input

[57:15] on uh the issue of platforms versus node

[57:20] platforms, the cost of platforms. Um you

[57:24] know there's all sorts of different ways

[57:26] of of doing this. Um and um you know I

[57:33] want to make it clear that when the

[57:36] uh planning uh planning and zoning and

[57:39] the council sent us on without platforms

[57:42] to uh the planning commission

[57:48] we did so understanding that we needed

[57:51] safety barriers we needed ADA

[57:54] compliance. you know, you don't need

[57:59] I'm not weighing in one way or the

[58:02] other. I'm just explaining that you

[58:03] don't need

[58:05] uh platforms have these barriers that

[58:08] Doug just uh provided. I was driving

[58:10] through Maddio just over the weekend and

[58:15] right down I guess that's main street

[58:18] Manunk all sorts of parklets all at

[58:21] street level all with what I think they

[58:23] call jersey plastic jersey barriers

[58:26] probably filled with water uh they're

[58:29] different ways they're different

[58:30] solutions uh I've even been mentioning

[58:34] in our discussions that

[58:37] on the safety end on the crash barrier

[58:40] ers. It may be something that we as a

[58:42] burrow want to make sure are in place.

[58:45] Does it change the fee? Does it are

[58:47] there ways of recovering those costs?

[58:50] But you know, putting safety paramount,

[58:53] you know, over the um you know, very

[58:57] many ways that you could have a

[59:01] a parklet. So our members of our

[59:05] committee will be talking with

[59:06] restaurant tours and uh town center

[59:10] people etc and trying to advance this

[59:13] very conversation. Uh I talked to Doug

[59:16] this afternoon uh after getting um

[59:20] this uh cost estimates from uh John and

[59:25] Steve and he said oh you know this is

[59:28] step one let us look and see if there

[59:30] are other structures and other ways we

[59:33] can suggest that might reduce the cost.

[59:37] So I think we're all moving in the same

[59:41] direction. I just don't think we've

[59:43] converged on a final spot at this point.

[59:46] » Okay. Um, so would you like to open it

[59:49] up for discussion or it's going to go

[59:51] back to committee?

[59:52] » It's going to go back to committee and

[59:54] then probably back to uh uh depending on

[59:57] what the committee does. It it may come

[1:00:00] right back to us. It may go back to the

[1:00:03] planning commission. We're working as

[1:00:05] collaboratively as possible on on this.

[1:00:08] So, um, yeah, I'm always interested in

[1:00:12] my colleagues views.

[1:00:14] » I mean, I have a lot of questions, but

[1:00:16] I'm thinking I'll hold them until

[1:00:18] something that looks like a close to

[1:00:21] final draft comes before us because who

[1:00:24] knows,

[1:00:25] » Right? I I mean, we were just

[1:00:27] discussing,

[1:00:28] you know, whether it was today or

[1:00:30] yesterday, you know, uh, Jill doesn't

[1:00:32] take any days off. um that we um were

[1:00:36] saying, oh, it says something about two

[1:00:39] parking spaces where it should only be

[1:00:41] one or two parking spaces depending on

[1:00:44] the configuration. We want to clean up

[1:00:46] some language. I'm sure everybody wants

[1:00:49] to do the same thing there. So yes, uh

[1:00:52] uh I don't want to get into that level

[1:00:55] of

[1:00:56] » Nits on something where we all know that

[1:01:00] » Details are important, but if there are

[1:01:03] general questions about

[1:01:06] » Yeah, go ahead. Oh, I I I I definitely

[1:01:10] acknowledge there are probably details

[1:01:12] to work through, but um you know, as as

[1:01:14] I mentioned last Wednesday, uh the

[1:01:16] commission um voted to recommend the

[1:01:19] draft. Um

[1:01:21] » And I think you know, the fundamental

[1:01:23] pieces are in place um in terms of our

[1:01:26] recommendation back to council.

[1:01:27] » Well, now that you're saying that, so

[1:01:29] let me just ask my big question. Um it

[1:01:33] you're not saying like this would be

[1:01:35] once it's accepted that this would be a

[1:01:37] standard standardized way to build the

[1:01:40] parklets or are you saying that like if

[1:01:43] it's vote like this would be in the

[1:01:44] ordinance?

