Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Jarretttown Project topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Jarretttown elementary plan updated: fields moved, traffic changes proposed, larger retention basin and tree trade-offs
Summary
Design team for Jarretttown Elementary presented ball‑field realignment, PennDOT‑aligned traffic recommendations (right‑in/right‑out island plus right‑turn stacking lane), expanded stormwater retention (3× basin and underground chamber), and a landscaping plan that removes up to 128 trees while adding 146, with further review by the township planning commission in April.
The district’s Jarretttown Elementary design team presented site‑plan updates to the finance committee on March 18, showing changes intended to reduce neighbor impacts and meet current engineering standards.
Ryan Murphy of ICS outlined three main design areas: ball‑field realignment, traffic mitigation informed by a week‑long study, and stormwater improvements. The ball fields were rotated to direct play away from neighbor properties and ADA‑accessible paths were added to both fields, Murphy said.
A traffic study observed arrival and dismissal patterns and identified a morning queue risk: the parent drop‑off loop measured about 940 feet and the team calculated the loop can handle roughly 44 vehicles on site and move about 80 vehicles through the queue during a 10‑minute arrival window. The consultants and county reviewer (PennDOT) recommended a right‑in/right‑out configuration enforced by a small triangular island at the entrance, plus a new right‑turn lane to add stacking capacity without widening Limekil Pike beyond what PennDOT permits. Murphy stressed any roadway modifications would require PennDOT approval.
On stormwater, the design relies on a much larger retention basin at the low point of the site (about triple the existing basin) and an underground concrete chamber that will be covered and turfable; the basin is intended to hold water only during large storms (24–48 hours) and will be fenced for safety. The team cited geotechnical results and current county stormwater standards as drivers for the redesign.
Murphy and Doug (project team) reviewed the landscaping trade‑offs: up to 128 trees could be removed or relocated, with 97 specifically called out for removal/relocation and 50 identified as likely removals; of that total, a subsample suggested 62 of 78 sample trees were invasive or dead. The plan shows planting 146 new trees for a modest net increase in cover, and staff said they will attempt to reduce removals during later design stages.
Board and committee members focused questions on traffic study duration and labeling (summary PDF lacked searchable appendices and clear legends), whether the island prevents unsafe left turns and pushes drivers into nearby residential streets, playground footprint, tree preservation options, and stormwater basin depth and fencing (team: contours will define depth; fence planned). The team committed to provide searchable traffic appendices and continue neighbor outreach ahead of a planning commission hearing anticipated in April.
Next procedural steps: conservation district submission completed, planning commission submission planned for late March/April and a value‑engineering process will follow; targeted bid date was stated as fall 2026 with construction starting early 2027 and phased site work through 2030.
