[{"_1":2,"_111":-5,"_112":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,99],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6078942,"mediaKeyId","2957289-e54b5e99a8e4be70d296fbaf8d300c8d","parentId",2957289,"title","Board approves inpatient behavioral‑health use at former care center with sale‑contingent condition","audioSeconds",1635,"startMs",4107000,"endMs",5742000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2957289-e54b5e99a8e4be70d296fbaf8d300c8d&start=4107&end=5742","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2957289-e54b5e99a8e4be70d296fbaf8d300c8d/thumbnail_4107000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6078942/Scranton/Lackawanna-County/Pennsylvania/Board-approves-inpatient-behavioralhealth-use-at-former-care-center-with-salecontingent-condition","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6078942-7e171cbed1f569f7437b5e55926276fd/orig.mp4?Expires=1770450815&Signature=aWK33e2OA-LzyDHKLKnO6aIy-2j0BgIjq~snmgGgADdR-Vzpzrqzotn~m2VSIE1skD0DaVQ6QbUPzWYFBo~14bY2acAdN7TUz-9ZsJP01jwQ2D8lo9Yn5uqdkFDLoKx2M2Ou-CKafV99Q44f~wXLzb8-u~EAdf2TQqIohhjM0ab18S1GkjTkRcpmIspNrm6Oh8fOHkhG13jAEKCLPWibhtsg~sQm9f94VnFMmli7Eqcdh7fsN7iFjzo131ReAuOTBckrD0MMBPJ8ArgZiqO-~QcvCsjVUhoo77m6jadez6nMcUNP3oC9Vq3GImhrPGFLvTUp7EJ~pyr3WYi5wIPhtw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","City Council of Scranton, PA","date","2025-04-10T11:46:07Z","article","The Scranton Zoning Hearing Board voted to approve Advantage Behavioral Health Services 2 LLC’s request to use 2309 Stafford Avenue (the former Mountain View Care Center) as an inpatient behavioral‑health treatment facility, subject to a condition that the approval would expire if the applicant does not complete the property purchase.

Attorney Julie Bernstein of Kaplan Stewart, representing Advantage Behavioral Health (ABH), described the request as an adaptive reuse of an existing facility along the highway that the board previously approved for a drug‑and‑alcohol treatment center in December. Bernstein told the board the inpatient program is voluntary, not an emergency acute psychiatric ward, and will use a state residential treatment license analogous to the licensure for the approved drug‑and‑alcohol use.

Colin Studwell, ABH’s CEO, told the board the facility would offer residential behavioral‑health care to voluntary patients whose primary diagnoses include severe anxiety, depression and PTSD. Studwell said the average length of stay would be approximately 30 days, the population would be nonviolent and intake/discharge procedures would be strictly controlled. He said staff would include medical personnel on call and full‑time clinical and administrative coverage; medication administration would be handled by clinicians or licensed nurses and medications would be stored and dispensed under controlled procedures.

Board members questioned operational details including supervision, monitoring and egress. Studwell testified there would be 24/7 staffing, video surveillance of entry points, scheduled visiting hours and regular head counts; he said the facility routinely uses checks and documentation to confirm patient safety. The applicant supplied letters of local behavioral‑health support and told the board the property is separated from residential neighborhoods by roadway buffer and existing landscaping.

Attorney Bernstein and Studwell said the site already has on‑site parking well in excess of typical daily visitor and staff demand. During the hearing representatives gave slightly different numeric descriptions of the parking inventory but consistently described it as “more than adequate” for the proposed patient and staff levels. The applicants said they expected to admit up to 80 patients with roughly 40 staff on payroll, not all on site at the same time.

After public comment — which included requests that the operator consult immediate neighbors and describe safety and monitoring procedures — the board moved and seconded a motion that included a condition mirroring the prior approval: if ABH does not complete the purchase of the parcel, the board’s approval/special exception would expire. The board approved the motion by recorded roll call, 5‑0.