[1:01:45] » Yeah. No, currently it's not it's not

[1:01:47] addressed like that. Currently it's

[1:01:49] open. We're giving performance criteria

[1:01:51] meaning you need a barrier in place of

[1:01:54] this size of this of this weight and and

[1:01:57] you need a platform that achieves flush

[1:01:59] a flush. you know, it's more general. Uh

[1:02:01] that gives people flexibility in terms

[1:02:03] of how to achieve it.

[1:02:04] » It does talk about building materials.

[1:02:06] » It does. Yes. Thank you. Yeah, it it

[1:02:09] puts uh restrictions on, you know, yes,

[1:02:13] this needs to be exterior grade

[1:02:14] materials. They need to be kept uh you

[1:02:17] know, maintained.

[1:02:18] » Will there be like Harry the building

[1:02:20] inspector? Will he be required to say

[1:02:22] yes, this meets the building

[1:02:24] requirements in the ordinance or is this

[1:02:26] like I mean if it's for safety it has to

[1:02:28] reach a certain

[1:02:30] » Threshold standard. So who decides that

[1:02:33] » It it goes through the bureau. So

[1:02:35] there's a there's a specific uh list of

[1:02:38] required items that uh are required to

[1:02:41] to be submitted includes a plan includes

[1:02:44] a list of materials

[1:02:45] » Um that has to be reviewed by uh by the

[1:02:48] bureau and then a permit is issued um

[1:02:52] and there's a fee associated.

[1:02:53] » That was my big question. Thank you. A

[1:02:55] and we could have

[1:02:58] barriers up, crash barriers up quickly

[1:03:02] that would not impede whether we had

[1:03:05] when we when and if we would have

[1:03:08] platforms following that. So we could be

[1:03:11] addressing the main safety concerns

[1:03:14] quickly if we thought there needed to be

[1:03:17] a transition period to allow um the

[1:03:22] whomever is providing these platforms to

[1:03:26] provide the platforms. The restaurant

[1:03:29] tours generally don't own the property.

[1:03:31] You know that they may only be there for

[1:03:34] a couple of years. Do they take their

[1:03:36] platforms with us? Is this something the

[1:03:38] landlord's providing? all of these types

[1:03:40] of practical financial issues are still

[1:03:43] a little bit up in the air.

[1:03:46] » Could I could I ask a few questions? Um,

[1:03:49] » So the platforms on Dartmouth it it

[1:03:52] would be sloped appropriately. So

[1:03:56] that issue.

[1:03:57] » Yeah, I think uh I think the road is a

[1:04:00] fairly significant slope and I think uh

[1:04:03] essentially we would do the platform

[1:04:05] would do the best it can uh to mitigate

[1:04:08] that slope.

[1:04:09] um is it going to be perfect and it's a

[1:04:12] letter of but again this is a

[1:04:14] pre-existing condition I think it would

[1:04:16] greatly greatly improve the slope that

[1:04:18] that is there

[1:04:19] » And

[1:04:20] » And on Dartmouth the very question you

[1:04:22] raised as you level it are we creating a

[1:04:26] different trip hazard at the edge of the

[1:04:28] platform or how do we address that and

[1:04:31] and we have

[1:04:33] » The barriers

[1:04:34] » Well we would have to have entry

[1:04:36] barriers or something you can only get

[1:04:38] through

[1:04:39] a a small point.

[1:04:42] » Again, we're not solving for for every

[1:04:43] condition because

[1:04:45] » What do you need?

[1:04:46] » Turn your microphones on, please.

[1:04:49] » Okay. And then um

[1:04:52] » What's there now? Right. There are

[1:04:55] barriers. There are platforms. So, those

[1:04:58] are platforms.

[1:04:59] » The platform was all been taken out.

[1:05:01] » They were removed. Yeah.

[1:05:02] » I haven't been out and about in

[1:05:05] development.

[1:05:05] » I know how it feels.

[1:05:07] We'll give you a special business.

