TOWNSHIP OF LOWER MAKEFIELD
MINUTES - JULY 22, 2002
The regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the Township of Lower Makefield was held in the Municipal Building on July 22, 2002. Chairman Roeper called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
Planning Commission: Albert Roeper, Chairman
John Pazdera, Member
Michael Shavel, Member
Others: Nancy Frick, Director Zoning, Inspection & Planning
John Koopman, Township Solicitor
Mario Canales, Township Engineer
Pete Stainthorpe, Supervisor Liaison
Absent: Deborah Gould, Planning Commission Secretary
Ron Tofel, Planning Commission Member
#534 - LOWER MAKEFIELD TOWNSHIP GOLF COURSE PRELIMINARY/
FINAL PLAN DISCUSSION
Mr. William Taylor, Mr. Wes Hackman, and Mr. Scott Arterburn were present.
Mr. Taylor stated they have received an Easement permitting them to cross the Williams
Gas Pipe Line and this will be presented to the Board of Supervisors at their next meeting.
Mr. Roeper noted the letter in this regard dated 6/10/02 and asked if all of these items have
been included in the Plans. Mr. Taylor stated they have requested PCS to survey where the
pipelines are located based on that letter and the survey date has been scheduled.
Mr. Roeper noted the letter from Mr. Yates dated 6/25/02 wherein he suggested a sprinkler
system be installed in the Club house. Mr. Arterburn stated a sprinkler system will be
installed for the entire building.
Mr. Arterburn stated they are working with the Conservation District and expect their
Mr. Roeper noted the letter from the Bucks County Planning Commission dated 7/17/02.
Mr. Arterburn stated they will correct the Plans with regard to Item #1.
With regard to Item #2, Mr. Arterburn stated they can provide a summary on the drawing.
He stated they have received the requested Variances in this regard.
Item #3 regarding screening was noted and Mr. Arterburn stated they will discuss this with
the Board of Supervisors. Mr. Roeper stated he feels they should show something on the
Plans for the Planning Commission to review. Mr. Arterburn stated there is landscaping
around the building and he will match this up with the Ordinance to see where the Bucks
County Planning commission feels they are delinquent. He stated they have existing trees
and also plan berming and other landscaping.
July 22, 2002 Planning Commission - page 2 of 6
Item #4 was noted, and Mr. Arterburn stated, per the Township requirements, they only
need thirty-six spaces for golfers and twenty for employees. They are showing 190 spaces
on their Plans. He feels the Bucks County Planning Commission is looking for a summary
of what is being provided and they can address this.
Item #5 was noted and Mr. Arterburn stated they will review the distance. They do have the
proper number of parking spaces.
Item #6 was noted and Mr. Arterburn stated they did discuss the requirements for the
parking islands in their previous presentation. Mr. Canales stated early on they indicated
they would meet the requirements of the Ordinance that an island would be provided every
twenty parking spaces. He stated there are some areas where they do not meet this
requirement. Mr. Arterburn stated they can meet this requirement; and while this will
decrease the number of parking spaces, they have an excess of what is required so they
will still be able to meet the parking requirements if they provide all the required islands.
Item #7 was noted regarding sidewalk/bikepath, and Mr. Roeper stated the Board of
Supervisors will make this decision.
Item #8 regarding Lighting was noted. Mr. Arterburn stated they will be installing wall
packs on the maintenance building and they can advise the Bucks County Planning
Commission how these will be installed and will show them on the building plans.
Mr. Arterburn stated while the Bucks County Planning Commission is recommending
additional lighting, they also need to be sensitive to the requests made by the surrounding
residents with regard to lighting. Mr. Roeper stated he feels they should provide security
lighting which is shielded in such a way that it will not be a problem for the neighbors.
Mr. Arterburn stated the wall packs will be facing to the north and the closest resident is
hundreds of feet away.
Item #9 regarding grading was previously addressed.
Item #10 was noted, and Mr. Arterburn stated they are retaining the structures which can be
Item #11 regarding water withdrawal was noted, and Mr. Arterburn stated they are well
into this process. The forty-eight hour pump test will start tomorrow. An application will
be made to the DRBC for the withdrawal and DelVal has done a good deal of work on this
already. Mr. Arterburn stated there are parameters they must comply with regarding the
amount of water that can be taken out. He also noted a well monitoring system has been
set up for the pump test. During the initial test, one well did show a four foot draw down
and they will monitor this well particularly during the forty-eight hour test. There is an
Agreement that will be signed by the Township and the neighbors with regard to the wells.
They will know after the test who will be impacted by the withdrawal. Mr. Taylor
reviewed the three levels of monitoring which will be done. Mr. Shavel asked what will
happen in a drought condition. Mr. Arterburn stated the DRBC regulates how much water
you can take so that when there is a drought, the amount permitted would most likely be
changed. This is done on a continual basis. Mr. Arterburn stated reports must be
submitted to the DRBC. He stated they cannot exceed 7 million gallons per month
according to the DRBC. Mr. Taylor stated the wells will be used to fill the ponds.
