TOWNSHIP OF LOWER MAKEFIELD

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

MINUTES – DECEMBER 20, 2004

 

 

The regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of the Township of Lower Makefield was held in the Municipal Building on December 20, 2004.  Chairman Fazzalore called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. noting that the Board had been meeting in Executive Session since 7:00 p.m. to discuss land matters.  Mr. Fazzalore wished all present a happy holiday season and a healthy and prosperous 2005.

 

Those present:

 

Board of Supervisors:               Frank Fazzalore, Chairman

                                                Pete Stainthorpe, Vice Chairman

                                                Scott Fegley, Secretary/Treasurer

                                                Grace Godshalk, Supervisor

                                                Steve Santarsiero, Supervisor

 

Others:                                     Terry Fedorchak, Township Manager

                                                Jeffrey Garton, Township Solicitor

                                                James Majewski, Township Engineer

                                                Kenneth Coluzzi, Chief of Police

 

 

PUBLIC COMMENT

 

Mr. Sam Conti asked why Lower Makefield Township only received $175,000 from the RCN settlement when Newtown Township received significantly more.  Mr. Garton stated Newtown Township spent a significant amount of money in litigation fees and Lower Makefield did not.  He stated there is also a bankruptcy proceeding pending and Lower Makefield felt it was better to accept the $175,000.  Mrs. Godshalk stated if they do go into bankruptcy, Lower Makefield will still get their money.

 

Mr. Zachary Rubin, 1661 Covington Road, stated a number of flags were posted on his property, and he understands that Verizon is going to start digging. He asked if they will have to restore the property where they are digging.  Mr. Fazzalore stated this is his understanding.  A number of Supervisors noted that they have already done work in their neighborhoods and they appeared to be doing a good job. Mr. Fedorchak stated if anyone experiences any problems, they should contact the Township office as soon as possible.  Mr. Fazzalore stated they did receive permits and have posted bonds.

 

Ms. Sue Herman asked if the Township sent a memo requesting a feasibility study on the railroad approach for hauling stone.  Mr. Fedorchak stated he did and requested assistance from Mr. Steil and Mr. Warren.  He stated Mr. Steil has provided the name of an engineer who does have some understanding of this, and Mr. Fedorchak would like to

December 20, 2004                                                       Board of Supervisors – page 2 of 14

 

 

bring this individual in if the Board of Supervisors is interested. Ms. Herman asked if this individual is Mr. McAfee noting her Task Force did get information from this individual and he has indicated it is not economically feasible.  She stated she knows there is Federal funding for this and Washington is looking into this as well.  Ms.  Herman stated they would like to have an objective opinion with someone linked with the Federal Government come in and do a study.  She stated the report they got from Mr. McAfee was very negative.  Mr. Santarsiero asked if a letter was sent out, and Mr. Fedorchak stated he asked for assistance from Mr. Steil and Mr. Warren and this was the information that he was provided.  Mr. Santarsiero suggested that they contact Congressman Greenwood about getting someone involved at the Federal level. 

 

Mr. Fazzalore congratulated Mr. Stainthorpe on his appointment to the Board of the Bucks County Water and Sewer Authority.

 

Mr. Richard Adams, 221 Taylorsville Road, stated he and his neighbors are trying to put

together a shared driveway agreement.  He stated he has been unable to locate any rules

regarding shared driveways.  Mr. Garton stated there are no rules in place regarding this. 

He stated most shared driveway agreements are private agreements, and the Township

has no format or requirements related to shared driveway use.  The Township does ask for confirmation that such an agreement exists if there is such a circumstance. 

Mr. Fazzalore stated there are problems with these when you go to settlement. 