[1:05:11] » Okay. Um

[1:05:14] then then my question is not relevant.

[1:05:16] Uh but the the existing barrier barriers

[1:05:18] are they there. The planters.

[1:05:20] » Yes.

[1:05:20] » Okay. So they just weren't heavy enough.

[1:05:23] » I think that's our that's our feeling.

[1:05:25] Yeah. They're just not significant

[1:05:26] enough. There needs to be real mass to

[1:05:28] to these barriers to have any any impact

[1:05:31] on car. And then I thought I saw very

[1:05:33] quickly it said something about if you

[1:05:35] have an existing parklet these

[1:05:38] guidelines would be put you would have

[1:05:40] up until April of next year to

[1:05:43] » That's right. That's what we're

[1:05:44] currently you know ready for the warm

[1:05:48] season. Um, it's something that that

[1:05:52] » So, if I'm a merchant and I think you

[1:05:55] said they they're around that the ROM is

[1:05:58] like 125, am I paying that?

[1:06:04] » Yeah. So, we're talking about that. So,

[1:06:06] we we have been talking about, you know,

[1:06:09] » Is there a way to fund this to get like

[1:06:11] a long-term learning through STC? So,

[1:06:13] that's what we're trying to figure out.

[1:06:15] But we would come up with a solution for

[1:06:16] funding before the deadline. So they're

[1:06:19] not just

[1:06:20] » Yes. I I think ideally we would give

[1:06:22] proprietors a few options. You can take

[1:06:24] these specs, go build it. If you have a

[1:06:26] contractor, if you want some financing,

[1:06:28] we're hoping 10 century so far has been

[1:06:30] very willing to work with us and and

[1:06:33] maybe, you know, they give a xyear loan.

[1:06:36] Um do we get a grant? Do we fund it? You

[1:06:38] know, give the to the bro give them some

[1:06:40] money to help them.

[1:06:41] » Okay. and the April date was developed

[1:06:44] early in this review process. We may

[1:06:46] have to add some time into that timeline

[1:06:50] in order to make it pragmatic.

[1:06:52] Again, just one of those details that

[1:06:54] needs to be worked out.

[1:06:56] » Okay. Circling back to your initial

[1:06:58] point about like we all love the parklex

[1:07:00] because of like, you know, all of the

[1:07:01] things, right? Vibrancy, etc. Um, what

[1:07:04] we would want to do is like I'm a big

[1:07:06] fan of the platforms. Clearly, I thought

[1:07:09] they were still there.

[1:07:10] Um I for all of the reasons that you

[1:07:13] described what what would would hate for

[1:07:15] it to happen is because of the financial

[1:07:18] » Literally the financial barriers and

[1:07:20] figuratively the barriers to entry

[1:07:23] um would make so that they don't come

[1:07:25] back.

[1:07:26] » I think that's what we're all we're all

[1:07:28] agreeing with you definitely. Um and I

[1:07:31] think that's that's step two is to

[1:07:32] figure out how to how to achieve it so

[1:07:34] it's not such a barrier. And and if I

[1:07:38] could just add Jana, like I you maybe

[1:07:41] have talked about this even more than

[1:07:43] anybody else in the room, but like you

[1:07:44] know I know that each of these decisions

[1:07:46] about parkletits has been so difficult

[1:07:48] in the town central world. Everybody's

[1:07:50] got an opinion. However, I do think that

[1:07:52] following like a lot of municipalities

[1:07:55] put it like slap dash to Parklet during

[1:07:58] CO and now it's like it's a 2.0 version.

[1:08:01] They've had to grown up. They've had to

[1:08:03] grow up, you know, know what the safety

[1:08:04] concerns are. And so I think that the

[1:08:06] message to the proprietors is really

[1:08:08] going to be, yeah, it was great when,

[1:08:10] you know, we were trying to keep your

[1:08:11] business alive, but if you want to do

[1:08:12] this, it really, you know, you're taking

[1:08:14] public space to do it. It has to be

[1:08:16] within our um our vision and our safety

[1:08:19] and, you know, we'll work with you, but

[1:08:21] nobody's trying to kill it by making it

[1:08:23] so arduous.

