TOWNSHIP OF LOWER MAKEFIELD
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
MINUTES - DECEMBER 20, 1999
The regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of the Township of Lower Makefield was held in the Municipal Building on December 20, 1999. Chairman Hackman called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. noting that the Board had been meeting in Executive Session for one hour to discuss legal and personnel matters.
Board of Supervisors:
Wesley Hackman, Chairman
Frank Fazzalore, Secretary/Treasurer
Fred Allan, Member
Scott Fegley, Member
Grace Godshalk, Member
Terry Fedorchak, Township Manager
Jeffrey Garton, Township Solicitor
Jan Gouza, Township Engineer
Joseph Bainbridge, Acting Chief of Police
There was no public comment at this time.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Mr. Fazzalore moved, Mr. Fegley seconded and it was unanimously carried to approve the Minutes of December 6, 1999 as written.
ANNOUNCEMENT OF REORGANIZATIONAL MEETING
Mr. Hackman announced that there will be a Reorganizational Meeting held on Monday, January 3, 2000 at 7:30 p.m. which will be for the purpose of reorganization only. Mr. Gouza stated they will be opening bids relative to the traffic signal and these could be ready for Board discussion on January 3 if this was desired. This was acceptable to the Board.
APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 1042 SUPPORTING THE LOWER DELAWARE RIVER CONSERVATION PLAN
Mr. Hackman stated this matter was on the Agenda at the last meeting and was tabled in order to give Board members time to review the report. Mr. John Ryder, member of the Environmental Advisory Council, was present and stated they are asking the Board to endorse the Plan which is an outgrowth of the Delaware River Management Plan. He reviewed the objectives of the Plan. He stated there are several recommendations which are listed on Pages 19 and 20 that relate specifically to Lower Makefield Township. These recommendations were developed over a two-year period through Mr. Ryderís work with the EAC and the Heritage Conservancy. He stated these recommendations with Supervisor endorsement will then be eligible for funding.
Mr. Fazzalore noted Page 20 regarding pursuing acquisition of property and asked why they would wish to purchase these properties if they cannot be built upon. Mr. Ryder stated there are certain things that are permitted in these types of lands and they are trying to stop this from being done. Mr. Fegley stated there are portions of the floodplain which can be built on. He noted this specifically relates to the Willard property and the islands.
Mr. Garton stated the adoption of this Resolution does not compel the Board of Supervisors to do anything.
Mr. Hackman noted the discussion of "Regional Implementation" on page 24 which seems to imply the Township is committing to implementing the recommendations. Mr. Fegley stated he feels they only want the communities that participated to work toward the goals that were identified as they are able and he does not feel they are agreeing contractually to be bound to anything. He noted the goals are very broad and there is no specific implementation project or amount of money being committed to at this time. He stated they will not be eligible for the grants that are available if they do not endorse the Plan.
Mrs. Godshalk asked if Bristol passed this. Mr. Ryder stated two Municipalities have endorsed this but he does not know who they are. He stated two Municipalities had to endorse it to move it to the EPA.
Mr. Hackman stated it indicated a survey was done of everyone who owned property along the River and they received 176 returns. He asked if any Lower Makefield Township residents responded. Mr. Ryder stated the names of those who responded are included in the detailed study and Lower Makefield Township residents were involved in the study. He noted the recommendations were discussed at two public meetings before they were approved. Mr. Ryder attended the meetings, one of which was held in Lower Makefield Township. Mr. Ryder stated he does believe there were Lower Makefield Township residents in attendance at the public meetings.
Mr. Fegley moved and Mr. Allan seconded to approve Resolution No. 1042 supporting the Lower Delaware River Conservation Plan.
Mr. Hackman asked the Township Solicitor if they are committing to anything, and Mr. Garton stated they are committing to the goals but not committing to any dollars. Mr. Fazzalore asked if they could make this plain by approving the Motion with the stipulation that it would have to come back to the Board of Supervisors for any expenditure of money. Mr. Fegley stated any Grant application would come back to the Board.