Mr. Adams stated the negotiations they have had with DeLuca Homes have not gone well.  They have now refused to call any meetings.  The neighbors are not speaking to each other.  Mr. Stainthorpe stated he recalled that when this was discussed as part of the land approval process, DeLuca was asked by the Township to make this a Township spec street.  He stated three of the four neighbors were in favor of this being a driveway and DeLuca was responsible for bringing it up to Township specs for a driveway.  He stated DeLuca will have to uphold their obligations, or the Township will not accept dedication of the property.  Mr. Adams stated there is an agreement regarding remediation and arbitration and there have been discussions between his attorney and the Township solicitor.  He stated there was an agreement between the Township and the Metz group, but this fell through this March.  He is concerned that he and his mother are going to have to leave their home where his mother has lived for fifty-four years.  He stated his mother feels the Township should have no say in this matter since there was a private agreement.  He stated there is a remediation portion in their Agreement and they do not feel the Township should be involved in this unless remediation fails.  Mr. Garton stated he has had numerous conversations about this and there is a provision that says the Township can enforce the agreement; and if there are expenses, they can be passed onto the homeowners.  In the event they have to, the Township has the right but not the obligation to become involved.  They have discussed language that if they have to go to Court, they would look to the responsible party for payment.  Mr. Fazzalore asked that the Board be kept advised of these proceedings.

 

 

December 20, 2004                                                       Board of Supervisors – page 3 of 14

 

Mr. Fred Allan, 816 Winthrop Drive, stated he hopes that the Board will refrain from passing on an increase with regard to the athletic teams when they pass the Budget. 

Mr. Garton stated there is a proposal to increase Fee-In-Lieu fees for the developers.

Mr. Stainthorpe stated there are no additional increases proposed for user fees for those who use the Township fields. 

 

 

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

 

Mr. Santarsiero moved, Mr. Stainthorpe seconded and it was unanimously carried to approve the Minutes of December 6, 2004 as corrected.

 

 

APPROVAL OF DECEMBER 6, 2004 AND DECEMBER 20, 2004 WARRANT LISTS AND NOVEMBER, 2004 PAYROLL

 

Mr. Fegley moved and Mr. Stainthorpe seconded to approve the December 6, 2004 and December 20, 2004 Warrant Lists and November, 2004 Payroll as attached to the Minutes.  Mr. Fazzalore stated he felt it had been made know that manual checks should be kept to a minimum because of concerns with fraud.  Mr. Fedorchak was asked to look into this.

 

Motion carried unanimously.

 

 

APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 2061 - REDUCING THE TAX MILLAGE TO 25 PERCENT OF THE 2004 MILLAGE

 

Mr. Stainthorpe moved, Mr. Fegley seconded and it was unanimously carried to approve Resolution No. 2061 – Reducing the Tax Millage to 25 percent of the 2004 Millage.

 

 

APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 2067 – ADOPTING THE 2005 BUDGET

 

Mr. Stainthorpe moved, Mr. Fegley seconded and it was unanimously carried to approve Resolution No. 2067 – Adopting the 2005 Budget.

 

 

APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 2068 – FIXING TAX RATES AND SPECIAL LEVIES

 

Mr. Stainthorpe moved, Mr. Fegley seconded and it was unanimously carried to approve Resolution No. 2068 – Fixing Tax Rates and Special Levies.

December 20, 2004                                                       Board of Supervisors – page 4 of 14

 

 

APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 2065 – AMENDING THE SEWER RENTAL FEE SCHEDULE

 

Mr. Stainthorpe moved, Mr. Santarsiero seconded and it was unanimously carried to approve Resolution No. 2065 – Amending the Sewer Rental Fee Schedule.

 

 

APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 2069 – PROVIDING THAT NO CONTRIBUTION BE REQUIRED FROM POLICE OFFICERS TO FUND THE 2005 POLICE PENSION PLAN

 

Mrs. Godshalk moved and Mr. Stainthorpe seconded to approve Resolution No. 2069 – Providing that no Contribution be Required from Police Officers to Fund the 2005 Police Pension Plan.

 

Mr. Fazzalore stated the Pension Committee did meet last week and the funds are in pretty good shape.

 

Motion carried unanimously.

