TOWNSHIP OF LOWER MAKEFIELD
PLANNING COMMISSION
SPECIAL MEETING
MINUTES - NOVEMBER 20, 2001

A special meeting of the Planning Commission of the Township of Lower Makefield was held in the Municipal Building on November 20, 2001. Chairman Roeper called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.

Those present:

Planning Commission:

Albert Roeper, Chairman
Deborah Gould, Vice Chairman (joined meeting in progress)
Ron Tofel, Secretary
Edward Koch, Member
John Pazdera, Member

Others:

Nancy Frick, Director, Zoning, Inspection & Planning
John Koopman, Township Solicitor
Captain Tom Roche, Police Department
Lynn Bush, Executive Director Bucks County Planning Commission

Absent:

Duke Doherty, Township Engineer
Frank Fazzalore, Supervisor Liaison

Mr. Joseph Taylor, Mr. Russell Tepper, Mr. Marc Brookman, attorney, and Mr. Robert Rodgers, Orth-Rodgers, were present representing Matrix.

Mr. Roeper stated they will attempt to satisfy questions concerning the traffic studies which were conducted by Orth-Rodgers and commented upon by Parsons-Brinckerhoff, the Township’s Traffic consultant, and Mr. John Allen, RAM’s expert.

Mr. Roeper stated a traffic study serves as a plan and guide for lay out of the roads and estimates the levels of service that will be provided. He stated this evening they will be discussing very subjective things which may or may not come to pass within the next ten years. The three individuals speaking this evening on the traffic have spent many years working in this field. Mr. Bob Rodgers from Orth-Rodgers, Mr. Jim Yeager from Parsons-Brinckerhoff, and Mr. John Allen, representing RAM, were present. Mr. Roeper stated Mr. Allen wrote a memorandum that listed some questions about the traffic studies that were done, and he would suggest that they use this memorandum and comment on it this evening.

Mr. Allen stated he has since put together additional information which he would like to make available this evening. Mr. Roeper asked if this information was provided to Parsons-Brinckerhoff or Orth-Rodgers, and Mr. Allen stated it was not. Mr. Roeper noted the one page sheet they received, and Mr. Allen stated this only relates to the Parsons-Brinckerhoff report.

Mr. Rodgers stated he would prefer to take time to review the information being provided this evening by Mr. Allen before being asked to comment on the information.

Mr. Yeager noted the report from Parsons-Brinckerhoff and stated he has made copies of the report for the Planning Commission. He is also prepared to run through the analysis to give the Planning Commission an understanding of what they did in reviewing the Matrix Plan and the traffic report that was done by Matrix’s traffic consultant. He stated he did review his work with Ms. Bush when they made their presentation to the Bucks County Planning Commission. Mr. Yeager provided a copy of his report to the Planning Commission this evening.

Mr. Yeager stated in May of 2000, Mr. Fedorchak contacted him with a request to look at the development, assess the traffic impact report that was done, and render an opinion whether they thought the work was done appropriately, whether the conclusions reached were appropriate, and if the work proposed would be sufficient to handle the level of traffic that will be generated by this development. Their report, dated July 13, provided this assessment. He stated they did a parallel study using their own procedures. They determined how much traffic would be generated and where the traffic would go.

They then assessed the impact of the new traffic on top of that which currently exists.

Mr. Yeager reviewed what is proposed for the entire site - both Phase I and phase II. Based on discussions with the Board of Supervisors, they were asked to look at this in four ways - level of development on the plans, adding a safety factor by adding an additional big box to the mix, looking at all Bellemead development which included 1.3 million square feet of office space and an additional 260,000 square feet of warehouse, and also consider if it was done only as an office park of 1.65 million square feet, what would the impact be. They did focus on the development as it was planned in 7/00 plus the safety factor of one additional retail box with regard to the base counts which were done by Orth-Rodgers as of 2000.

Mr. Yeager stated they did their own counts of the critical intersections in May of 2000.

