PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES –
The regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the
Those present:
Planning Commission: John Pazdera, Chairman
Andrew Strauss, Vice Chairman (left meeting in progress)
Karen Friedman, Secretary (joined meeting in progress)
Fred Allan, Member
Cynthia Harrison, Member
Others: Nancy Frick, Director Zoning, Inspection & Planning
John Koopman, Township Solicitor
James Majewski, Township Engineer
Drew Wagner, Township Engineer
Steve Santarsiero, Supervisor Liaison
HISTORICAL COMMISSION – PRESENTATION BY CARTER VAN DYKE
Mr. Carter VanDyke was present with Ms. Helen Heinz, Historic Commission.
Mr. VanDyke stated a number of years ago he began developing historic guidelines. This
evening he is presenting proposed amendments to the Subdivision and Land
Development Ordinance, amendments to the Zoning Ordinance, and amendments to the
Zoning Ordinance which pertain to the Historic District. He stated as they developed the
Design Guidelines they noticed that there were conflicts with the Ordinances in place
which needed to be addressed. They anticipate that, in the not too distant future, there
will be sewers in
of opportunity for infill development.
Mr. VanDyke reviewed the proposed amendments to the Subdivision and Land
Development Ordinance including changes to street widths, reduction of radius for
collector roads, and access driveway setback amendments. He has also proposed a new
Section C requiring street lights which meet the Design Guidelines and a new Section D
with reference to lighting. Recommendations are also made for off-street parking as well
as new buffer standards for the Historic District. With regard to stormwater
management, because of problems experienced in the past in other Historic Districts, they
have recommended that there not be detention basins but that all stormwater detention be
addressed underneath the parking areas.
With regard to changes needed to the Zoning Ordinance, they have modified definitions
of structures to comply with the
recommendations of the
Commission. They have also developed additional standards for the
Historic/Commercial District which are in keeping with the Historic Neighborhood
Design Guidelines. Buffer requirements are similar to what was described in the
Subdivision Land Development regulations. Mr. VanDyke also noted the parking
requirements on Page 5 and stated they are recommending joint parking within the
Historic/Commercial District. This would allow two or more uses to make use of a
common parking lot. Parking would also be permitted off premises of a parcel provided
it is within 500’ of the use. This would be reviewed annually by the Township. No
directly illuminated signs will be permitted.
A number of changes are also recommended for the Historic District and need to be
incorporated into the Zoning Ordinance. A new series of definitions has been proposed.
On Page 2, they define all the parcels which are within the Historic District.
Mr. VanDyke stated this took a significant amount of time because there were a number
of conflicting maps.
Mr. Koopman stated there was an Ordinance adopted by the Township many years ago
that created the Historic District and that Ordinance did identify parcels. He asked if they
are adding to his, and Mr. VanDyke stated they are. Ms. Frick asked if any parcels have
been taken away, and Mr. VanDyke stated they have not. Ms. Frick asked the number of
parcels they are adding, and Mr. VanDyke stated he feels it is three to four. He stated
they are not extending the District, but there were holes within the District which they
have addressed.
On Page 4 they amended the duties of the Building Inspector which is more procedural.
They have also upgraded the Checklist so the Code Enforcement Officer has an
appropriate Checklist for reviewing these properties. They also outline the considerations
and determination that the Historic Architectural Review Board makes when they
consider an Application. Mr. VanDyke stated HARB has developed a library of resource
information which is a good source of information for people trying to redevelop these
properties.
Mr. VanDyke asked that the Planning Commission digest this information so that
hopefully they will be able to make a recommendation the next time they come before the
Commission.
Ms. Harrison asked if there is a map depicting the parcels, and Mr. VanDyke noted the
map that was included although it does not specifically list the parcels. Mr. VanDyke
agreed to make something more definitive available to the Commission. Ms. Frick
provided this evening the Guidelines Booklet to the new members of the Planning
Commission.
Mr. Koopman stated the Historic District encompasses four Zoning Districts.
Mr. VanDyke stated the way they have written this is that it only applies to that portion of
the Districts which overlay the Historic District. Mr. Koopman asked if any of the R-4 is
open, and it was noted R-4 in this area is already developed. It was noted the Zoning will
not change. Only those areas within the Historic District will be affected.
Ms. Harrison stated she feels they should also know which parcels could still be
developed so that they can compare how it would look if it were developed under these
new requirements. Mr. VanDyke stated a study was done prior to this work which was
called the March Study, and they did some vision planning showing how infill
development could take place. They also looked beyond the Historic District if the
Township was interested in having the Historic District expand. Ms. Ann Langtry stated
they can make additional copies of the March Study available. Ms. Harrison stated she
would like to review these items adding that she would be in favor of the Village concept,
but does not want there to be the potential for abuse by a developer.