 

 

APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 2070 – PROVIDING THAT NO CONTRIBUTION BE REQUIRED FROM ANY NON-UNIFORMED EMPLOYEE TO FUND THE 2005 NON-UNIFORM PENSION PLAN

 

Mr. Santarsiero moved, Mr. Stainthorpe seconded and it was unanimously carried to approve Resolution No. 2070 – Providing that no Contribution be Required from any Non-Uniformed Employee to Fund the 2005 Non-Uniform Pension Plan.

 

 

APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 2071 – ESTABLISHING THE 2005 PARK AND RECREATION FEE-IN-LIEU OF FEE

 

Mr. Stainthorpe moved, Mr. Santarsiero seconded and it was unanimously carried to approve Resolution No. 2071 – Establishing the 2005 Park and Recreation Fee-In-Lieu of Fee.

 

 

APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 2072 – ESTABLISHING THE 2005 TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE

 

Mr. Stainthorpe moved, Mrs. Godshalk seconded and it was unanimously carried to approve Resolution No. 2072 – Establishing the 2005 Traffic Impact Fee.

December 20, 2004                                                       Board of Supervisors – page 5 of 14

 

APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 2073 – DESIGNATING 2005 DEPOSITORIES FOR TOWNSHIP FUNDS

 

Mr. Stainthorpe moved, Mr. Santarsiero seconded and it was unanimously carried to approve Resolution No. 2073 – Designating 2005 Depositories for Township Funds.

 

 

APPROVAL OF HERITAGE CONSERVANCY PROPOSAL TO PROVIDE HISTORIC PROPERTY TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE CONSULTING

 

Mr. Jeffrey Marshall was present.  Mr. Garton stated he has prepared a Professional Services Agreement for the Board’s consideration.  Mr. Stainthorpe stated there are specific tasks to be performed for a total of $11,255.  He asked about the fee for attendance at meetings.  Mr. Garton stated he felt it was better to set a per-meeting fee.  Mr. Marshall stated he felt there would be approximately twenty to thirty meetings that would include the monthly meetings of the existing Boards which he felt he should attend to understand the situation more thoroughly.  He stated they would also meet with an Ad Hoc Committee if one was created.  Mr. Santarsiero stated the proposal was approximately $175 per meeting.  Mr. Marshall stated he recognizes that when they do a Budget such as this, it is only an estimate.  Their goal is to provide the Township with a method to review the historic properties and make informed decisions.  Mr. Stainthorpe suggested that under Item #2, they include the words, “sum not to exceed.”  Mr. Marshall asked about additional work that may have to be done not included under these tasks, and Mr. Garton stated they would have to come back to the Board of Supervisors.   It was agreed that the price per meeting should be listed as $175 per meeting. 

 

Mrs. Godshalk stated this was tabled at the last meeting so that the matter could be taken back to the other Boards involved and those present this evening from those Boards should have the opportunity to speak. 

 

Ms. Michelle Stambaugh, Vice Chair of the Historic Commission, stated they did meet on the 17th to discuss this proposal.  Ms. Suzanne Curran, Historic Commission, stated they did present comments this evening to the Board of Supervisors.  She stated they did not have a quorum present at their meeting to discuss this.  Ms. Curran stated the Historic Commission is more than willing to work with the Heritage Conservancy and feels they could bring the costs down with some of the preliminary research.  She stated much of the background work has been done on a number of these properties.  They have worked with Mr. Marshall before and have a lot of experience working with them on other properties in the past.  She stated they have also worked extensively with developers and property owners to keep historic properties in private hands.  She stated Task #6 does into explain in detail what is included in this task, and they would like more information on this.   Mr. Fazzalore stated Mr. Marshall did indicate he would be working with the Historic Commission.  Ms. Stambaugh stated they want it known that the Historic Commission had already done a lot of the work that was listed under Tasks #1 and #2. 

December 20, 2004                                                       Board of Supervisors – page 6 of 14

 

 

Mr. Fedorchak stated the Township did make application through the County for a Grant, and they have received notice of an award in the amount of $20,000 so he can put as much as $10,000 toward this specific activity.  He stated they also made application to the State Historic Commission for a similar type grant in the amount of $20,000.   This does require a $10,000 match.  He stated they may be able to use this in Phase II, should it be received.