The decision converts a previously granted nonconforming treatment use on the parcel to a closely related inpatient behavioral‑health use, subject to state licensing and the sale‑contingent condition. Managerial and clinical operations, licensing and a community outreach plan were discussed as next steps for the applicants.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Scranton Zoning Hearing Board 4-9-25","oneSentenceSummary","The Scranton Zoning Hearing Board approved Advantage Behavioral Health Services’ request to operate an inpatient behavioral‑health facility at 2309 Stafford Avenue, attaching a condition that the approval will expire if the applicant does not complete purchase of the property.","taxTitle","Scranton, Lackawanna County, Pennsylvania","taxId",2973,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6078947,"Scranton board hears heated neighborhood opposition, finds short‑term rental not in compliance",1518,2257000,3775000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2957289-e54b5e99a8e4be70d296fbaf8d300c8d&start=2257&end=3775","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2957289-e54b5e99a8e4be70d296fbaf8d300c8d/thumbnail_2257000.jpg","/articles/6078947/Scranton/Lackawanna-County/Pennsylvania/Scranton-board-hears-heated-neighborhood-opposition-finds-shortterm-rental-not-in-compliance","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6078947-bca55fd1b103b88607a82779074992ce/orig.mp4?Expires=1770450815&Signature=ksNL4IeGOREut96CGJUbUrEwo2flCMjNbCnW570oZf7VAnACPpxRaGUtxYxQx-Xx~k-L3RKh-T6bpWeIRsvJe~mFgOq2YIw7gHfBcR5ZrlZTi5ZO4AgwvK6nM9fTMU-7c1Nv7AOZaX4LY5rb9yZIHSri1iAn1Yco7y8HcUXreS7t-HyqVjV2h5CpGttn59Yv6BA2WuekD5mrxJ4IYKr0x7VdsUE2nsohNUGwCNXRxzf1AEMlB4v6~pygiYKzptXyQSaag0nWAzOh4NOxkA6aIxuyHk9vLGqlZWK0CpCMZRlA9RYvL5cyisYyxTQFh3eH7NR0egTbOY6JMVxyJqoz0w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Scranton Zoning Hearing Board reviewed an appeal lodged by homeowner Kevin Noon of a zoning department violation letter alleging his house at 1405 Cherry Street was operating as a short‑term rental without meeting the city's requirements for primary‑residence short‑term rentals.

Kevin Noon told the board he has lived in the house for more than 20 years and that the property is his primary residence. He said he limits bookings, keeps house rules and provides off‑street parking in a two‑car garage and adjacent alley parking when guests stay. “I would like to respectfully request that the zoning board allows me to continue to offer short term rental of my home,” Noon said.

Dozens of neighbors and nearby residents testified in opposition, saying they had not seen Noon regularly at the address and raising concerns about street parking, lack of sidewalks and the potential impact of short‑term rentals on property values and neighborhood character. Edward Gilmartin said his group gathered signatures opposing Airbnbs in the East Mountain neighborhood and reported 69 petition signatures within half a day. Joan Matsui and other longtime residents told the board they had not observed the homeowner living at the address consistently. Cynthia Gribado, identified in testimony as Noon’s partner, said the house is used by family members and has ample off‑street parking.

Zoning staff and board members focused on two ordinance requirements in Article 6 AAA noted at the hearing: (1) that the dwelling be the owner’s permanent address and (2) that the owner occupy the dwelling for at least six months per calendar year. Board members also discussed the short‑term rental parking requirement—one off‑street space per bedroom—meaning the property would need three off‑street spaces for three bedrooms if all bedrooms are offered to renters.

After testimony and questioning, the board voted on whether Noon’s short‑term rental conforms to the zoning rules that permit short‑term rentals in R‑6 as a use when the owner resides on the property and meets the parking standard. The recorded roll call in the hearing shows multiple board members voting that the property was not conforming with the short‑term rental requirements; one member voted that the property did conform. Based on the board’s recorded votes during the meeting, a majority concluded Mr. Noon’s operation did not meet the ordinance’s residency and parking requirements and therefore did not conform to the city’s short‑term rental rules.