#538 – BOXWOOD FARMS – PRELIMINARY PLAN APPROVAL
Mr. Murphy, attorney, and Mr. Joe Marrazzo, were present. Mr. Murphy stated in
November they presented a revised set of Subdivision Plans. The parcel is located on
family home on the parcel. They are proposing the relocation of this home and the
construction of seven new homes. Following the November meeting, they revised the
Plans and a new PCS letter dated
comply with all items in this PCS letter.
Item #1 was noted which identifies the three waivers requested. These were discussed
previously, and the Planning Commission indicated they would be in support of these
items. Mr. Murphy stated they are recommending Fee-In-Lieu of active recreation.
Ms. Friedman asked if the barn is historic, and Mr. Murphy stated it is not. He stated it is
in ruins.
Mr. Murphy stated the existing home will be re-located and
will face
Road. The house is from the late 1800’s. The home will be moved forward 70 feet.
Ms. Harrison asked about the problems of seepage into the basements on Lots #5 and #6.
Mr. Murphy stated there was some question about the adequacy of the inlets, and PCS
was going to look into this. Mr. Majewski stated he did do a field investigation and
looked at the site in conjunction with the calculations for water coming through the
emergency spillway. He is confident there will not be any problems.
Mr. Allan noted the entrance to
that the entrance is away from the intersection. Mr. Marrazzo stated he would not have a
problem with doing a reverse on this lot.
Ms. Helen Heinz asked that they not move the house because the value of the house is
its existing location on
sideways as it is the siting of the house which is what makes it important. Ms. Heinz
stated the property slopes up and from the road currently, and you can see the house and
the barn as it was in 1856. She noted some of the original boxwoods are still in place.
Mr. Murphy stated the foundation of the home is crumbling and the plate of the home is
rotted. He added there is very little of the historic landscaping surviving. There is a
clump of older boxwoods, and Mr. Marrazzo will re-create some of the landscaping
materials in front of the home when it its relocated so you can see it from the road.
He stated he feels moving it a short distance and turning it
so people traveling on
Valley Road can see it will enable travelers to be reminded how the property looked in
the past.
Mr. Allan stated he feels if they have to jack the house up anyway, they could rehab the
house at its current location. He stated it does make a nice presentation at the current time
at its existing location. Mr. Murphy stated they will have to relocate the driveway as
well. The home will still face
leave the home where it is located now, a new home would be built in front of it and you
would not be able to see the older home from the road. Mr. Majewski stated they would
also need to get additional Variances if the lots were pushed back because of the impact
on the woods. Ms. Heinz stated this area was more agricultural in the 1800s, and the
woods are not on the map. Mr. Murphy stated they are trying to make an effort to
preserve the property.
Ms. Ann Langtry stated Mr. Murphy is familiar with projects that have been done by
Mr. DeLuca who has been very willing to change lot sizes and plans in order to retain
historic structures. She stated they are asking that the Planning Commission recommend
leaving the house where it is and work with the lot configuration to make this possible.
Mr. Pazdera stated if they left the house where it is located, it would still be 30’ off the
new
the house. Ms. Heinz stated if you move the house it loses its historic value. She stated
she would prefer they knock it down rather than move it. Mr. Pazdera stated he would
prefer that they move the house slightly rather than lose it.
Mr. Marrazzo stated he has seen pictures of the previous landscaping and would be
willing to work with the Historic Commission to try to reinvent this provided it makes
sense on the property. He stated economically it is less expensive to tear the house down
than it is to move it.
Ms.
was noted it is not a requirement that the house be preserved.
Ms. Heinz asked if this recreated landscaping would be dedicated to the Township since
the new property owner could take it out. It was noted it would be deeded to the lot.
Ms. Harrison stated if they are restoring the house rather than tearing it down, she feels it
adds value to the Township.
Ms. Friedman asked if there was a way to protect the house from being torn down by a future owner. Mr. Koopman stated here are facade easements and other sorts of easements that could be attached to the house. A facade easement would require that the facade fronting the street could not be changed. Mr. Marrazzo stated he would be willing to agree to this.