 

Mrs. Godshalk stated much of this work does already exist, and the Heritage Conservancy in working with the groups may be able to make an adjustment.  

Mr. Marshall stated he wanted to ensure that enough money was in the Budget to cover the work they may have to do.  He stated they may find the quality of the work already done is fine, but he did not want to submit a Budget that did not cover the work they may need to do.

 

Mrs. Godshalk moved and Mr. Santarsiero seconded to approve the Agreement with the Heritage Conservancy subject to inclusion of “sum not to exceed” and a price per meeting fixed at $175 per meeting.

 

Mr. Santarsiero asked if the other Committees involved have comments to make before the Board votes on this.

 

Ms. Jo Norum, Elm Lowne Committee, stated they did meet and all were in favor of moving forward with the Plan.   They wanted to make sure that this was only a temporary consulting group.  Mr. Stainthorpe stated his vision of the Task Force would be it would be temporary in nature and would have no other authority except to provide input from the groups they represent to Mr. Marshall. 

 

Mr. Santarsiero asked if the Motion includes the formation of a temporary body, and it was noted that this particular Motion does not.

 

Mr. Santarsiero stated he had requested that representatives of the Historic Commission report tonight on the status of attaining National Registry for the Satterthwaite House, and he asked for this update. Ms. Stambaugh stated she does not have a formal report on this tonight.   Their meeting is scheduled tomorrow and they can discuss it at a future meeting when they get input from Ms. Heinz who is working on this.  Ms. Langtry stated she discussed this with Mr. Marshall many years ago.  She stated the fact that it has already been declared as eligible by the State puts them in a good position.  She stated there are pros and cons on taking the next step and actually placing it on the Register. 

Mr. Fazzalore noted the Board of Supervisors will only have one meeting in January.  Mr. Santarsiero stated he would like to discuss this at the Supervisors meeting on

January 3 and asked that the Historic Commission discuss this so that they can report on this at the Board of Superiors meeting on January 3.   Ms. Langtry stated the memo that

 

 

December 20, 2004                                                       Board of Supervisors – page 7 of 14

 

was prepared by Ms. Heinz and presented to the Board of Supervisors was not approved by the Historic Commission.  She stated she does not feel they will be ready by January 3 to update the Board of Supervisors on this since they are having some internal controversy regarding this issue.  Mr. Santarsiero stated he feels there is a desire by a majority of the Board of Supervisors to move forward with this.  Other Supervisors disagreed.  Mr. Santarsiero stated he feels they want to move forward with what the alternatives are.  He stated he would ask that this be resolved at the latest by the first meeting in February.  

 

Mr. Stainthorpe stated when this first came up, it was when they were discussing subdividing and selling the Satterthwaite House and it was at Mr. Santarsiero’s suggestion that they table this until they could look into other things that might help such as Grants, etc.  He stated this is what prompted them to make this a more thorough project and bring in Mr. Marshall and the Heritage Conservancy.  He feels this is what Mr. Marshall will be doing; and while there was a sense of urgency ten months ago to sell the property, now that they are looking at the bigger scope of historic preservation he is not sure there is an urgency to deal with the Satterthwaite House as a separate entity. 

Mr. Santarsiero stated while this may be true, his concern is that if there is something they can be doing now to better position the saving of the house from being subdivided off and selling it to a third party, and that would be getting it on the National Registry, he would like to go forward with that.  He stated he understood it was the Board of Supervisor’s direction to the Historic Commission to do exactly that when they met in May or a subsequent meeting before October when they addressed this issue and gave the Historic Commission the direction to go ahead and get this on the National Register. 

Mr. Stainthorpe stated while this may be true, he feels now that this should be put into the bigger context and this is why they brought in Mr. Marshall so that they are not doing projects piecemeal without a coordinated plan.  He stated there is a limited amount of Grant money available and he would like to know what is the most valuable way to get the most for their preservation dollars.  Mr. Santarsiero stated that he is only saying they did direct the Historic Commission to proceed with the National Registry status.  He added that the fact that now there seems to be some disagreement on the Historic Commission does concern him, and he would like this addressed sooner rather than later.