No amendment was made to the Motion and the Motion carried unanimously.
Mr. Ryder was thanked for the work he did on the project.
DISCUSSION OF FIVE MILE WOODS SCOUT PROJECTS AND ACCEPTANCE OF COOLBAUGH DONATION AND AUTHORIZATION TO PROJECT WITH APPLICATION TO MOBIL
Mr. John Heilferty, Naturalist at the Five Mile Woods, was present. He stated he has been involved in the completion of four Eagle Scout Projects and eight are being worked on currently. He noted Scott Buck of Troop 10 has worked on the Brock Creek trail and constructed 750 linear feet which will allow for an educational experience.
Mr. Heilferty noted Mike Coolbaugh from Troop 3 is proposing to repair and upgrade boardwalk in the Five Mile Woods to make the trail accessible for the handicapped wheelchair. He added Mikeís father has offered to make a donation of $500 which could be matched by his employer Mobil Oil. The intention is to allow these funds to go toward the costs involved in his sonís project. While this project has not yet been approved by Mikeís troop, Dr. Coolbaugh has indicated he would still like to make the donation.
Mr. Heilferty asked that the Board accept this donation and authorize proceeding with the paperwork for the Mobil Matching Gift Program.
Mr. Hackman asked the Township Solicitor if the Township can accept the donation, and Mr. Garton stated the Board can accept donations. Mr. Fazzalore asked if these funds will be sufficient to complete the project, and Mr. Heilferty stated this is a very ambitious project and these funds may not be sufficient since they estimate the cost of the lumber to approach $3000. Mr. Heilferty noted he does have money in his Budget which they could put toward the project. Mr. Fazzalore stated he feels the project should be done and feels the Township should pick up the additional costs if necessary. Mr. Heilferty stated he feels he can cover the expenses in his Budget. He noted they are also going to work with Home Depot on the lumber as they have done in the past.
Mr. Fegley moved and Mrs. Godshalk seconded to authorize the acceptance of the Coolbaugh donation and proceed with the application to Mobil.
Mrs. Godshalk asked if Dr. Coolbaugh feels this will be a tax deduction and noted the need for 501C3 status. Mr. Heilferty stated he contacted Mobil directly and faxed their representative information on the project who then indicated she felt this was acceptable. Mrs. Godshalk stated she has been questioned about Elm Lowne and the 501C3 status and suggested possibly there should be a separate category so donations could be considered as donations. Mr. Garton was asked to look into this matter.
Motion approved unanimously.
DISCUSSION OF REHABILITATION OF SPRING LANE AND HILLSIDE LANE
Mr. Gouza stated they have recommended that they provide a structural overlay, widen the streets to twenty-six feet which would include curbs, install underground storm sewer systems and pavement base drains. He noted they also looked at the back yard drainage channels that go from Lindenhurst Road through ten different properties and exit to the pipe under Spring Lane to Core Creek. He stated the major drainage area is that which comes off of an area not only in Lower Makefield but also Newtown Township open space in the area which is approximately 152 acres. There is also another forty acres that contributes that is east of Lindenhurst Road.
Mr. Gouza stated if the two streets were reconstructed and the drainage systems put in and discharged below the development, approximately half of the drainage area would be intercepted by the new street construction. He added there are number of problems that exist currently including the fact that there is significant undergrowth and downed trees as well as a number of obstructions in the channel. There are also a number of unique bends. The ultimate solution, in their opinion, is that the channel needs to be re-aligned and re-fortified with some type of material that would not erode and would stabilize the channel. He stated he does not feel that they can stabilize the channel with some kind of growth. He stated they have ten different properties impacted by the channel, and there is no right-of-way or easement available at this time. He stated there is a considerable cost associated with any type of stabilization.