Ms. Friedman noted the house is currently sitting on a hill and asked if there is any way
to restore this. Mr. Marrazzo stated it will not sit exactly at the same elevation as it does
currently. Ms. Friedman asked if they could come close to that elevation with grading
provided it does not impact stormwater management. Mr. Marrazzo stated currently it is
10’ from curb height and it is proposed to be 8’ once relocated. He stated they will have
an elevation change because of the new foundation; and provided it does not impact
stormwater calculations, he would be willing to work on this.
Mr. Ed Cotterell stated his home backs up to
single family homes is the best option for the property if they must have something other
than open space.
Mr. Majewski stated he does not feel there is anything of major substance on the
engineer’s review letter that would prohibit making a recommendation at this time.
Ms. Friedman asked how far back they could push the home on the building lot without
creating a problem for the use of the lot. Ms. Frick stated if they push it back, it will not
give the property owner the opportunity to have anything in their rear yard.
Ms. Harrison moved, Mr. Strauss seconded and it was unanimously carried to recommend to the Board of Supervisors approval of the Preliminary Plan subject to:
1. Compliance with PCS letter dated
2. Compliance with CKS letter dated
3. Developer agrees to work with the Township to preserve a Facade
Easement on the historic house which will be acceptable in terms
to the developer and the Township, and that the developer
landscape the front of the house as close as possible to the original
landscaping design and trying to keep the elevation as close as
possible to the existing elevation taking into consideration drainage
requirements.
Mr. Strauss left the meeting at this time.
#548 – THOMAS GOUGH PRELIMINARY/FINAL MINOR SUBDIVISION APPROVAL
Mr. Murphy was present with Mr. Thomas Gough. Mr. Murphy stated the property has
frontage on
to retain the existing home and
pond on 4 ½ acres which will be Lot #1.
1 ¼ acres and will be purchased by Mr. Gough upon which he will build a new home.
The PCS review letter dated
requested. Mr. Majewski stated they did discuss with the Applicant ways to reduce the
stormwater run off. They are recommending that they plant a meadow in between the
house and where the water would cross into the pond. The water that goes into the pond
will not increase by any measurable amount after construction. They feel the Waivers
requested are appropriate.
Mr. Murphy noted items #2 and #4 and stated these discuss whether this Application
should be considered a Minor Subdivision. Mr. Majewski stated if the Board of
Supervisors determine that road improvements are required in front of the lot, this would
then be considered a Major Subdivision. He stated he does not feel road improvements
are necessary. Mr. Murphy noted there were discussions some years ago about
improvements to the road on the opposite side of the street, and the property owners in
the area were very much opposed to this. Mr. Murphy stated they would be willing to
restrict Lots #1 and #2 from further subdivision.
Mr. Majewski stated there must also be a restriction regarding the meadow to be planted,
and he would recommend a separate document memorializing this.
Ms. Linda Buben stated her rear yard will back up to the new home. She is concerned
with water on the property after construction. She stated she has had a constant water
problem since the homes were built on the opposite side of the street. Mr. Murphy stated
the water is running away from Ms. Buben’s property. Ms. Buben stated she was told
this as well when Afton Crest was built, and she now has water which she never had in
the twelve years prior to Afton Crest’s construction.
Mr. Gene Harzinski stated some years ago Mr. Keats presented a development plan for
this property and there was concern that any building on the property would be in
jeopardy because of the way the water flows in this area. Mr. Murphy stated at that time
they were proposing two lots as opposed to one. He noted the proposed lot size is three
times the minimum permitted.
Ms. Buben stated they were told that the water table possibly changed when the new
development was constructed. Ms. Harrison stated in looking at the diagram, it appears
everything is flowing away from Ms. Buben’s property. Mr. Harzinski stated he does
have some additional water problems but not to the extent that Ms. Buben has. He stated
he has a walk-out basement. He stated water flows down from
onto the property under discussion. Mr. Gough stated he is familiar with the water in the
area and recognizes that the pond is the low area. Mr. Murphy stated Ms. Buben’s parcel
is above this property and noted water will not flow uphill.
Mr. Ken Ross,
water goes down like a river to DeLuca’s detention basin. No water that hits the street
has ever gone onto the property they are discussing building on although there is a lot of
water that goes through the rear yards. He stated he has had water problems with a small
sinkhole and feels there may be an underground stream. He does not feel Afton Crest has
anything to do with any water problems people are experiencing.