 

Ms. Stambaugh stated they understand that getting Registry status is a very lengthy process.  She is not sure where the project is at the current time.  They may have an answer of where this stands by February.  Mrs. Godshalk stated some years ago they did award to an historic architect a contract to research for preservation the Satterthwaite House, the Patterson Farm, and Elm Lowne.   That individual hired Helen Heinz to do work , and Ms. Heinz needed to test borings , but the Board of Supervisors would not approve this.  Mrs. Godshalk stated when Mr. Santarsiero came on board, she made a Motion to get the test borings done and this is when the question came up about other uses for the house.  The Historic Commission was then asked to come up with some uses    

 

December 20, 2004                                                       Board of Supervisors – page 8 of 14

 

for the property.  Ms. Heinz put the report together but it did not go before the Historic Commission.  Ms. Heinz did this as a private individual.   Mrs. Godshalk stated the

architect who was awarded the bid is no longer doing this, and no one else was awarded this.  Mr. Fedorchak stated he felt that Ms. Stark had subbed some of the work out. 

 

There was further discussion as to whether or not the test borings were approved by the Board of Supervisors.  Mr. Stainthorpe stated this confusion is why he wants the Heritage Conservancy involved. 

 

Mr. Fegley and Mrs. Godshalk stated they are still in favor of putting the Satterthwaite house in private hands.  Mr. Fazzalore stated he would entertain a Motion to subdivide the Satterthwaite House.  Mr. Santarsiero stated this is not on the Agenda and there has not been public notice. 

 

Mr. Santarsiero stated there was a consensus given that the Historic Commission research alternate sources of funds and uses for the Satterthwaite House as a public property. 

He stated they also approved the funds to have the borings done and directed the Historic Commission to go ahead and undertake the process of getting this on the National Register.  He would like to know the status of this.

 

Mr. Fedorchak stated he will contact Ms. Stark and get clarification of her status in this process.

 

Ms. Virginia Torbert stated the Board of Supervisors did as Mr. Santarsiero has indicated.  She stated she feels the problem is something internal in the Historic Commission.

 

Mr. Marshall stated here are slightly more benefits to being on the Registry; but once you have the determination of eligibility, you also get certain benefits.  He stated proceeding with the Registry does provide additional benefits.  Mr. Fegley asked if there are any benefits to stalling the process.  Mr. Marshall stated there may be an outcry against taking it out of public hands if it is placed on the Registry.

 

Motion to approve Agreement carried unanimously.

 

Mr. Santarsiero moved that a Task Force be created to consist of representatives from the Board of Supervisors, Farmland Preservation Corporation, Historic Commission, Elm Lowne, HARB, Farmland Preservation Corporation, Planning Commission, and at least three local farmers to work with the Heritage Conservancy over the next ten months or so and as necessary to meet; and if necessary to meet with the various Boards and Commissions just mentioned to update them and keep them apprised of how that study is going on. 

 

Mr. Stainthorpe asked about the requirement that there be three local farmers. 

Mr. Santarsiero stated at the last meeting, Ms. Torbert raised the point that there should

December 20, 2004                                                       Board of Supervisors – page 9 of 14

 

be members of the farming community involved; and he agrees with this since many of

these properties impact the historic nature of the Township which was primarily a rural community and those individuals have a special point of view to bring to this task. 

Mr. Stainthorpe stated he feels having three local farmers is over-representing that group as there are other groups that have stakes in the community as well.   He suggested there be three residents, one of whom would be a farmer.  This was acceptable to

Mr. Santarsiero. 

 

Mr. Fazzalore stated he is concerned with all of the groups being represented which he feels will make this process take much longer.  He stated Mr. Marshall is going to meet with the Historic Commission and the Elm Lowne Committee. Mr. Fegley stated he does feel there should be a Task Force and the meetings should be open to the public.