Mr. Hackman asked about the cost for the total restoration, and Mr. Gouza stated he estimates it would be an additional $125,000 over the $375,000. This is for the road only and does not include sanitary sewers or public water lines. Mr. Hackman stated he does not feel they would want to do a total restoration unless they put in public sewers and public water. Mr. Gouza stated he does not feel they would want to proceed with any of these scenarios until they decide what they want to do about public sewers and water. Mr. Hackman asked if he could provide an estimate on the cost to install public water and sewer as well. It was noted the Sewer Engineer would have to provide the information on public sewers. Mr. Hackman asked Mr. Gouza to begin to investigate the cost for public water, and Mr. Gouza agreed to contact the Water company on this. He was also asked to give his best estimate on the cost for a total restoration of the roads. Mr. Fedorchak was asked to have CKS provide information on the cost for public sewers.
With regard to the rear yard drainage problems, Mr. Hackman asked how much of the water comes from the dam and what would happen if they took the outlet of the dam past this area. Mr. Gouza stated they cannot re-route the dam water. He stated the channel is the natural drainage course. Mr. Gouza stated they considered enclosing the channel but this was cost prohibitive.
Mr. Fazzalore stated there is $2 million in the Streets Budget and asked if they can afford $500,000 out of this. Mr. Taylor stated this would be a decision for the Board to make. Mr. Fazzalore stated on the Road Tour Mr. Coyne was adamant that this was private property; and if they are considering doing this, they should be prepared to spend millions of dollars around the Township because there are many of these instances throughout the Township. He noted specifically Rock Run Dam. Mrs. Godshalk stated if the Township allowed for development without providing for run off, the Township is responsible. Mr. Fegley stated when development occurs it is not becuase the Township wills it. He noted they followed the engineering standards in place at the time. He noted the Silver Lake area which was private property and feels this was resolved properly. Mrs. Godshalk stated she does feel they owe it to the residents to provide a solution. Mr. Fegley stated he feels if they re-align the channel it will make the water run at a faster rate. He added he would like input from Skelly & Loy if they get to a point where they feel stream re-design is necessary. Mr. Allan stated he feels if they are going to proceed they should do it right and do it at one time rather than do a "Band-Aid" approach. Mr. Fegley stated much of this depends on whether the residents want sanitary sewers and public water. Mrs. Godshalk asked if any consideration has been given to a new, huge, retention basin.
Ms. Gay, 21 Spring Lane, stated she feels they should run it down to Lindenhurst Road and drop it in the basin where Concept Way is to be located. She stated the water in their rear yard is coming from the detention basin. The water in the front of their properties is coming from Quarry Road. Mr. Gouza agreed to look into taking the water down Lindenhurst Road. Ms. Gay stated the road height cannot be raised or her home will be flooded. She stated she has been flooded five times since 1966. Ms. Gay was asked about the water today after the rain, and she stated they were fine. She noted she had 4" to 8" in the front yard and this is normal.
It was noted Mr. Gouzaís report is available for the public to review.
Ms. Gay asked if they will address the area of the back yards prior to the front yards since the rear yard problem is their pressing problem. Mr. Fegley stated they are still waiting for information but feels the comprehensive solution is best since if they only address the rear yards, they are not addressing problems other people in the area have.
Mr. Hackman stated there is also a street problem that needs to be addressed in this area. The neighbors present stated they do not feel the street is a problem.
Ms. Irene Koehler, 25 Spring Lane, stated while she does agree they need to have a comprehensive solution, if it means they will have to wait a number of years to get everything resolved, she feels they should start with the rear portion since the residents cannot wait for them to address the creek problem. Ms. Koehler stated the Township created the problem by digging the ditch.
Ms. Moon stated the maps in Doylestown show the location of the creek when her family purchased the property in the 1950s. She stated the Township came in and did this with a backhoe. She noted there is a 17 1/2" long erosion ditch behind their shed and asked if this will be corrected as well. Mr. Hackman stated the Township cannot fix private property. Ms. Koehler stated she feels the Township created this problem and should correct it.
Mr. Gouza stated if the roads were improved, this would cure the erosion problem they are experiencing next to their shed between the two properties. Ms. Moon asked if they would then fill in the ditch. She stated the problem is not starting on private property, it is starting on public property. Mr. Hackman stated generally the Township does not go on private property.