The board’s questioning highlighted the evidentiary challenge of proving continuous residence for six months and the practical parking limit on Cherry Street, which has limited sidewalks and curbside space. The board also instructed that factual claims about residency be supported with documentary evidence (IDs, utility bills, etc.) if an applicant seeks a overturn of a zoning enforcement determination.

The board’s recorded votes reflect the board’s determination on the conformity question at the hearing. The board did not set additional conditions or a rehearing date at the close of the session.","A multi‑hour hearing on an appeal of a zoning violation for a short‑term rental at 1405 Cherry Street included testimony from dozens of neighbors, a petition and a divided board vote finding the property did not meet the ordinance's residency and parking requirements.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6078952,"Neighbors oppose 10‑unit proposal as Scranton board hears lot‑coverage variance request",489,509000,998000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2957289-e54b5e99a8e4be70d296fbaf8d300c8d&start=509&end=998","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2957289-e54b5e99a8e4be70d296fbaf8d300c8d/thumbnail_509000.jpg","/articles/6078952/Scranton/Lackawanna-County/Pennsylvania/Neighbors-oppose-10unit-proposal-as-Scranton-board-hears-lotcoverage-variance-request","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6078952-183145d6aa3c7afc99ce00b38f7c7b59/orig.mp4?Expires=1770450815&Signature=GF8qPwWkYWN2mw-0~a~r3vunuY3Uc3CkFvGRwcnQy7YLmHp~~gwdFsihkKRQ7axen9j~C-KKSs16Z-39CUcvJYHYjGRbdMZiid9GWeZwnWJfEMF3PK2rou1379adxX~5FNp46lDmFTgyfPUgar156MdJNsaOXMDeoYnsrQPjtt1W6jJuZpPpRi8P8ZLAS3XDGVw8tJJYCP4zRbM8gqb6H8lEu48KL5gJnNmr~INpGlAiMG1MYYvd-QXrgfO3mWU7U7ZoUxG1qrGRcSFegum5RklRaaCIvfYQemo8iGbHJJfuYkkBOUVvk~CFdxnTFcdAmgZLIsUx2iLoSxdRwqbxaw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Scranton Zoning Hearing Board heard hours of testimony and public comment on a request by West Market Street LLC for variance relief to increase lot coverage to permit construction of a proposed 10‑unit apartment at 448 West Market Street.

Jordan Clark, an architect with the Bologna Group representing the applicant, said the plan would combine three adjoining lots and build a two‑story, 10‑unit building with units larger than the 650 square feet required by the zoning ordinance. Clark told the board the request was for an increase in impervious‑surface coverage, which the application lists as a percentage variance.

Neighbors and neighborhood leaders urged the board to reject or closely scrutinize the proposal. Tom Welby, district office director for state Representative Bridget Kosarowski and a member of the North Scranton Neighborhood Association, said the association voted unanimously in opposition at a recent meeting and described “quality of life” concerns including past code violations at the property and a stop‑work order posted on the front door. “I believe we have … businesses in that neighborhood that they don’t think that is a positive addition,” Welby said.

Several other residents said the narrow, hilly stretch of Market Street already suffers parking congestion, limited sight lines and flooding. Christine Falbo, co‑president of the North Scranton Neighborhood Association, said sidewalks and blocked sight lines make pedestrian safety a concern near the proposed site. Diana Blank, who lives nearby, described multiple vehicle crashes near her home and said adding more units would increase traffic at a hazardous intersection. Justin Nikoloff, the owner of the adjacent property, said the existing site is poorly maintained and that nearby tenants are troubled by activity at the address.

Board members questioned the completeness of the applicant’s materials during the hearing. Members asked for clearer measurements of proposed impervious coverage, the number and layout of parking spaces, curb‑cut permits from the city for driveway access and whether the site lies in or near a floodplain. Clark said the project will require land‑development review and subdivision approval from the city planning commission and that the parking areas would be paved as required.

The applicant and board also discussed whether the existing adjacent houses would remain and how new drive access would be arranged. Clark said the use—apartments in an End Zone—would be permitted by the district’s use rules, but that the project seeks relief from lot‑coverage limits.