When they compared their counts with what Orth-Rodgers has used, the Parsons-Brinckerhoff counts were somewhat higher. They therefore used the higher counts rather than the Orth-Rodgers counts. They then looked at trip generation to determine traffic in and out of a development of this size and type. He stated they used the Trip Generation Handbook, and ran the analysis and came up with much the same rates as Orth-Rodgers used in their reports. He stated they came in somewhat higher since they had added an additional big box retail. They then overlaid the trip generation from the new development over the background counts. They did escalate the background counts to consider a future year. He noted Orth-Rodgers considered a background growth rate of 1% per year.

Mr. Yeager met with the County and agreed that a growth rate of 2% would be a better rate to consider, and this is what they used. Mr. Yeager stated they considered where people would be coming from and going to as relates to this development. He stated the tool they used to assess this was from the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Organization. They were comfortable with the traffic figures with regard to the office component but felt that they were high on their reliance of the local population for the retail portion, so they shifted a percentage over from Big Oak Road to the Route 1/Oxford Valley Road area to assume it would have a more regional flavor to traffic coming to the retail portion of the development.

This meant more of the traffic would be accessing the site through the critical intersection of Big Oak/Oxford Valley Roads.

Mr. Yeager stated they then looked at how well the intersection would operate under the configuration provided by the developer. They found there were some deficiencies. They had anticipated a Level of Service D would be acceptable and asked that the developer add additional lanes to the Big Oak/Oxford Valley Road intersection beyond what they had agreed, and the developer has agreed to do so. Mr. Yeager stated Mr. Allen did comment that Parsons-Brinckerhoff’s future analysis indicated that they would have Level of Service D and in some instances Level of Service E. While this is the case, it is still better than it exists today. They therefore advised the Board of Supervisors that if the development as proposed were to occur and the improvements made as Parsons-Brinckerhoff has stipulated, they felt competent that operations would be at an acceptable level and the Township’s interests would be maintained.

Mr. Yeager stated full development as it was previously indicated accounted for 452,000 square feet of retail and 780,000 square feet of office development, of which at least the office development component has been reduced somewhat from their original report. The current plan has 650,000 square feet so that the Parsons-Brinckerhoff analysis was done with even more office.

Mr. Roeper asked if he has felt that there is a need for any changes as a result of the comments from RAM or Bucks County Planning Commission. Mr. Yeager stated they met with the Bucks County Planning Commission and went through a similar discussion as being done this evening. The Bucks County Planning Commission indicated they felt the traffic counts Matrix used were more local than they felt comfortable with as it relates to the retail portion and this was the same thought Parsons-Brinckerhoff had and had based their analysis on this. The County had not seen the Parsons-Brinckerhoff report when they did their review. Mr. Yeager stated he has had discussions with Mr. Allen regarding the comments he made in his report; and he feels that since Mr. Allen has seen the work Parsons-Brinckerhoff has done, he has a better level of comfort since the developer agreed to make the additional improvements Parsons-Brinckerhoff recommended.

Mr. Koopman asked what additional improvements were added, and Mr. Yeager noted the fold-out page in the back of their report that lists Orth-Rodgers proposed improvements and the additional improvements Parsons-Brinckerhoff recommended. They requested an additional left turn and right turn lane on the east bound approach of Big Oak Road and an additional through lane to the west bound approach of Big Oak Road. They also requested an exclusive right turn lane on the southbound approach on Oxford Valley Road as well as some additional signal timing changes. One additional improvement not listed is in the area in the front of their site which would serve the pharmacy where the Plan had a right in/right out for the pharmacy onto Oxford Valley Road south of the Big Oak Road intersection, and they had requested that they extend that access not only to serve the pharmacy but to provide another access for the retail side of the development. They also recommended that they follow through with their plans for the intersection of Big Oak Road and Township Line Road to the west of the site adjacent to the Railroad which needs to be signalized and that the PennDOT improvements proposed be in place.