[1:08:24] » Sorry, Colin.

[1:08:25] » Can I just caution you against um using

[1:08:29] burrow tax dollars to give to private

[1:08:32] parties? There are state, you know, I

[1:08:35] know there's some state main street

[1:08:36] programs where they give grants that you

[1:08:38] could then hand out, but as to the

[1:08:40] burough's own tax revenues, that's not a

[1:08:43] permitted use.

[1:08:44] » Would you be distinguishing between the

[1:08:48] platforms and the safety barriers there?

[1:08:51] » So, I think I'm sorry, I apologize, but

[1:08:55] the safety barriers is the thing that I

[1:08:56] want to talk about because I think that

[1:08:58] is something that we've been lacking for

[1:08:59] a very long time. And I'll defer to Bob,

[1:09:03] but if there are barriers that we can

[1:09:05] utilize in any way, shape or place we

[1:09:08] need to or at events that we have, then

[1:09:11] I think that that's something that we

[1:09:12] should have on hand. Um, and it has been

[1:09:14] a a concern of mine for many years.

[1:09:17] » Well, and that's one of the beauties of

[1:09:20] and again, I'm not weighing in on any

[1:09:22] particular technology of the waterfilled

[1:09:26] jersey barriers.

[1:09:28] You know, they're not as privy. you

[1:09:30] know, uh, uh, so there are there are

[1:09:34] tradeoffs, right?

[1:09:37] » Bob, would you say that the same is true

[1:09:38] of a

[1:09:40] » A crash barrier?

[1:09:42] » I would if it's dedicated to one

[1:09:44] property's use, you know, I I I

[1:09:47] understand mayor's point. If you have

[1:09:49] something that's movable, you use it for

[1:09:51] special events, use it here or there,

[1:09:52] that's a burrow, that's a burrow

[1:09:54] property. But if it's being dedicated to

[1:09:56] one particular business, I don't think

[1:09:58] that's something you can do. Well, I

[1:10:00] would view that it's being dedicated to

[1:10:02] the safety of our citizens uh versus a

[1:10:06] parklet is being dedicated to the

[1:10:08] business.

[1:10:13] » I my caution stands.

[1:10:15] » Thank you, sir.

[1:10:18] » Anybody else have any burning um

[1:10:21] questions or comments on parklets?

[1:10:22] Because it's going to come back and

[1:10:24] maybe that's the just let it do its

[1:10:27] thing. I just wanted to say that I think

[1:10:28] the planning commission has done exactly

[1:10:30] what I hoped they would do. I wanted

[1:10:32] safety and accessibility addressed and

[1:10:35] and thank you for doing that. And I

[1:10:38] think that that those considerations

[1:10:41] should be continued no matter what the

[1:10:44] cost is because they just they're just

[1:10:47] not negotiable. Um and I fully

[1:10:51] understand our solicitor's cautions

[1:10:53] about using taxpayer money. I was going

[1:10:56] to make the same one, but I didn't know

[1:10:58] the legal background. So, thank you.

[1:11:01] » Yeah, I I just want to say too that um I

[1:11:05] support what the planning commission has

[1:11:06] done requiring platforms and safe

[1:11:09] barriers for accessibility and safety.

[1:11:13] And we can all take a look at the uh

[1:11:16] telephone pole or poll in front of the

[1:11:19] co-op that was hit by a truck a few

[1:11:22] months ago.

[1:11:24] it it still is all marked off. You can't

[1:11:26] walk down the sidewalk um in front of

[1:11:29] the co-op. And if that had been a few

[1:11:32] feet to the left, that could have been

[1:11:35] Arya.

[1:11:37] So um you know, just it it it's really

[1:11:41] important. So I I really also applaud

[1:11:44] the planning commission for all its work

[1:11:46] and advising us. Thank you. Well, we'll

[1:11:49] be back to you uh probably not next

[1:11:52] week, but probably next month with more

[1:11:55] on this. Uh so, and we um look forward

[1:12:00] to working with members of the planning

[1:12:04] commission on other concepts around

[1:12:07] design standards and costs that may make

[1:12:12] it less of a gulp for people to swallow,

[1:12:15] you know. Uh

[1:12:16] » Thanks, John. really appreciate it.