No formal decision on the lot‑coverage variance was recorded during the hearing; the board took testimony, questioned the applicant and heard multiple residents, and the item remained under consideration at the hearing’s close.

The board asked the applicant to provide clearer plans and for staff to confirm whether floodplain or drainage requirements apply. The planning and engineering details discussed will be part of any subsequent land‑development review if the board grants zoning relief.","An architect for West Market Street LLC asked the Scranton Zoning Hearing Board for relief to build a 10‑unit apartment building that would increase lot coverage; residents raised concerns about parking, flooding and safety during a lengthy hearing.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6078937,"Zoning board: summary of votes — four items approved or acted on",2068,188000,2256000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2957289-e54b5e99a8e4be70d296fbaf8d300c8d&start=188&end=2256","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2957289-e54b5e99a8e4be70d296fbaf8d300c8d/thumbnail_188000.jpg","/articles/6078937/Scranton/Lackawanna-County/Pennsylvania/Zoning-board-summary-of-votes-four-items-approved-or-acted-on","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6078937-323e4683da432d567a7bd9543b647fa5/orig.mp4?Expires=1770450815&Signature=CdstNLuwrpDhWpCeYwBSgx7w7~FvYFIA0V4-xCAuBM4e-T88B8JGesa9uEcJbIWpuwVPTCWA0yYtNdVNp09w~RK6Q93FKO9gcdUAVMf-DXxSUUYg68oT7DjXaitE4Jow0MYLyKhPpsqd62iNnHM-0V-TYoyKfr4meSFLnVKWgSX7~SB7NzA~6cS82hkGZ2XFfyBzzjaIkBGPvT4P7l8P9zHehN7bdwioV~sVsbJIzrt4RjAQMbzHrugRBb1OyBtpSVvaNo79TgME01D7XrdYj7EqluGj2IYnwo9LwqLRFB5io4UWly2kaxX~hr~xBbvAb1MVLWb3XLGHSgBpugy2mQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","At the Scranton Zoning Hearing Board meeting, members recorded votes on several agenda items after testimony and public comment. The board made the following rulings and procedural dispositions.

358 Theodore Street (Susan Brace) — Variance to convert a mixed‑use property into a two‑unit residence: Applicant Susan Brace testified she inherited the property in 2024 and planned to convert the first floor (former store) into a two‑bedroom apartment; the second‑floor apartment is grandfathered. The board moved and seconded a motion after public support from a nearby neighbor. Board members responded in the affirmative during roll call and the applicant was thanked; the record reflects board approval.

1110–1112 Prospect Avenue (Sean Bingham) — Amendment and approval to convert a four‑unit into a five‑unit (amended from proposed six to one additional basement apartment): Applicant Sean Bingham amended his request at the hearing to seek one basement apartment rather than two. He presented plans and discussed parking that he said would accommodate the additional spot(s). The board voted by roll call and approved the amended request by a 5‑0 vote.

515 Willow Street (Joshua Ortega) — Variance request to convert mixed‑use property into a four‑unit property: The applicant asked to table the item while negotiating parking arrangements and confirming commercial/residential use status for the ground floor. The board voted to table the application unanimously so the applicant could return with revised plans.

Procedural notes: 328 Pittston Avenue was announced as not being heard at this meeting. The board accepted the minutes of the March 12, 2025 zoning hearing during roll call earlier in the session.

The board advised applicants to supply clear, complete plans (parking layouts, lot coverage figures, proof of ownership or occupancy where relevant) to aid deliberations at future hearings.","The board approved several variances and procedural motions: approvals included conversion requests for 358 Theodore Street and 1110–1112 Prospect Avenue, it tabled a Willow Street application, and recorded votes are listed below.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Board approves inpatient behavioral‑health use at former care center with sale‑contingent condition

Scranton board hears heated neighborhood opposition, finds short‑term rental not in compliance

Neighbors oppose 10‑unit proposal as Scranton board hears lot‑coverage variance request

Zoning board: summary of votes — four items approved or acted on