Mr. Roeper asked if they considered Middletown traffic. Mr. Yeager stated the limits of their study where the intersection of Township Line and Big Oak Road since the traffic would be dispersed at that point. He stated development in their full build out includes Middletown development and was considered in their analysis.

Mr. Roeper asked about development in the area of I-95 and Big Oak/Township Line Road. He stated a sizable residential development is proposed. Mr. Yeager stated this development was not specifically considered but was considered as part of the background growth.

Mr. Tofel expressed concern with the counts being done in May rather than July, August, or December when peak traffic occurs. Mr. Yeager stated their analysis was requested in May of 2000 and they were given only a short amount of time to provide their analysis to the Township. He stated everything that is in their report is built on the base data. He stated typically you do not design for all improvements for the worst situation but instead are typically done for the commuter peaks. They are not done for the Christmas season or a specific situation such as Sesame Place. Mr. Yeager stated Matrix will load the same roadways as Sesame but from an opposite direction particularly when PennDOT’s Interchange improvements are installed. He stated Sesame Place and Oxford Valley Mall traffic should be addressed very well by the PennDOT improvements. Mr. Tofel asked if there is any idea when PennDOT will have these improvements in place. Mr. Yeager stated he has heard that the final design is complete, and the bid package was being advertised.

Mr. Rodgers stated Orth-Rodgers designed those Interchange improvements for Falls Township and Middletown. They are waiting for a permit from Bucks County Soil Conservation, and it is expected that it will be bid and the contract awarded in Spring, 2002. It should take one year to complete. Mr. Tofel stated he is concerned that the Township asked Parsons-Brinckerhoff to do the survey in May.

Mr. Rodgers stated Parsons-Brinckerhoff did almost an independent traffic study and has recommended additional improvements which Matrix has agreed to provide. He stated they also added 100,000 square feet of retail which is not his client’s Plan and this represents a tremendous increase in trip generation which should more than offset any additional seasonal traffic.

Mr. Pazdera noted the signalization at Township Line. Mr. Rodgers stated they hope to work with Middletown Township and proceed with this work assuming they can get a permit from PennDOT. Mr. Roeper asked about the location of Big Oak Road/Township Line in Lower Makefield, and Mr. Rodgers stated the line splits the road with the older portion and the stop sign being in Middletown.

Mr. Allen provided information to the Planning Commission this evening which included his comments to the Board in May, Orth-Rodgers’ response to those comments, and his responses back to Orth-Rodgers indicating whether his questions were answered or not.

Mr. Allen stated he feels they should be prudent in their plans since it is not known what will be in the area in ten years. He stated he works for the State of New Jersey and he considered a number of items other than those which have been discussed by Orth-Rodgers or Parsons-Brinckerhoff.

Mr. Allen commented in his report on development size of the Matrix Plan as compared to Bellemead; and he feels that even though Matrix is slightly smaller, the new mix will generate more traffic and impact the roadways more severely. He stated over the years the Trip Generation Manual has been revised, and there would be less trips in the Bellemead Plan using these new figures. Mr. Allen noted information provided in his packet to justify this point. He stated Bellemead would generate 11,000 trips per day and Octagon will generate 24,000 trips per day.

Mr. Rodgers stated when the traffic was studied in 1985 it was assumed that traffic counts would be somewhat higher than they are today. He stated he feels they should focus on the fact that Parsons-Brinckerhoff has added 100,000 square feet more retail than they are proposing. He added that Parsons-Brinckerhoff did use the Sixth Edition of the Trip Generation Manual.

Mr. Allen stated typically in New Jersey their protocol calls for morning counts to be taken from 6 a.m. to 10 a.m., evening peaks to be 3 p.m. to 7 p.m., and weekend counts to be taken 10 a.m. to 6 p.m. They do look at weekend counts and summer recreational counts in New Jersey.

Ms. Gould joined the meeting at this time.

Mr. Allen stated they also consider quality of life issues and air quality in New Jersey.

