7_10_24 Planning Board Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Approved 8.7.24 trucks also that we will have worked out what is the time period for which we will keep that 203 pressurized system in place. I've done one of these before in Orange County for a 204 neighborhood of single-family houses, and we couldn't get permission until we absolutely 205 satisfied the State on the time periods. 206 207 Beth Bronson: Understandable. So, just to be clear that the three-story buildings that have a care facility 208 in them, those will have the sprinkler systems, or the community center would have them, 209 but then all of the 150 homes that are proposed would not, and they would be specifically 210 reliant on the emergency services that were available in that district? In Bingham? 211 212 Scott Radway: The three-story buildings for multifamily would have sprinklers. The other 90 dwellings 213 that we've proposed are single family houses sort of side-by-side, attached single family, 214 and then three together townhouse or triplex, realtor language differs from regulatory 215 language, but those can be sprinklered. They don't have to be sprinklered by building 216 code, and being the location that's pretty accessible, so we have some time response 217 things, so I think working advantage of this location. 218 219 Beth Bronson: I did drive by there today and did a time trip from the intersection at Morrow Mill and 54 220 down to the hospital, the emergency department basically, and it was 15 minutes. It was 221 interesting to see because I grew up in that area, and so I know kind of how far out of 222 town it is, but you forget how close and yet how far away as well. 223 224 Scott Radway: I did that trip 2 weeks ago myself. 225 226 Beth Bronson: Oh my. I hope there were no potholes. 227 228 Scott Radway: Thank you for your questions. 229 230 Adam Beeman: For expediency, I'm just going to go right to the public comments unless anybody else has 231 any other questions. 232 233 Beth Bronson: If I had a comment that was pending, I do not have it anymore. 234 235 Adam Beeman: Anybody else on the board have any follow-ups? 236 237 Statler Gilfillen: I just would like a clarification of the first gentleman that spoke. You made the comment 238 that it is declared that it would be for people over 55. Is that meant that you are declaring 239 it as a legal issue to include in the final documents so that that is binding? Declared 240 doesn't tell me. Is it legally binding? That's all. 241 242 Scott Radway: That's a great question and it pushes us into the weeds on some issues. If you're an age 243 55, there's three types of descriptions you can say that HUD finds, or the federal register 244 has found in its definitions to be acceptable for this community. One is it's senior housing, 245 one is a retirement community, or one is its age 55 plus and you have to advertise and go 246 through a whole bunch of legal steps, and if you don't advertise correctly of what you are 247 and other things, you're subject to a number of penalties. You can, we can, an applicant 248 can, but somebody will declare that they are an age-restricted, age 55-plus community 249 and then there's, we talked a little bit about it last month, there is the split between how 250 many households have to be occupied by people that are 55 and older and how many 251 could be occupied that are 54 and younger, and as a community or as an entity you can 252