July 22, 2002 Planning Commission - page 3 of 6
Item #12 regarding planting is a listing of the Bucks County Planning Commission’s
Item #13 was noted with regard to course safety wherein the Bucks County Planning
Commission has cited a recommendation on minimum distance between the centerlines of
the proposed fairways recommended by the American Society of Golf Course Architects.
Mr. Arterburn stated Mr. Jacobsen sits on the Board of the Society and is not aware of any such recommendation being made. He is comfortable with the design and disagrees with the Bucks County Planning Commission. Mr. Roeper asked that they discuss this with the
Bucks County Planning Commission. Mr. Shavel noted the comments in the letter
regarding drives greater than 230 yards, and Mr. Arterburn agreed to look into this but
noted the property that would be impacted would be the Christmas tree farm.
Item #14 was noted regarding the IPM (Integrated Pest Management) Programs, and
Mr. Arterburn stated this is done as a matter of course and is included in the contract.
Mr. Arterburn noted the comment regarding the Audubon Society’s Signature Program,
and stated they do plan to bring the Audubon Society into this and they usually begin this at
the time they start growing the golf course in.
Item #15 regarding stormwater management was noted. With regarding to the emergency
spillway comment (Item a), Mr. Canales stated where this is shown on the plan is the
natural low point and it cannot be moved to any other location. Only when there are storms
that exceed the 25 year storm, will water come out of the spillway and they feel comfortable
with the current design. Mr. Roeper asked if the parcel that would be impacted, while
currently vacant, could be built upon. Mr. Canales stated this would be difficult to say
since that parcel does have woodlands and wetlands. He stated water currently does go
in that direction and they have substantially reduced the flow.
Item b. regarding the existing pond was noted and Mr. Canales stated they have looked at
this and are satisfied with the plan.
Item c. regarding the drainage/depression areas was noted, and Mr. Canales stated they
have reviewed this and are satisfied with the plan.
With regard to Item d., which relates to the safety ledge, Mr. Roeper asked if there is a
normal design for this. Mr. Arterburn stated the water level in the pond will fluctuate. He
stated RBA has designed the shelf at 2’ rather than one foot as recommended by the Bucks
County Planning Commission for aesthetic reasons. Mr. Roeper asked that they discuss
this again with the Planning Commission but he feels 2’ seems reasonable in light of the
fluctuation of depth. Mr. Shavel asked what will be done to keep children away from this
area in the winter. Mr. Arterburn stated there will be full-time employees at the facility all
year. Mr. Shavel asked about signage, and Mr. Arterburn stated they could do this.
Item e. with regard to sediment forebay and water quality inlets was noted. Mr. Arterburn
stated they received the comments from Bucks County Soil Erosion Control who are the
experts, and they did not have any of the concerns that Bucks County Planning
Commission is noting. Mr. Roeper stated he felt that they were concerned about on-going
sediment, not necessarily that which occurs during construction. Mr. Arterburn stated the
course will be heavily turfed once it is grown in, and he does not feel there is a need for a
July 22, 2002 Planning Commission - page 4 of 6
forebay. Mr. Canales stated he agrees with Mr. Arterburn that once the course is
established, there should not be a problem. Detention Basin #3 has the parking lot run off
and this will be a dry basin. Mr. Roeper suggested that they review this again with the
Bucks County Planning Commission.
Item f. was noted regarding the basin plantings. Mr. Arterburn stated Basin #3 is a feature
on the Golf course and they did receive a waiver on this from the Planning Commission.
Mr. Arterburn suggested that the Bucks County Planning Commission be provided a copy
of the 4/22/02 letter where the Waivers which were granted are outlined as well as the
Variances which were received.
Item #15 refers to the gas line easement which was discussed previously this evening.
Mr. Arterburn noted that there was a list of items included in the Williams letter and he
would recommend that rather than do most of this work, they sign the Responsibility
Agreement instead which they have indicated they will be forwarding to the Township.
Item #17 regarding sewage facilities was noted, and Mr. Arterburn noted this issue has
Mr. Taylor stated there was some discussion about the Type I Landscape Buffer
requirements, and the Zoning Hearing Board is allowing them to discuss this with the
individual homeowners. If no agreement can be reached, they will install the Type I
Buffer. Mr. Arterburn stated they have already had discussions with four adjacent
residents about the tee locations, and the drawings have been revised in this regard.
