October 4, 2017

eliminate some of the pavement. Referring to Site Plan Sheet 12 of 17, (last revised 9/21/17), Mr. Morris identified the area and described the turning movement. He stated the plan had been upgraded from SU-30 Single-Unit Truck, to an SU-40 Single-Unit (three- axle). Mr. Keller stated the plan should provide some sort of striping and arrows to indicate how vehicles maneuver through the lot, and he wanted more trees planted in the area. Mr. Morris agreed to the condition; he stated he would add stripping and arrows to the plan to indicate channelized traffic flow, he would flip the direction for the service vehicles. He said he could put some knockouts in the curbing to add some trees. Mr. Keller stated he was satisfied. Item #7, (It appears the parking layout could be further modified to enhance its efficiency...the large pavement area located north of the pool house should be designed with 24” wide isle widths, curbed islands, and additional parking to minimize the parking deficiency... Additionally, the handicap parking spaces should be moved closer to the pool house.). Mr. Keller stated that the Applicant was removing a tree in the parking lot area north to the pool house; the tree was located on a small paved island. He stated there was room for a couple of additional spaces. Mr. Morris stated there was room for four additional spaces; he thanked Mr. Keller for the suggestion because it helped with the grading of the handicapped spaces. Item # 8, (Testimony should be provided regarding the methods to resurface the parking lot and if it will include milling...) Mr. Morris stated yes, the parking lot would be milled and resurfaced. Item #11, (Testimony is to be provided regarding the need for a handicapped space and accessible route to the most northerly one-story building adjacent to the overflow parking area.) Mr. Morris stated he did not know if there was a need, but the Applicant would comply with the request to include a handicapped space if required by code. Item #14, (We recommend walkways for patrons along the front of the main building to minimize walking in the main drive aisles.) Mr. Morris stated the he had added the walkway. Item #24, (There is limited lighting (via floodlights) of the existing overflow parking area, which should be eliminated and a lighting design provided conforming to Township requirements.) Mr. Keller asked if it was

is limited lighting (via floodlights) of the existing overflow parking area, which should be eliminated and a lighting design provided conforming to Township requirements.) Mr. Keller asked if it was still the Applicant’s intent not to change the existing lighting. Mr. Morris stated no revision was proposed. Mr. Keller asked if there was a reason the club did not want to install a lighting system that conformed to Township standards. Mr. Morris stated the club used the overflow parking area rarely at night; they did not want to add poles and curbs for islands. Mr. Angowski stated that if the Board would permit, the club would probably restrict access to the overflow lot during nighttime hours; if not, he would ask the club if they would reconsider. Mr. Keller stated the Board should consider the appropriateness of limiting access to the area during nighttime hours. It would be difficult to enforce if there was a large nighttime event. The area was illuminated; it just did not conform to Township standards. Item #25, (Provisions for security lighting are to be discussed in testimony, including the hours of illumination, and if there are different requirements for different portions of the site.) Mr. Keller asked if the lights in the overflow area were dusk-to-dawn photocell. Mr. Morris stated the Applicant planned to install dusk-to-dawn with motion detectors on some of them. Mr. Keller stated the final plans identify the lights to be on all the time; the rest of the lights 6