[1:12:19] » Thank you.

[1:12:19] » Um can we let um Mr. Petrosa go next?

[1:12:23] » I'm I'm doing him next. Okay.

[1:12:26] » I told uh my good friend that he I

[1:12:29] didn't even think he needed to be here

[1:12:31] tonight, but here we go. Riverview Road

[1:12:34] » Regarding the application dealing with

[1:12:36] properties at 541 545 Riverview Road. PC

[1:12:39] working on the applicant. Transiting

[1:12:41] officer, federal engineer recommends

[1:12:43] approval of the proposed land

[1:12:45] development plan for 541545

[1:12:48] for review as amended or resubmitted by

[1:12:51] the applicant, including granting the

[1:12:53] waiver from section 128609 to allow for

[1:12:57] a combination combined preliminary and

[1:13:00] final land development application and

[1:13:03] from uh section 10246E

[1:13:06] to allow a curb cut over 12 ft to the uh

[1:13:09] proposed 24 ft to facilitate traffic

[1:13:12] flow and access by emergency

[1:13:15] and planning and zoning concurs with

[1:13:17] that recommendation. And given the

[1:13:20] extensions granted by the applicant and

[1:13:22] all and that all matters seem to be

[1:13:25] resolved, I'd like to move for approval

[1:13:27] of the application as revised and

[1:13:30] recommended by the planning commission.

[1:13:33] So moved.

[1:13:35] » Is there a second?

[1:13:37] » Second. I'm going to ask you to amend

[1:13:39] that you just add a condition that the

[1:13:41] um the applicant enter into a

[1:13:43] development agreement and financial

[1:13:45] security agreement to the satisfaction

[1:13:47] of the citizens. We don't always require

[1:13:49] them, but this project I think is going

[1:13:51] to require some some fur oversight and

[1:13:54] making sure that the sidewalks and

[1:13:57] streets get restored and connected

[1:13:59] properly.

[1:14:00] » As amended, Dave. A

[1:14:02] » As amended. And I asked Don if they

[1:14:04] would have any problems with that just

[1:14:06] so no problem. So as amended by

[1:14:09] solicitor

[1:14:11] » Second.

[1:14:13] » Any further comments?

[1:14:16] » Jared, do you have a comment?

[1:14:21] Yeah, I'm going to call the question and

[1:14:22] thank everybody for finding a solution

[1:14:25] to something at the top of Riverview

[1:14:28] Road, which has been a question for as

[1:14:30] long as I've been here and probably

[1:14:31] almost everybody's been here. So, I'll

[1:14:34] call the question. Thank you.

[1:14:37] All

[1:14:37] » In favor.

[1:14:40] » Anyone?

[1:14:42] » All right. Uh for a second later on in

[1:14:46] the agenda under public works, there's a

[1:14:48] motion to approve a traffic sign

[1:14:51] » Which relates to the same project.

[1:14:53] » Okay. Did you want to handle it that way

[1:14:56] so we can get out of here?

[1:14:57] » Yeah, I think

[1:14:59] incorporate that.

[1:15:00] » I'll defer to Jared then

[1:15:04] to to you.

[1:15:05] » Okay. Uh so in connection with this

[1:15:07] project um right

[1:15:10] » There's a a traffic signal problem.

[1:15:11] there was a traffic signal that was uh

[1:15:13] placed

[1:15:15] um at at Baltimore Pike and River Road

[1:15:19] uh encroached on private property built.

[1:15:21] I don't know how many years ago that

[1:15:22] was, but um anyways, in order to to get

[1:15:26] pendon approval for what they're doing,

[1:15:28] they need to either move that over or

[1:15:32] they need to get an easement from the

[1:15:34] property owner, which is his client. His

[1:15:36] client's willing to give an easement to

[1:15:38] the burrow so we can keep it where it

[1:15:40] is. and then hand off the traffic. So,

[1:15:43] uh there's a traffic signal agreement

[1:15:45] which uh Bob has reviewed um that would

[1:15:49] accomplish this. I'll move the

[1:15:51] acceptance of the travel traffic signal

[1:15:54] agreement.