 

Ms. Langtry stated the initial intent was for Mr. Marshall to attend the meetings of the Commissions already set up to get information from those Boards as a whole.  Her concern is that if they put a Task Force together beyond the three Historic Boards they already have, it will create redundancy.  She feels it would be more beneficial for

Mr. Marshall to go to the groups involved.  Mr. Stainthorpe stated he did not feel that

Mr. Marshall would be going to all of these meetings every month.  He envisions him going to each Board one time for a special meeting.   The Task Force would then work with Mr. Marshall and this Task Force would be disbanded once this job was done.

Mr. Santarsiero stated this is only to bring all the voices together in one place and get the job done in the ten months proposed. 

 

Mr. Marshall stated he was also hopeful that someone from the Finance Department would also be involved to bring that kind of expertise as the other advisory groups would not have this information.  Mr. Stainthorpe stated the Township Manager should therefore be on this Committee as well.

 

Mr. Stainthorpe stated the Task Force would give input to Mr. Marshall so that he can provide advice to the Township.

 

Mr. Fegley stated the alternative to a Task Force would be that Mr. Marshall would attend a meeting of each of the groups and meet with someone from the Finance Department.  Mr. Santarsiero stated he would prefer having all the people together in one place when this is being discussed because there is a benefit from getting different points of view heard at the same table. He stated this might also be helpful in terms of building a consensus to support where the study is going. 

 

Mr. Stainthorpe seconded the Motion for the purpose of taking the vote.  The Motion did not carry as only Mr. Santarsiero was in favor.

 

 

 

December 20, 2004                                                     Board of Supervisors – page 10 of 14

 

Mrs. Godshalk moved that there be public meetings, five or more if necessary at least two

of which are in the evening at which all interested are welcome to attend.   Mr. Fegley seconded.

 

Mr. Marshall was directed to try to attend at least one meeting of each of the groups. 

 

Mr. Fegley seconded and the Motion carried unanimously.

 

Mr. Fedorchak stated he will work closely with Mr. Marshall to ensure that everyone is aware of the meetings.

 

Ms. Curran stated there seems to be a perception about the Historic Commission particularly with regard to global planning.  She stated the Historic Commission has been involved for many years in planning regarding Edgewood Village and working with the Heritage Conservancy and other consultants for years.  She stated they have been involved in very detailed tasks over the years and have put in a lot of time for the Township.  Mr. Santarsiero stated he did not mean for his comments to be taken as any denigration to the work they have done.  He stated he only wanted to state that there are a lot of different interests involved in this issue and it makes sense in looking at it from a global perspective to bring all of those people to talk about it.

 

 

AWARD BID FOR MEMORIAL PARK PROJECT PHASE I

 

Mr. David Horton, Boucher & James, was present.  Mr. Fazzalore noted the amount of $949,617.44 included in the letter and asked if this includes the electrical.  Mr. Horton stated it does not.  Mr. Fazzalore stated only $1 million was approved and he asked how they can approve this if they do not know what the electrical will cost.  Mr. Horton stated by establishing a Contract with the contractor for the items he has indicated – base bid plus a number of alternatives, they still keep the alternatives as optional meaning they are not committing themselves to the contractor.  They therefore keep in reserve a certain number of the items until such a time as they know exactly what the electrical costs will be.  He stated they could hold back building the basketball court, putting in under drains at the Memorial, or any number of the items shown.  He stated if they do not encounter rock, they may not incur those costs.

 

Mrs. Godshalk stated much of the work will already be done with the trenching. 

Mr. Horton stated he has contacted an electrical engineer who would be doing the design work and they feel it is in the realm of $50,00 to $60,000 provided nothing elaborate is required for the Memorial.

 

Mr. Garton stated until the work is performed, they do not pay for the alternatives. 

The bid is only obligating the Township to the base bid.

 

December 20, 2004                                                     Board of Supervisors – page 11 of 14

 

 

Mr. Stainthorpe stated the benefit is that if they decide to go forward with the alternatives, they could not go over what they have shown. 