Mr. Gary Peters, 17 Spring Lane, stated some of these corrections may involve expense to the homeowners and asked when they would start estimating these expenses. Mr. Hackman stated they are working on this matter. He noted at Robinson Place they have been working on public sewers for two years. He stated if they install sanitary sewers, the homeowners pay a portion of this expense.
Mr. Henry Lee stated the water from the retention basin is being vented onto private property. He asked what would happen if the property owners did not allow this to happen by installing a dam on their properties. Mr. Garton stated if they are a lower grade property, they have an obligation to accept water from the property that is upgrade.
Mr. Fegley noted it has been indicated that the existing detention basin is protecting homes in the area as well.
Ms. Gay stated she feels the least expensive solution is to dig the detention basin deeper.
DISCUSSION OF STOOPVILLE ROAD/ROUTE 532 INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS
Mr. Gouza stated he has done further investigation and prepared a report to the Board of Supervisors on 12/14/99. He stated the Township was aware of this project in May, 1999 since there were meetings between PennDOT and Mr. Coyne. Mr. Fazzalore stated he feels they should request that PennDOT install a light at this location. Mr. Hackman stated he does not feel what they are doing is installing a permanent intersection and are only doing maintenance work at this time.
Mr. Gouza stated he was also asked to look into the bridge in front of Mr. Hackmanís property and he has submitted this analysis to the Township. It was noted the Board was not provided with this report. Mr. Gouza stated they looked to see if the bridge warranted a weight restriction; and based on the structural integrity of the bridge, it does not warrant such a restriction. Mr. Hackman asked about the narrowness of the bridge. Mr. Gouza stated there are safety concerns but this does not enter into posting it for a weight restriction. Mr. Gouza added that by this time next year there will be a new bridge in this location that will meet all requirements.
DISCUSSION AND TABLING APPROVAL OF GOODWIN & LACEY FINAL PLAN
Mr. Donagy was present. Mr. Garton noted the Preliminary Plan received approval on 10/4/99. The Final Plan is dated 11/19/98, last revised 12/2/99. He suggested the following conditions for approval:
1) Continued compliance with the Preliminary Plan approval which occurred on 10/4/99;
2) Compliance with the CKS letter dated 12/14/99;
3) Funding and execution of Development and Financial Security Agreements;
Mr. Garton stated there is still to be considered the issue concerning contribution for frontage improvements along the re-constructed Stony Hill Road and Township Line Road. He stated the Township engineer has analyzed this and indicated the Stony Hill portion would be $26,500 and the Township Line portion would be $34,500 for a total contribution of $61,000. All Board members indicated they felt the developer should pay the $61,000 for road improvements. Mr. Donagy stated they have a serious concern with the $61,000 number. He noted Stony Hill Road was added as frontage to the property and is of no benefit to the property since their access is on Township Line Road. He stated he also objects to contributing to an already existing roadway other than as it relates to the Traffic Impact Fee. Mr. Hackman stated the Township can either make the improvements and accept the contribution from the developer as they move in or wait until the developers come in for the road improvements to be done. Since the Township had an obligation to have safe roads, they built the road and as the developers have come in they have been required to pay for those improvements. Mr. Donagy stated they would not have been required to put in the Stony Hill Road improvements. Mr. Gouza noted the $61,000 is for the developerís side of the road only. Mr. Hackman stated this improvement has been on the Township map for many years.
Mr. Garton noted the Plan does not expire until 2/4/00 and the matter could be tabled to provide time for Mr. Donagy to confer with his client.
Mrs. Godshalk stated she was advised that if the Township did the improvements they could collect the costs from the developers when the developments came in.
Mr. Donagy stated he would rather the Board table the matter at this time so he can discuss it with his clients.
Mr. Fazzalore moved, Mr. Fegley seconded and it was unanimously carried to table until January 17, 2000.