Mr. Majewski stated possibly as a condition of approval, they could require that
Mr. Gough dig a test pit where the new house is to be sited. Mr. Gough stated he has
done six test pits and will submit this information to the Township. He stated they found
only one pit had water at 14’ in a twenty-four hour period. The basement will be 7’
deep. Ms. Friedman asked if the existing property owner on this parcel has indicated that
they have had water problems, and Mr. Gough stated he has not heard of any problems
from the individual who is the seller. Mr. Allan stated he feels they should request more
extensive test borings before approval. Mr. Gough stated since he is building the home
for his family, he would prefer not to bear any more expense since he has already done
six tests. Mr. Allan stated he is concerned about the potential sale of the property in the
future. Mr. Gough noted his property will be 5’ below Ms. Buben’s basement floor.
Mr. Majewski stated he is comfortable with the developer’s proposal.
Mr. Allan suggested to Ms. Buben that she contact the Township and ask that they look
into whether there is a crack in the storm drain that is causing Ms. Buben to get this much
water.
Mr. Allan moved, Ms. Friedman seconded and it was unanimously carried to recommend
to the Board of Supervisors approval of the Thomas Gough Preliminary/Final Minor
Subdivision Plan subject to compliance with the PCS letter
dated
letter dated
#532-A – FLOWERS-MADANY TRACT PRELIMINARY PLAN DISCUSSION ON REVISED LAYOUT
Ms. Friedman excused herself from this discussion as it is in close proximity to her property.
Mr. Joe Sotek was present and presented a revised sketch showing two separate
cul-de-sacs as opposed to the through road. He stated they have also provided for an
emergency-access easement from
The easement will be provided along
the Board of Supervisors.
Mr. Allan asked the proposed cost of the new homes, and Mr. Sotek stated they will be
approximately $600,000.
Mr. Sotek stated they will need Waivers for the length of cul-de-sac.
Mr. Allan suggested that they build the houses as far away from the easement as possible
on Lots #1 and #3. Mr. Sotek stated
emergency access between Lots #5
and #6.
Crossing Road.
Mr. Majewski stated
shift this someplace else on the
plan possibly next to
wetlands and the ponds and the need for a Variance.
Ms. Frick asked that
have a more usable rear yard. Mr. Majewski stated they should also look at Lots #3 and
#4 in this regard. Mr. Allan suggested that they be made one acre each.
Mr. Tom Ames,
will. Mr. Ames stated the portion of
of the last streets to be plowed in
will have to go through this to get
to their portion of
he feels
with
Mr. Allan noted
stated he feels it might be off
Mr. Koopman noted they will need relief for crossing the stream. Mr. Sotek stated this
will be for the utilities. Mr. Majewski stated Road B also crosses the stream.
Ms. Friedman noted the area parallel to Silverwood and asked the impact on the
woodlands. Mr. Sotek stated they will look at this area; and if they need to remove
vegetation, they will look into replacing the buffer.
OTHER BUSINESS
Ms. Friedman reported on the discussions which took place at the Environmental
Advisory Council. She provided information on the proposed
clean-up at
Park. Federal and State Grants are being applied for, but the Township will need to
discuss setting aside funds to pay for the balance if Grants do not pay for the full clean-up
cost.
Canal on a Canal Clean-Up to be held the morning of April 3. There were also
discussions about contacting the DCNR about the possibility of adopting sections of the
Canal for continual clean-up throughout the year. The LMT EAC is also discussing ways
to be involved in Yardley’s Canal Day to be held on July 10. There was discussion on a
Hazardous Materials Collection to be held in
into finding a location in the Township where this could be held. The EAC also
discussed the Brock Creek corridor
Master Plan. This could impact
the north end of the trail. The next meeting on this matter is Wednesday, May 17th at the
Old Library on
discussed the possibility of presenting an Environmental Steward Award for those
preserving the environment. They will draw up a mission statement, list criteria for
eligibility, decide how to evaluate the submissions, measurement standards, and how to
petition for nomination. A decision will be made as to the type of award to be presented
and where the ceremony might take place. Finally, the EAC discussed the new NPDES
requirements and where the Township stands with meeting these requirements.
Mr. Majewski stated the Township just filled out the Annual Report to the DEP stated
that the Township now has a section on the Website discussing the program and links for
more information. There also brochures on this available in the Township offices. They
will also be putting this information on the Cable TV channel and in the Township
Newsletter. Mr. Majewski stated he would be willing to give the EAC an update on this.
Mr. Allan invited the Planning Commission to the Friends of McCaffrey function to be
held on Sunday, March 28 from
food. They have already sold 226 out of 600 tickets.
There being no further business, Ms. Harrison moved, Ms.
Friedman seconded and it was unanimously carried to adjourn the meeting at
Respectfully Submitted,
Karen Friedman, Secretary