Mr. Allan stated Orth-Rodgers did their weekday counts from 5 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. and their weekend counts from 11 a.m. to 3 p.m. He stated he has never seen counts for this type of development start at 5 p.m. or later. He stated he has lived in this area for fifteen years, and he feels the peak starts between 4:00 p.m. and 4:30 p.m. Mr. Allen stated the weekend counts were done from 11 a.m. to 3 p.m. in February. Mr. Allen stated while he recognizes that they would not want to take a count at the absolute peak, there is a large amount of traffic six to seven months of the year. He noted information he provided from the Trip General Manual which shows variation of traffic through the year by month for shopping centers, and February is only 78% of the normal. He stated Orth-Rodgers indicated their counting program exceeds the requirements according to the New Jersey Code since they counted more than the required number of hours. Mr. Allen stated he feels it is more important when they count than how long they count. Mr. Allen stated Parsons-Brinckerhoff did their counts in May, but did not count the weekend so they did not validate or invalidate what Orth-Rodgers had done. Mr. Allen stated he feels the counts could still be done in December. He also feels they should have counted a summer weekend from 10 a.m. to 6 p.m. and from 3 p.m. to 7 p.m. in the afternoon during the week for the p.m. peak. Mr. Allen stated he feels a count done in December would be comparable to a count done in the summer. He stated the trend is that the mid-day peak (11 a.m. to 1 p.m.) is also now a consideration. He stated automatic traffic recorders could be put out to give more detailed information at the intersections.

Mr. Rodgers stated he has been doing traffic impact studies for thirty-one years in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and throughout the world. He stated they are not subject to the New Jersey Access Code in Pennsylvania. Mr. Rodgers stated they are overlooking the significant dollars worth of improvements Matrix is proposing. He stated Oxford Valley Mall and Sesame Place should not be compared to their development. The peak period for his client’s property is the evening rush hour and this has been confirmed by Orth-Rodgers and Parsons-Brinckerhoff. He has done studies for this area since 1985. The Levels of Service forecasted are quite good and can withstand the increase of traffic because of other developments which may occur.

Mr. Yeager stated his analysis was based on morning and afternoon weekday commuter peaks and those times were chosen because if you look at the site, they felt the critical time period will relate to people going back and forth on their way to the office development.

They do have a problem in the area related to Oxford Valley Mall and Sesame Place; however, the level of retail development is a smaller component than the office development. If the Plans before them were for a regional mall, they would have looked at it differently and would have focused more on the trip generation for that particular use.

One of the benefits they have of looking at the evening peak hour is that it is also a fairly busy time for the retail portion. Mr. Yeager stated he and Mr. Allen did work on a project in New Jersey on Route 70 where they did put out Automatic Traffic Recorders and they did find there were more elevated levels of traffic in the mid day than they anticipated; however, the analysis period they are using on that project will still be the traditional A.M. and P.M. weekday commuter peaks.

Mr. Roeper asked if there were to be 25% more traffic, would they feel this would impact only Levels of Service or would they require additional road improvements. Mr. Yeager stated they feel the Saturday peak will generate less trips than during the regular commuter peaks. Possibly they would need more improvements based on surrounding traffic increase, but part of those improvements are being put in place by PennDOT. Mr. Roeper asked if additional improvements would be made in the immediate area of the development.

Mr. Yeager stated transportation plans do not traditionally look at the peak of the peak season as it is not prudent to put in lanes to consider the worst traffic days of the year.

There are levels of traffic they accept. If there were to do an analysis that indicated Sesame Place is generating ten times the traffic they felt they were, Oxford Valley Mall were to double their size, and Matrix would be built, it would result in failure of the roadway system. To the extent that the failure could be mitigated, they must consider if the community could afford those improvements. He stated he feels they have to live with times of the year and times of the day when traffic is bad. He does not feel they could build any improvements to satisfy the worst of the worst conditions.

