|
|
Lawrence approves new hotel, facility expansion
Thursday, August 09, 2012
By Jeff Corcino Staff Writer
The Lawrence Township Board of Supervisors approved the conditional use for a new hotel on Industrial Park Road and a zoning change to allow Martell Glass in Hyde to expand its facilities in Hyde at its meeting Tuesday night.
The supervisors voted unanimously to approve the conditional use request by Nick Patel/K&K Dholu to construct a hotel with a height of 50 feet, nine inches tall.
Patel is planning to construct a new 80-room, 49,627 square-foot Holiday Inn Express hotel at the intersection of Industrial Park Road and Bud George Boulevard.
The supervisors also approved Patel's Local Economic Revitalization Tax Assistance request. The estimated construction cost of the hotel is $3.7 million, according to Township Secretary Barbara Shaffner.
The total project is expected to cost $6 million.
LERTA gives new construction a tax break on local and state taxes.
Patel also owns the current Holiday Inn Express along state Route 879; he said this hotel will be switched to a Best Western once the new hotel is completed.
The supervisors also approved the request by Martell Glass to have the zoning ordinance amended changed on a piece of property in Hyde along Washington Avenue near the railroad tracks changed from residential urban to commercial highway.
The company wanted the change because it plans to open a new facility on the property.
The company plans to build a 100-foot by 300-foot building that could be expanded further to house its new operations.
There are two lots on the site and the lot in question, with the change is now zoned commercial highway is the front portion of the property located along Washington Avenue. The company plans to place offices on this portion, according to a previous article in The Progress.
The back portion will house a new glass-tempering machine, according to a previous article in The Progress.
In addition to the new building, he said they plan to continue to operate in their current facility along Washington Avenue in Hyde.
• Craig Sattesohn of George Road asked the supervisors to make it "no parking" near the intersection of George Road and Village Road. He said people often park along the road during football games or to pick up their children after school causing a hazard because they park on both sides of the road blocking the lane and said there is also lack of sight lines when people park near the intersection.
The supervisors asked acting Police Chief Mark Brooks to look into the matter and make a recommendation to the supervisors.
• the supervisors approved Supervisor Glenn Johnston's proposal that he would pay half of the approximately $1,000 to have anti-dust oil placed on approximately 3,000 feet of Pifer Road.
Johnston said he would also prepare the road for the oil by placing a new crown on the road at his cost.
Johnston said he wants the work done because he lives along the road and is willing to pay to have it done.
Supervisor Ed Brown said the township has a long-standing policy of performing work like this where the property owner pays half and the township pays half and in this project, the split is more like 80 percent being paid by Johnston.
Brown and Supervisor William Lawhead voted in favor, Johnston abstained.
• Johnston said the state Department of Transportation have impose a new rule on how ground can be impacted when new pipes are installed underneath PennDOT right of ways.
Johnston said the new rule now forbids the use of certain pieces of equipment, which would double the township's cost for any such work.
Thus far, he said PennDOT officials have not given him a good reason for the rule change. When he asked, PennDOT officials said the machines could compress or deflection of pipes underneath, but Johnston said all the pipes the township uses for water and sewer lines are too strong to be affected by this.
"It is absolutely insane," Johnston said.
He asked residents to call their legislators to complain about the rule change.
• the township rejected the lone bid for the painting of the Hyde Building because the bidder did not submit proper bonding as required.
The supervisors voted to re-advertise the project for bid.
|  |
|
|
|