TABLING APPROVAL OF HIDDEN POND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
Mr. Fazzalore moved, Mr. Allan seconded and it was unanimously carried to table approval of the Hidden Pond Development Agreement.
APPROVAL OF SBA TOWER DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (OLD OXFORD VALLEY ROAD)
Mr. Fazzalore moved and Mr. Allan seconded approval of the SBA Tower Development Agreement. Motion carried with Mr. Fegley voting no.
APPROVAL OF CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR SIGN AT 1667 EDGEWOOD ROAD
Mrs. Godshalk moved and Mr. Allan seconded approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness for the Sign at 1667 Edgewood Road.
Mr. Hackman stated he understood HARB was basically in favor of Approval, but they did not have a quorum present. Mr. Hackman noted there is still an outstanding question regarding road widening in this area which was being put off until they revised the Master Plan. Mr. Fazzalore stated the sign is located far enough back that it would not be impacted by the road widening. Mr. Fegley stated he does not feel they are moving the pillars - they are just replacing the sign.
Motion to approve carried unanimously.
Mrs. Godshalk noted the chiropractorís sign has fallen down, and Mr. Fedorchak was asked to look into this. Mr. Fazzalore also noted the large PAA signs in the Township, and he asked Mr. Fedorchak to look into these as well.
DENIAL OF DEDICATION OF OAK TREE FARM
Mr. Fazzalore moved, Mr. Fegley seconded and it was unanimously carried to deny dedication of Oak Tree Farm based on the reasons outlined in Nancy Frickís letter dated 12/15/99.
DENIAL OF DEDICATION OF HIDDEN OAKS I, PHASES 1, 2, 3, 4
Mr. Fazzalore moved, Mr. Fegley seconded and it was unanimously carried to deny dedication of Hidden Oaks I, Phases 1, 2, 3, 4 based on the reasons outlined in Nancy Frickís letter dated 12/15/99.
DENIAL OF DEDICATION OF HIDDEN OAKS II
Mr. Fazzalore moved, Mr. Fegley seconded and it was unanimously carried to deny dedication of Hidden Oaks II based on the reasons outlined in Nancy Frickís letter dated 12/15/99.
DENIAL OF DEDICATION OF LOST TREE
Mr. Fazzalore moved, Mr. Fegley seconded and it was unanimously carried to deny dedication of Lost Tree based on the reasons outlined in Nancy Frickís letter dated 12/15/99.
DENIAL OF DEDICATION OF FARMVIEW VILLAGE 6, GATEFIELD
Mr. Fazzalore moved, Mr. Fegley seconded and it was unanimously carried to deny dedication of Farmview Village 6, Gatefield based on the reasons outlined in Nancy Frickís letter dated 12/15/99.
APPROVAL OF DECEMBER 6, 1999 AND DECEMBER 20, 1999 WARRANT LISTS AND NOVEMBER, 1999 PAYROLL
Mr. Fazzalore moved, Mr. Fegley seconded and it was unanimously carried to approve December 6, 1999 and December 20, 1999 Warrant Lists and November, 1999 Payroll as attached to the Minutes.
APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 1043 ADOPTING THE 2000 BUDGET
Mr. Fazzalore moved and Mr. Allan seconded to approve Resolution No. 1043 adopting the 2000 Budget. Mr. Hackman noted there will be no increase in the tax rate in the year 2000. Motion to approve carried unanimously.
APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 1044 FIXING THE TAX RATES AND SPECIAL LEVIES
Mr. Fazzalore moved, Mrs. Godshalk seconded and it was unanimously carried to approve Resolution No. 1044 fixing the tax rates and special levies.
APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 1045 PROVIDING THAT NO CONTRIBUTIONS BE REQUIRED FROM POLICE OFFICERS TO FUND 2000 POLICE PENSION FUND
Mr. Fazzalore moved, Mrs. Godshalk seconded and it was unanimously carried to approve Resolution No. 1045 providing that no contributions be required from police officers to fund 2000 Police Pension Fund.
APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 1046 PROVIDING THAT NO CONTRIBUTIONS BE REQUIRED FROM NON-UNIFORM EMPLOYEES TO FUND 2000
NON-UNIFORM PENSION FUND
Mr. Fazzalore moved, Mrs. Godshalk seconded and it was unanimously carried to approve Resolution No. 1046 providing that no contributions be required from non-uniform employees to fund 2000 Non-Uniform Pension Fund.
APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 1047 ESTABLISHING THE 2000 PARK & RECREATION FEE-IN-LIEU OF FEE
Mr. Fazzalore moved, Mrs. Godshalk seconded and it was unanimously carried to approve Resolution No. 1047 establishing the 2000 Park & Recreation Fee-In-Lieu of Fee.
APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 1048 ESTABLISHING THE 2000 TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE
Mr. Fazzalore moved, Mrs. Godshalk seconded and it was unanimously carried to approve Resolution No. 1048 establishing the 2000 Traffic Impact Fee.
APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 1049 DESIGNATING 2000 DEPOSITORIES FOR TOWNSHIP FUNDS
Mr. Fazzalore moved, Mrs. Godshalk seconded and it was unanimously carried to approve Resolution No. 1049 designating 2000 depositories for Township funds.
CONFIRMATION OF PRIOR BOARD DECISION TO APPOINT MAILLE FALCONEIRO TO PERFORM 1999 AUDIT
Mr. Fazzalore moved, Mr. Fegley seconded and it was unanimously carried to confirm the prior Board decision to appoint Maille Falconeiro to perform 1999 Audit.
ROCK RUN DAM PROJECT GRANT UPDATE
Mr. Fedorchak stated June 25, 1997 was the first time Mr. Gouza and he met with engineers from the DEP to discuss the Rock Run dam. He stated they toured the area and provided them with all engineering done at that point in time. It is now Mr. Fedorchakís understanding that they are close to completing the feasibility study and the cost/benefit ratio will exceed one; therefore making this project eligible for State funding. The study will be completed by June 30, 2000. After that there is a formal report that must be prepared which will take two to three months. Upon completion of that report, the Township will receive a copy; and if it meets with the Boardís approval, they will be asked to pass a Resolution sponsoring the project. It is then taken to the State and Mr. Steil and Mr. Conti will be asked to include it as part of the next yearís Budget (2001).
DISCUSSION AND REJECTION OF BIDS FOR TWO USED POLICE VEHICLES
Mr. Fedorchak stated they received one bid for the two used police vehicles from Chris Mclean for $100 each. It was noted Mr. Mclean is a Township employee. Mr. Fazzalore asked if they would not get more for these if they were sold for scrap. Mr. Fedorchak stated there is a procedure they have to follow and they advertised the sale of these vehicles and only received one bid. They asked for a minimum bid of $1,000 for the Thunderbird and $800 for the Caprice. They also asked for a minimum bid of $1,000 for the van but did not get any bids for the van. Mr. Fedorchak was asked where advertisements are placed, and Mr. Fedorchak stated they are advertised in the legal notice section of the Bucks County Courier Times. The vehicles were also parked in front of the Tax Office. Mr. Fegley asked about placing a notice in the regular classified section where autos for sale are normally listed.
Mr. Fazzalore moved and Mr. Fegley seconded to reject the bids. Mr. Fegley asked that they be advertised in the Classified Section. Motion to reject bids carried unanimously.
ZONING HEARING BOARD
There was discussion on the Simons variance request to construct a garage at the property at 2032 Silverwood Drive which will encroach into the side yard setback. The Board commented on the extensive size of the proposed garage. Mr. Fazzalore moved and Mrs. Godshalk seconded to authorize the Township Solicitor to appear in opposition.