Mr. Rodgers stated the Orth-Rodgers study was done in August for the p.m. peak when Sesame Place was open. He stated he cannot conceive of any meaningful improvements which could be considered other than what they indicated, supplemented by the Parsons-Brinckerhoff recommendations. He stated they have added additional lanes for their project, and PennDOT will make improvements to the intersection.

Mr. Pazdera asked the Levels of Service during the worst times at Big Oak Road and Oxford Valley Road. Mr. Yeager stated at full build out for Matrix and adding 15% to 20% additional traffic, they would have failure which they have at the present time. They determine failure to be if the average person sits in excess of sixty seconds to make a movement. With Matrix fully built and background growth as they see it, and the improvements provided, none of those movements sit more than sixty seconds in the future. Mr. Tofel asked at what time in the future, they would be back to the current failure situation. Mr. Rodgers stated they are showing critical movement at the intersection of Big Oak Road and Oxford Valley Road during existing conditions to be from 120 to 125 seconds. If they get it to 60 seconds, this would be a 50% improvement. He stated he feels they have provided for the maximum road improvements that can be accommodated at this area. He also feels Parsons-Brinckerhoff has provided for a safety factor by including an additional 100,000 square feet of retail which they are not proposing for their site.

Mr. Allen reviewed a number of developments which are proposed for the area but were not considered in the site. He stated he was never provided a copy of the Final Plan for the road improvements. Mr. Allen questioned if they want to take the risk that if the development goes through, that there could be gridlock on Day One.

Mr. Rodgers stated there was considerable debate on the appropriate growth rate.

Parsons-Brinckerhoff doubled the growth rate, and he feels this is a significant growth rate amount. He stated 100,000 additional retail space has been added which is a full 22% in trip generation coming off their property. The amount of square footage for office space has been reduced 130,000 square feet.

Mr. Allen agreed that 2% is more appropriate for growth rate and stated he does feel this changed what Matrix was asked to do.

Mr. Allen stated there have been conflicting reports on the time frame for this development from five to ten years. He stated he feels they should be prudent and analyze it for a ten year time frame. He is not sure what Orth-Rodgers looked at since they do not tell what the future year is. Mr. Roeper stated he feels that if it takes longer to build out, the traffic situation will not deteriorate as quickly. Mr. Allen stated while you are building the development, other developments are taking place and traffic is getting worse. When Matrix would then finally open, you would have all that additional traffic on top of it.

Mr. Roeper stated there is not much more land left in the area which could be built upon.

Mr. Allen noted Shady Brook Farm could develop as well as other properties. He stated they should not only consider what is in the immediate area since development is occurring in other Townships as well. He noted this corridor is a heavy magnet for traffic.

Mr. Rodgers stated he feels Mr. Allen is trying to cloud the issue. He stated he questions where the responsibility of his client stops. What is being discussed is not traffic that is generated by his client. He stated their traffic study has been reviewed by a traffic consultant hired by the Township who requested further improvements based on square footage not anticipated by his client. His client has agreed to make those improvements.

Mr. Roeper stated Mr. Allen indicated that he was not provided a copy of the Plans, but noted these Plans have been available at the Township Building for months. He stated other traffic improvements proposed elsewhere are available from PennDOT. Mr. Roeper stated he does not feel they have the luxury of requesting that a traffic study be done in July since the Planning Commission is faced with a deadline for making a recommendation.

Mr. Allen asked if capacity analysis summary reports are available at the Township, and Mr. Rodgers stated they are.

Mr. Allen asked when the development will be built out. Mr. Rodgers stated the traffic impact study indicated build out for five years, and Parsons-Brinckerhoff indicated five years. Mr. Rodgers asked Mr. Allen if there is a calculation of the developer’s fair share once traffic studies have been done, and Mr. Allen agreed there is. Mr. Roeper stated he feels the Board of Supervisors will make this determination. Mr. Rodgers stated Matrix has agreed to pay for the full extent of improvements to the intersection back and this is more than what New Jersey would have required of the developer. Mr. Roeper noted Pennsylvania also has fair share, and this is what the Traffic Impact Fee is based upon.