[1:15:56] » Second.

[1:15:59] Do I have is that up here? Do we have

[1:16:02] that? Oh, yeah. That's in our packet.

[1:16:04] Okay.

[1:16:05] » Um any comments, questions? All in

[1:16:08] favor? I oppose. Motion carries.

[1:16:12] » All right. Back to planning and zoning

[1:16:14] if that's all right, Mr.

[1:16:17] Manager. Um,

[1:16:21] regarding artificial turf, uh, one of

[1:16:23] the many, uh, concerns raised by the

[1:16:26] public and noted by council in its memo

[1:16:29] to planning commission on camp field is

[1:16:31] artificial turf. uh planning themselves

[1:16:34] to release that it might be timely to

[1:16:35] address artificial turf worldwide

[1:16:37] through some type of restriction.

[1:16:40] The uh

[1:16:44] uh PC liaison to planning and zoning

[1:16:46] thought it's sufficient to hear from

[1:16:48] planning and zoning on this matter and

[1:16:49] not necessary for come at this juncture.

[1:16:53] As mentioned earlier, planning and zing

[1:16:56] has uh decided not to send anything to

[1:17:00] the planning comm uh commission until we

[1:17:02] hear from the solicitor and zoning

[1:17:04] officer to whom we have sent some

[1:17:06] inquiries which we have heard from this

[1:17:08] afternoon. Uh we will consider all of

[1:17:11] this at our next meeting and get back to

[1:17:13] you one way or the another for our

[1:17:16] October cycle. The scope of our

[1:17:18] discussion ranged from ban on new

[1:17:20] installations of artificial turf to

[1:17:23] treating artificial turf as hardcape for

[1:17:25] lockage with the former getting the

[1:17:28] majority of our support. Our current

[1:17:30] rules and regulations do not address

[1:17:33] artificial turf. During the over one and

[1:17:35] a half years of discussion regarding

[1:17:37] Cunningham field, we have found ways of

[1:17:39] providing the college with guidance

[1:17:41] about what may or may not be acceptable

[1:17:43] at Cunningham. For example, we have sent

[1:17:45] to the college strong signals about the

[1:17:47] importance of the 200 foot transition

[1:17:49] zone, preserving mature trees, strict

[1:17:52] views of the colleges to be allowed to

[1:17:54] install lighting or amplifies sound and

[1:17:57] parking requirements. These informal

[1:18:00] conversations have hopefully provided

[1:18:02] the college with greater insight as it

[1:18:04] continues to develop plans for

[1:18:06] Cunningham Field, a policy direction on

[1:18:09] artificial turf should add to that

[1:18:11] clarity. We're not asking for a vote on

[1:18:15] uh this cycle in artificial turf or

[1:18:18] making a particular proposal. We wanted

[1:18:20] to let full council and the public know

[1:18:23] that we were discussing this matter at

[1:18:25] committee and thought we would provide

[1:18:27] other members with an opportunity to

[1:18:29] give us feedback.

[1:18:31] So, if there's any comment you'd like us

[1:18:34] to be considering as we, you know,

[1:18:37] ponder this issue and uh come back to

[1:18:39] you hopefully as early as next month. Uh

[1:18:43] we are all ears now or as you all know

[1:18:47] always accessible to each and everyone.

[1:18:51] » Does anyone have anything to share on

[1:18:53] TUR? I know that individually we've been

[1:18:56] reading and digesting and trying to

[1:18:58] understand. So that process should

[1:19:01] continue and it will be in committee and

[1:19:04] please feel free to go and share your

[1:19:06] thoughts.

[1:19:08] Very good. Uh and I believe that is

[1:19:11] everything. Thank you for your patience

[1:19:13] and your input. Can we take a one

[1:19:15] minute?

[1:19:16] » Yes. We're in recess for a minute.

Swarthmore Borough Work Session 9 8 26 Part 1

Transcript