The regular meeting of the Planning commission of the
Planning Commission: Karen Friedman, Chairman
Cynthia Harrison, Vice Chairman
William Taylor, Secretary
Fred Allan, Member
John Pazdera, Member
Others: Nancy Frick, Director Zoning, Inspection & Planning
John Koopman, Township Solicitor
James Majewski, Township Engineer
Frank Fazzalore, Supervisor Liaison
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Mr. Pazdera moved and Ms. Harrison seconded to approve the
#550- PRIME PROPERTIES - PRELIMINARY/FINAL PLAN APPROVAL
Mr. George Kiriakidi and Mr. Nicholas Rose, engineer, were present. MR. Rose stated
this is a two-lot subdivision
proposal is to construct two, single-family dwellings. There is an existing dwelling to the
left of the tract and farm property behind and to the right of the property. There is a
swale in front of the property which they have agreed to improve down to the culvert
would be required to do with regard to detention. Subsequent to the prior meeting,
Mr. Rose ran through the calculations and forwarded them to Ms. Frick and the Township
engineer. Mr. Rose stated they looked at three options as to how to handle the
stormwater. One option was as shown on the Plan, the second was to add 3% to allow
for additional impervious which would be a total of 15%, and the final option was to look
at full build out to the maximum amount which would be 19%. All options would have
the detention area at a 3 foot depth. Option #1 as shown on the Plan would provide a 60
by 20 underground stone storage area on each lot. This allows for 12% impervious
surface. This area as shown on the Plan is in the front yard although they feel they may
move it to the side or rear yards or a portion in each. Option #2 was noted which would
add 3% to the impervious surface which would take them to 15% and this would result in
a 68 by 20 wide area on each lot. This would also be the same underground system.
The final calculation they did was for build out to 19% impervious and this required an
80 long by 20 wide area on each lot. There was previous discussion on the merits of a
Waiver to permit them to go to the middle option recognizing that these are fairly
significantly larger than required by Ordinance and it may be unlikely that there would be
a full build out to 19%. Ms. Friedman asked Ms. Frick how often homes in the Township
are built to the full amount of permitted impervious surface, and Ms. Frick estimated it to
be more than half of the homes in the Township.
Mr. Allan asked how far from the stormwater system could they install a pool etc.
Mr. Majewski stated they would recommend there be a minimum of 10 from any
structure. Ms. Frick stated a fence would have to be 10 from this and the waters edge
would be 10 from the fence. Mr. Allan noted one of the lots on the Plan and stated if
they are facing the road from the street, a pool would have to go on the left hand side.
Mr. Rose stated this would depend on which side they installed the detention facility.
He stated they could structure the stormwater system differently. They could also tie the
front roof drains to a system in the front and the rear roof drains to a system in the rear.
He stated once they know what they can design to, they will do this and then determine
where it would make the most sense contemplating decks, etc. in the future. Ms. Frick
asked to where in the back they would move the detention system. Mr. Koopman stated
once it is determined how large a system they must have, they have indicated they will
then determine where it should be put. Mr. Rose stated the shape shown on the existing
plan is approximately half of what they would be required to provide for full build out.
Mr. Koopman stated the Building Permit and the Plot Plan will have to show this area of
underground storage. He asked if it will be easy to determine that what is under the grass
is the stormwater retention area. Mr. Rose stated he assumes there will be some sort of
Disclosure Statement that would identify this. Mr. Koopman asked if there will be
anything that is visible on the property, and Mr. Rose stated this would not be apparent
looking at the property.
Ms. Harrison asked what the setback from the road is, and Mr. Rose stated it is 80.
Mr. Taylor asked if this detention area can be put in the
setback, and Mr. Majewski stated it can.
Mr. Rose noted there will not be a surface basin. They are proposing an underground system
which is excavated, stone is installed which is surrounded with filter fabric,
and the area is then backfilled on top to grade level. There will not be a depression and it will
just look like yard. Ms. Frick asked if
this requires any maintenance, and Mr. Rose stated it does have an outlet pipe
that allows water to go out to the swale in the street. Ms. Frick asked if this system is used in any
of the surrounding Townships. Mr. Rose stated
they have done them in
Mr. Allan stated he would like to see as much of this in the front yard as possible because
if it is on the side and it fills up, they might impact the adjoining properties.
Ms. Friedman stated this would also allow the purchasers more use of their rear yard.
The Applicant was asked if they could install plantings over the system, and Mr. Rose
stated they could not install trees. They could install small bushes and flowers. Ms. Frick
asked how the homeowners would be advised that trees cannot be put on top of this.