Mr. Yeager stated Matrix is going above fair share and is making the improvements at 100% their cost. Mr. Yeager stated if Matrix had not come in and agreed to make the improvements, the Township or the State would have had to expend significant funds to correct the existing problems. Mr. Roeper stated the Board of Supervisors has just approved a Budget and there are no funds available to make major improvements such as Matrix is proposing.

Ms. Lynn Bush stated they met with Mr. Yeager, representatives of Orth-Rodgers, and Mr. Tepper. She stated in Mr. Yeager’s report there was a conclusion and summary and she asked if all these items have been addressed by the applicant. She noted these recommendations were above and beyond what Orth-Rodgers originally proposed.

Mr. Yeager stated Orth-Rodgers has addressed these under Scenario B and agreed to incorporate them in their Plans. Ms. Bush asked if Mr. Yeager has looked at the Plans to insure that all items have been included on the Plans, and Mr. Yeager stated he has.

Ms. Bush noted the road improvements at Big Oak and Township Line and she felt these were not under consideration until Middletown Township approved their plans.

Mr. Yeager stated he understands the resident Township is required to make the request to PennDOT. Being that Middletown and Matrix have not reached an agreement on their portion, it is not clear if Middletown will make the petition to PennDOT. However, they do have a commitment from the developer that the funding to make those improvements will be put in place once it is permitted for them to do so. He does not feel they can ask them to go any further at this point. Mr. Rodgers stated they have agreed to fund and construct these improvements. He stated there is precedent for adjacent Townships working out an agreement on this.

Ms. Bush stated she felt there was a northbound left turn lane at Tall Pines. Mr. Rodgers stated the Highway Improvement Plans have always shown this improvement. There is a site plan that did not show this and this was an error which will be corrected. The Plans submitted to PennDOT and the Township have always had this improvement.

Ms. Bush stated if the Township engineer is making recommendations, they should make sure that these are included in the Plans that they will take action on; and she understands that this has now been done.

Mr. Larry Borda stated he feels if Parsons-Brinckerhoff had been given an option to do a traffic study at a later time, they would have done so. He stated Parsons-Brinckerhoff also indicated that retail was not a big factor in their analysis. He stated he feels the Planning Commission should consider RAM’s expert’s testimony as many residents have been caught in traffic jams as a result of big box retail. He stated he feels there is a deficiency in the traffic studies being used. He stated if they consider the intersection in the area which was designed by traffic engineers, it appears that traffic analysis is not an exact science.

Mr. Borda stated he feels one option is that the project not be approved because of potential problems to accommodate the traffic being generated by this complex. He is concerned about increasing costs for insurance to the Township, increased security costs, additional fire potential, and wear and tear on the roads. He stated if they do have gridlock, there will be a decrease in property values and potential loss of tax revenues.

Mr. Roeper noted some of the improvements they already have on Oxford Valley Road were paid for by Bellemead.

Mr. Zachary Rubin, 1661 Covington Road, stated he feels the traffic engineers have made mistakes in the past and have not been able to accommodate traffic in Falls Township. He stated they do not want this to happen in Lower Makefield Township. He stated the traffic studies were all done before they knew who the occupants would be in the big box stores.

He stated there are no Sears Great Indoor Stores in the immediate area so he feels this will be a regional retail mall. Mr. Rubin stated Bellemead had thirteen years to develop office buildings and failed to do so. He stated he does not understand how Matrix will construct Phase II which is the majority of the office complex. Mr. Rubin asked if Matrix owns the property or when they plan to take title. Mr. Brookman stated they have answered this question before the Board of Supervisors at a public meeting.

Mr. Roeper stated the Planning Commission’s jurisdiction does not take into consideration who owns the property. The Planning Commission has before them a developer who wants to develop the property and he is paying the expenses of the development planning process. Whether he has title or not is the applicant’s business, and is not a consideration for the Planning Commission to address.

Mr. Borda submitted a letter to the Planning Commission this evening and asked that it be made part of the record.