Mr. Hackman asked if the Board was prepared to go to Court on these issues if the Zoning Hearing Board decides to grant the Variance. Mr. Fazzalore stated he does feel they should be prepared to do so because of the water problems in the Township. Mr. Fegley stated the Board of Supervisors would decide at a later date on each case whether they want to take an Appeal. He stated the Township Solicitor can advise the Township Zoning Hearing Board how the Board of Supervisors feels about the case. Mr. Fegley stated he feels this procedure is working well and keeps the Board advised of what is taking place at the Zoning Hearing Board meetings since there were some problems in the past when the Supervisors did not have the information until after the fact.
Motion carried with Mr. Hackman voting no.
The Kortick variance for the property at 412 Honeysuckle Court was noted. They are requesting a variance to construct a shed resulting in greater than permitted impervious surface. Mr. Fegley moved and Mr. Fazzalore seconded to authorize the Township Solicitor to appear and report back to the Board. Motion carried with Mr. Hackman voting no.
No action was take on the DíSouza variance request for the property at 1205 Shetland Court.
There was discussion on the Sim variance request for the property at 1515 Brookfield Road. The applicant is requesting a variance to construct a pool which would result in impervious surface exceeding requirements. Mr. Fegley moved and Mr. Fazzalore seconded to authorize the Township solicitor to appear in opposition. Motion carried with Mr. Hackman voting no.
No action was taken on the Kosiras variance request for the property at 2038 Silverwood Drive.
There was discussion on the King variance granted by the Zoning Hearing Board. Mr. Garton noted this matter was previously discussed and has to do with wetlands. He noted the Board of Supervisors received a copy of a memorandum regarding the decision where the Zoning Hearing Board granted the request but required the applicant to re-construct some wetlands. They have not yet received the complete Decision. Mr. Allan asked if they granted the side yard variance. Mr. Garton stated the lot was non-conforming and they were deciding if this was the minimum necessary to make a reasonable use of the property. The Board of Supervisors had some concerns that the improvements were too extensive and should have been scaled back. Mr. Garton stated they must now decide if they want to take the matter to the Court of Common Pleas. Mr. Fegley noted he feels the individual who purchased this property is involved in real estate and did have knowledge of the Ordinance and it was purchased within the last year. Mr. Fegley moved and Mrs. Godshalk seconded to Appeal the decision of the Zoning Hearing Board to the Common Pleas Court. Mr. Hackman asked the cost to appeal this. Mr. Garton estimated it to be $1,000. Mr. Hackman asked the likelihood that the Township would prevail. Mr. Garton stated he feels they will be able to prevail such that the Plan would be amended more to the Boardís liking. Motion carried with Mr. Hackman voting no.
There was discussion on the Brown variance granted by the Zoning Hearing Board. Mr. Garton stated they have permitted impervious surface to go to 20.5% from 18.5% and did not deal with the issue of whether the pavers were pervious. Mr. Hackman stated the Zoning Officer found a letter from the Township engineer that indicated grass is pervious and anything more solid than grass is impervious. The property is located on Westover Road. The lot is 18,124 square feet and they are adding 360í more than permitted. Mr. Fegley moved and Mrs. Godshalk seconded to appeal the Zoning Hearing Board decision to the Court of Common Pleas. Motion carried with Mr. Hackman and Mr. Allan voting no.
There were no Supervisorsí Reports at this time.
Ms. Sue Herman asked if they received the Preliminary Plan for Newtown Office Commons. Mr. Fedorchak stated he did send a letter a few weeks ago to the Newtown Township Manager asking for additional information but has not yet received a response. Mr. Hackman asked if they have taken the steps to appeal as they did with CAU. Mr. Garton stated they did notify PennDOT in writing of Lower Makefieldís desire to participate. Mr. Hackman asked if they received anything further on their appeal of the CAU project, and Mr. Garton stated they have not.
Mrs. Godshalk moved, Mr. Fegley seconded and it was unanimously carried to appoint Brian McNamara and Jonathan Shain to the Zoning Hearing Board.
There being no further business, Mr. Fegley moved, Mrs. Godshalk seconded and it was unanimously carried to adjourn the meeting at 9:50 p.m.