Mr. Arterburn stated the only outstanding item is the letter to be received from the Bucks
County Conservation District which they expect to receive shortly. Mr. Hackman stated
they are trying to move the Golf Course along as quickly as possibly and have been in the
review process for five months. He asked that the Planning Commission consider granting
approval with the provision that they satisfy the few outstanding items so that they can
proceed to the Board of Supervisors. He stated the Township Planning Commission has
done this in the past routinely. Mr. Hackman stated the Bucks County Planning
Commission comments are advisory and he feels that they have already addressed all of the
Lower Makefield Township Planning Commission concerns. Mr. Roeper stated until they
can satisfy the Planning Commission with respect to the water and course safety issues,
they will not recommend approval. Mr. Hackman stated it was indicated this evening that
the Golf Course architect is involved with the Society cited by the Bucks County Planning
Commission and he knows of no such standards. Mr. Arterburn stated he is not sure what
they can do to satisfy the Planning Commission’s concerns other than to have
Mr. Jacobsen put something down on paper indicating he feels this lay out is appropriate
from a safety standpoint.
Mr. Roeper suggested that the Golf Course be scheduled for review at the next Planning
Commission meeting to be held on August 12, 2002.
#511 - MISKIEL/DARRAH - PRELIMINARY PLAN APPROVAL
Mr. James McMaster was present and stated he feels they have met all issues that have been
raised. He noted the CKS letter and stated they will comply with all items.
July 22, 2002 Planning Commission - page 5 of 6
The PCS letter dated 6/6/02 was noted. Item #1 was noted, and Mr. McMaster stated they
are requesting Fee-In-Lieu.
Item #2 was noted and Mr. McMaster stated they are requesting a Waiver.
Item #3 was noted, and Mr. McMaster stated they are requesting that any frontage
improvements be deferred until building permits are applied for.
They will comply with Item #4 which relates to the CKS letter.
Mr. McMaster stated Items #5 and #6 relate to the wetlands. He stated he disagrees with
Skelly & Loy. He provided a copy of the Ordinance section which relates to this matter.
They feel the proposed dwelling as shown is a buildable lot based on the houses in Lower
Makefield. They feel they comply with the Ordinance. Mr. Roeper stated from a planning
standpoint, the lot does not look very attractive. He stated in the past they discussed the
possibility of a lot being carved out in the upper left hand corner of the property so they
have access to Schuyler and asked why this was not considered. Mr. McMaster stated
there is a small strip of land that is not part of this property which is owned by the Bucks
County Conservancy. Mr. Koopman stated the Township has now taken title to this land.
Mr. McMaster stated if the Township would allow access across this strip, this would
make Mr. Roeper’s suggestion viable. Mr. Roeper stated he feels the Board of
Supervisors may consider an easement for a driveway across this and that location would
seem to be far better than what they are currently showing. Mr. McMaster stated they
would also like to see any house that is built on Parcel 1 to be as far away from Parcel #2
as possible. Mr. Roeper asked if they would be willing to discuss this with the Board of
Supervisors, and Mr. McMaster stated he has already discussed this with Mr. Garton who
indicated they could discuss it with the Board when they go before them with their Plan.
Mr. Roeper moved, Mr. Pazdera seconded and it was unanimously carried to recommend
to the Board of Supervisors approval of the Revised Minor Subdivision Plan for
Miskiel/Darrah in accordance with the Plans dated 10/14/98, last revised 5/7/02, sheet 2 of
2 dated 5/23/00, last reviewed 10/26/00 subject to the PCS letter dated 6/6/02 with the
exception that the Planning Commission recommends the location of a proposed dwelling
on Lot #1 be moved to the southwest corner of the property adjacent to Schuyler Road and
that the Board of Supervisors favorably consider granting an easement across the 10’
easement owned by the Township so as to permit the proposed residence access to
Schuyler Road opposite the Hudson Drive area.
MASTER PLAN UPDATE
Mr. Roeper stated he sent a letter to the Bucks County Planning Commission regarding the
mailing of the citizen questionnaire. It will be mailed 8/21 or 8/22/02 with a return deadline
of 9/6/02. The printer will need the camera-ready copy by August 7. Mr. Roeper reviewed
the printing and mailing costs and it is anticipated that these costs will be approximately
$310 more than was budgeted because of increases in postage and printing charges. The
Planning Commission will hold a work session on September 9 following the regular
meeting in order to review the questionnaires received by the Township before they are sent
to the Bucks County Planning Commission. Mr. Roeper noted eight out of seventeen
questionnaires have been received from the Department Heads and other Boards and
Commissions. He is expecting to receive three more this week and he will follow up with
July 22, 2002 Planning Commission - page 6 of 6
those who do not respond. He asked that the Bucks County Planning Commission prepare
draft news releases, information for the Township Website, and a draft Agenda for the
public meetings to be held in September and that these drafts be received in August for
Mr. Roeper noted the letter in the packet from Mr. Fedorchak regarding the Rosebank Winery and asked that this item be put on the Agenda for the next Planning Commission meeting.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:45 p.m.
Albert Roeper, Chairman