Mr. Roeper thanked those who attended the meeting this evening. He noted a communication that was faxed at 5:30 p.m. this evening in response to a request that they clarify what was being done in connection with an environmental study. Mr. Roeper read the communication into the record. Mr. Roeper stated based on the review provided by the consultants, they feel that they have complied with all necessary requirements of the Township. Mr. Roeper stated Mr. Doherty was unable to attend this evening’s meeting due to a prior commitment. The question was raised at one of the meetings with respect to the water run off from this site and the impact to Brock Creek. They have reviewed the Plans, and it is quite evident that very little water will flow to Brock Creek and will be only from one small detention basin in the corner of the property. The bulk of the water will go to Mill Creek which flows to Middletown. It will go through a culvert under I-95 and the area adjacent to that culvert represents a large portion of the wetlands that are associated on this site. Mr. Roeper stated he talked to Mr. Doherty about this since the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors are very concerned about this. The Township engineer pays particular attention to the calculations that involve run off. Mr. Roeper stated the detention basins have to be designed so that the flows from this property do not exceed what it is at the present time. The flows will continue for a longer period, but it should not, except under very exceptional circumstances, exceed the present flows. Mr. Roeper stated in the past they have questioned Mr. Doherty, and will continue to do so, to make sure that the detention calculations made by the developer meet the requirements of the Ordinances.

Mr. Tofel asked if they have considered air or noise and destruction of natural resources.

Mr. Roeper stated they have not consider air quality or noise but they have considered natural resources. He stated Bellemead did mitigate some wetlands, and they had approval from the Army Corps and the DEP to do this work. Matrix plans to undo some of that, but will not do away with any of the wetlands without proper mitigation. With regard to the woodlands, in the Bellemead Plans there were 5.5 acres of woodlands; and the Matrix Plan shows 12.12 acres. He stated there has been a good deal of growth in the time since Bellemead was before the Township, and it is conceivable that there will be even more woodlands in the future.

Mr. Mike Kane, Yardley Meadows, stated at the last meeting it seemed that the Planning Commission was on the verge of requesting an additional traffic study. He asked if they are going to vote on this matter tonight or consider it at their meeting on Monday.

Mr. Roeper stated at the last meeting the only point on which they took a consensus was whether or not to pave Tall Pines Road. With regard to the traffic study and all other points raised, they will discuss them over the next one or two Planning Commission meetings and will have to consider these items when they make a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors. They will not vote tonight on whether there should be a traffic study.

Mr. Kane stated if they have two more meetings before they make a decision on whether or not they want to have an additional traffic study, the Board of Supervisors may not be able to consider whether they want to have a traffic study before the holiday traffic has ended.

Mr. Roeper stated Matrix still has to respond to questions they raised at the last meeting and those responses will be evaluated. Mr. Roeper stated he would not be able to honestly answer whether the Planning Commission will make a decision on November 26 or December 10. Mr. Kane commended the Planning Commission for their openness and for entertaining every question raised.

Mr. Chris Aronkowski stated Matrix is relying heavily on PennDOT improvements, and there is a distinct possibility that these improvements will not be made for a number of years due to cut backs. He noted a number of other projects which were proposed to be done by PennDOT have been delayed. Mr. Roeper asked if someone in the Township could touch base with PennDOT as to their timetable. Captain Roche stated he feels Mr. Doherty would have this information, and Ms. Frick agreed to look into this as did Ms. Bush. Mr. Tofel stated Mr. Rodgers previously indicated that this project will be awarded in the spring. Mr. Aronkowski stated his father is the Assistant District engineer and agreed to make his father’s phone number available to Mr. Frick. Mr. Tofel asked if the Township has copies of the Route 1 PennDOT drawings, and Ms. Frick stated Mr. Doherty has these.

There being no further business, Mr. Pazdera moved, Mr. Koch seconded and it was unanimously carried to adjourn the meeting at 9:55 p.m.