 

Mr. Horton stated he feels they should approve the $1 million as it would give them a contingency.  This would not be awarding him $1 million.

 

Mr. Stainthorpe asked why the electrical was not included.  Mr. Horton stated at the current time there has not been a final decision on the Memorial lighting.  He stated they will have to do a study to determine what is needed.  Mr. Fazzalore asked when they will make the decision.  Mrs. Godshalk stated the Memorial Committee is now working with a lighting consultant.  They have also met with Chief Coluzzi on security lighting.  She stated they are almost ready to go out with their bid specs.

 

Mr. Fegley moved, Mr. Stainthorpe seconded and it was unanimously carried to award the bid in the amount of $949,617.44 with the condition that the Contract include the right of the Township not to proceed with the alternatives.

 

 

AUTHORIZE ADVERTISING AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND ORDINANCE NO. 337 WHICH ADOPTED THE INTERNATIONAL FIRE CODE BY ADDING ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR FIRE HYDRANTS

 

Mr. Stainthorpe moved, Mr. Santarsiero seconded and it was unanimously carried to authorize advertising an Ordinance to amend Ordinance No. 337.

 

 

APPROVE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH PIZZO LANDCLEARING, INC. FOR LOTS NOS. 1, 6, AND 7 IN THE ESTELLE SMITH SUBDIVISION, LOCATED OFF OXFORD VLALEY ROAD

 

Mrs. Godshalk moved, Mr. Stainthorpe seconded and it was unanimously carried to approve the Development Agreement with Pizzo Landclearing, Inc.

 

 

APPROVE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR PENNSYLVANIA FIELD STONE STACKED STONE WALL AT 1666 EDGEWOOD ROAD (EDGEWOOD CHAPEL)

 

Mr. Stainthorpe moved, Mr. Santarsiero seconded and it was unanimously carried to approve Certificate of Appropriateness for Pennsylvania Field Stone Stacked Stone Wall at 1666 Edgewood Road (Edgewood Chapel).

 

 

December 20, 2004                                                     Board of Supervisors – page 12 of 14

 

 

APPROVAL OF EXTENSIONS – TROILO-FLOWERS MINOR SUBDIVISION, HARRIS FARM (FIELDSTONE PLAN NO. 496N), HARRIS FARM (FIELDSTONE PLAN NO. 549), FLOWERS/MADNAY TRACT (BROOKSHIRE ESTATES)

 

Mr. Santarsiero moved, Mr. Stainthorpe seconded and it was unanimously carried to grant the following extensions:

 

            Troilo-Flowers Minor Subdivision, Yardley-Langhorne Road - 4/06/05

            Harris Farm, Fieldstone Plan No. 496N, Edgewood Road       - 3/31/05

            Harris Farm, Fieldstone Plan No. 549,    Edgewood Road       - 4/21/05

            Flowers/Madnay Tract (Brookshire Estates), Washington

             Crossing Road                                                               - 3/20/05

 

 

ZONING HEARING BOARD

 

Mr. Stainthorpe moved, Mr. Fegley seconded and it was unanimously carried to oppose the Andrew and Wendy Kraus, 6 Glenolden Road, Variance requests to allow previously constructed patio and walkway which exceeds permitted impervious surface.

 

It was agreed to leave to the Zoning Hearing Board the Thomas J. Mack Construction, Inc. Variance request to construct an addition at 1021 Lafayette Drive exceeding permitted impervious surface.

 

It was agreed to leave to the Zoning Hearing Board the Kristine and Kevin Wojnovich Variance request to construct a shed with greater than permitted height and exceeding permitted impervious surface.

 

It was agreed to leave to the Zoning Hearing Board the Robert Quinn, Variance request to remove an existing garage and construct a new garage resulting in greater than permitted impervious surface and disturbance of floodplain.

 

It was agreed to leave to the Zoning Hearing Board the B & H Solariums Variance request to construct a sunroom over an existing patio at 1335 University Drive resulting in greater than permitted impervious surface.

