Sanford Center Replacement Project
Answers to Issues Raised at Town Hall on 5/9
What will be done with parking lot lighting to protect neighboring property from light and glare?
Lights will be dark sky compliant and trees will be left along roadside to further block parking area lights
The speed which cars travel on that section of West River Rd. is a concern
We agree. Site design work calls for driveway entrances to be as far south on the roadway as possible to avoid the hill and curve further up on River Rd.
We would also encourage a traffic study be done by the county as soon as practical to look at the need for reduced speed or a turn lane. (the study would evaluate use, traffic patterns, etc., so can’t be requested until the center is established and used).
Concern over the septic system and land elevation needs
The architectural design and site plan call for a pump system and not a gravity system.
What will be done to optimize the acoustics of the building since it is so large and open?
We will make sure the architect and builder will make this a priority issue.
We will add a loop system which ties into the electronics of most new hearing aides
The location seems inconvenient to some participants, too far from current center, harder to drive to, and outside of the village amenities
The proposed location is actually less than 2.5 miles from the current site.
Current location is also inconvenient from some areas of the Township
Concern over the siting of the building on the property – will it be set back and away from the boundary. Shouldn’t be too close to the homes south of the property
Nothing is set in stone yet on the location within the site. Engineering studies will have to be done to determine the optimal placement, including septic system, parking lot drainage and retention pond etc. Setback from the road is included, and we will make sure we have sufficient clearage from nearby homes.
Has this decision already been made? Is the site selection set in stone?
While we are a ways from finalizing a relationship with the Township and could still consider other sites, we are strongly supportive of this direction for the following reasons:
- Changes in the priorities of the foundation community make it imperative that any project proposal be extremely attractive, innovative, collaborative, and have strong community benefits and impact.
- Investment at this level of funding must include foundation support, broad community buy in, and high likelihood of success.
- Co-locating greatly increases the chances of both projects coming to fruition, and gives us the best chance for having the center of our dreams.
- Before the idea of a joint project came about, we approached the township at the recommendation of the village to look into the availability of property owned by the township. When we learned that the Township also intended to approach the major foundations for assistance with the recreation/park project, we knew that the prospect of foundation support for two separate area projects was not good.
- The synergy created by co-locating and the opportunities for nature-based recreation, exercise, education, and intergenerational programming holds great promise for current and future generations of older adults.
Several concerns and suggestions were brought up regarding the actual design and architectural plan.
Nothing is set in stone at this point. Rather than get into the specific details of interior design at this time, we wanted to present our ideas at a higher level in order to share our progress and current state of the plans. We needed this general plan in order to cost out the project and have a concrete plan to approach the foundations.
We fully intend to involve the current participants and others in final design elements.