 

 

SUPERVISORS REPORTS

 

Mr. Fazzalore stated he attended the Sewer Authority meeting and they are starting to televise the lines.  He stated they have found further deterioration and they will make a report to the Board.

 

December 20, 2004                                                     Board of Supervisors – page 13 of 14

 

 

ANNOUNCEMENT OF APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS TO THE AGRICULTURAL SECURITY AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE

 

Mr. Fazzalore stated at the direction of the Board of Supervisors, he appointed the following to the Agricultural Security Area Advisory Committee:

 

            David Fleming

            Thomas McGowan

            Robert Colavita

            Ronald Workman

            Steve Santarsiero, Supervisor

 

Mr. Fedorchak noted under the Act, the Chairman makes these appointments.

 

 

APPROVE RAISING COMMUNITY POOL GUEST FEES

 

Mrs. Godshalk moved and Mr. Stainthorpe seconded to raise the Community Pool Guest Fees from $5 to $10 on  weekdays, weekends, and holidays and from $2 to $4 for Guest Fees after 5 P.M.

 

Mr. Santarsiero stated he feels $5 to $10 is steep.  He stated if you have a family who is visiting and take them to the Pool,  it is going to cost a lot of money.  He does not have a problem with raising the fees as recommended after 5 p.m.  He does not remember the reason behind this.  Mr. Stainthorpe stated the fees have not been raised for years. 

Mr. Santarsiero asked if there is a pressing need to do this.  Mr. Fazzalore stated a considerable amount of money has been spent at the Pool and they need to bring in additional income.  He noted particularly the expense of the slide.  Mr. Santarsiero stated he felt that the projection on this was that this was going to be paid for by virtue of what they anticipate their annual expenditures and revenues to be over the next few years.

Mr. Fedorchak stated they looked at their needs over a three year period and determined the slide was the top priority.  They wanted to get it done and then defer capital improvements for two years after this.  Mr. Santarsiero stated they are not incurring any debt to do this as it is money they anticipate given their past flows of revenues and expenditures. 

 

Mrs. Godshalk stated she feels $10 for a day at the Pool is a reasonable amount.  She stated for those paying a family Membership this may help keep down the crowds.

 

Mr. Santarsiero stated if there was a pressing need to do this to raise more money for the Pool he would not have a problem doing this, but this does not seem to be the case. 

 

 

December 20, 2004                                                     Board of Supervisors – page 14 of 14

 

 

Mr. Fazzalore asked about the ending balances for the Pool, and Mr. Fedorchak stated their ending balance was $100,00.  This increase could raise approximately $20,000. 

 

Ms. Torbert stated this represents a 100% increase and is the kind of thing which will make people very angry.  She suggested there be a different rate for the weekdays as opposed to the weekends.

 

Motion carried with Mr. Santarsiero opposed.  

 

 

APPROVE DONATION TO LYFT COMMUNITIES THAT CARE PROGRAM

 

Mr. Fazzalore stated they had a group come in at a prior meeting looking for funds and a memo related to this was received by the Board.  Chief Coluzzi stated this was for the Bullying Program.  It was noted that Falls Township gave $3,700 and the Pennsbury School District gave $2,000.  Mr. Fedorchak stated he would recommend that any donation come from the General Fund – Central Government.

 

Mrs. Godshalk moved, Mr. Fegley seconded and it was unanimously carried to donate $2,000 to LYFT Communities That Care Program.

 

 

APPOINTMENTS

 

Mrs. Godshalk moved and Mr. Fazzalore seconded to re-appoint Marilyn Ellis to the Elm Lowne Committee.

 

Mr. Santarsiero stated he will repeat his comment that he feels if someone comes up for re-appointment that they also open this position up to the general public.  He stated this goes for the next appointment as well. 

 

Motion carried unanimously.

 

Mrs. Godshalk moved, Mr. Fegley seconded and it was unanimously carried to re-appoint Chip Kern to the Golf Committee.

 

There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m.

 

                                                                        Respectfully Submitted,

 

 

 

Scott Fegley, Secretary