Mr. Rose stated this could go in the Disclosure Statement. Mr. Kiriakidi stated they do
these systems a lot and have never had these questions. He stated any excess water that
does not permeate to the ground would go through a pipe and go out much lower than the
grade of the house. It would not get into the homes. Mr. Allan asked where it will drain,
and Mr. Rose stated it drains to
the swale in
they must have something on the Plan indicating that they cannot have trees over this.
Ms. Harrison stated she is concerned about what will happen with subsequent purchasers.
Mr. Rose stated they could put the shape of the restricted area on the Record Plan.
Mr. Taylor asked if 3% is a reasonable amount for additional impervious surface.
Mr. Majewski stated this is what the Ordinance calls for. The Township prefers not to
have the original builder/owners do the build out to the ultimate. He stated this 3%
would cover a pool and a shed. It would be 983 square feet for these lots. Mr. Rose
stated they would still put a Note on the Plan that if a homeowner were to seek additional
impervious surface, they would have to come to the Township for permission to do this.
Mr. Majewski stated they could also consider asking them to design the seepage beds to
the maximum allowed under the Ordinance which is 16%; and if the homeowner comes
to the Township in the future to add an additional 3% impervious surface, the homeowner
would have to provide additional stormwater management.
Mr. Fazzalore stated whatever they do, they need to control the water. Mr. Majewski
stated there will be a swale along the property line to channel it to the swale in Big Oak
Road. Mr. Allan asked about the run off from these systems. Mr. Rose stated up to a
certain point it will fill up in the system. Once it reaches a certain level, it goes through a
4 diameter pipe. They will extend the outlets so it will go to the swale. They will also
deepen the swale for approximately 500 from the site to the culvert. Mr. Fazzalore
noted this is in an area where they are proposing to build the Rock Run dam.
Mr. Kiriakidi stated they feel they are controlling the water at least 100%. Mr. Rose
stated their calculations show that there will be no increase and under some options they
are proposing there will be a slight decrease. He stated if they build up to 16%, they will
not increase the flow. If they go higher, the homeowners would have to install additional
stormwater systems. Mr. Majewski stated he was in the area during the recent heavy
rains and there was ponding over the road in the area that they have asked the developer
to fix. Mr. Majewski stated the idea is to minimize the impact of the development and
not increase the amount of water. Mr. Rose stated he feels the swale will help the
situation. Mr. Allan asked if they could make the underground pit deeper. Mr. Rose
stated it is possible if they went deeper, there would be water tables that would come up.
Mr. Kiriakidi stated he feels what will help the most is fixing the swale. Mr. Majewski
stated they do have poorly drained soils in this area. They are only counting the storage
between the large stones. Mr. Kiriakidi stated the only water that is supposed to go in the
storage area is the water from the roof drains. Mr. Majewski stated he does not feel
going deeper would help.
Mr. Taylor asked where the water eventually goes, and Mr. Majewski stated there is a
cross pipe that goes across the road and eventually goes to the Rock Run area.
Mr. Taylor asked if they could take this to the detention basin on the corner, and
Mr. Majewski stated this would not work gradewise.
Mr. Koopman stated he assumes there will be no more or less volume of water using this
system than if there was a detention basin, and Mr. Majewski agreed. Mr. Rose stated
they feel because it is such a small project by the time they would have installed a basin,
berms etc, it would not have looked particularly attractive. With their plan, they can get
the same volume, but will have it underground instead of on the surface.
Ms. Friedman asked if they could separate the stormwater system into two areas and get
the same results, and Mr. Rose stated they could. She asked what the homeowners would
be required to do if they wanted to go beyond the 16% impervious surface. Mr. Koopman
stated a Note would have to be put on the Plan limiting the impervious surface to 16%
and state that if they are going to put anything more, they will have to come back to the
Township for approval for additional stormwater management. Ms. Friedman asked
what the stormwater management system would have to be, and Mr. Koopman stated
they would have to determine this at the time of the request and the Township engineer
would have to review their proposal and make a determination whether it can be
approved or not. Ms. Frick asked if the homeowner reading this would recognize that
they would have to go to the Zoning Hearing Board. Mr. Koopman stated he does not
feel this is normally a Zoning Hearing Board issue, and the homeowner would have to
come back either to the Planning Commission/Board of Supervisors and/or in house to
the Township engineer. Mr. Fazzalore stated that while the first homeowners will
comply, he is concerned about second and third owners as they do not read their plans.
Mr. Koopman stated hopefully before someone installs impervious surface, they would
come to the Township to obtain a permit and at that point it would be flagged.
Mr. Kiriakidi stated at 15% or 16% they should be able to install a pool, etc. and
Mr. Majewski stated he does feel they could do something on the property. Ms. Frick
stated she is concerned because the first homeowner will most likely come in with a
request for a circular drive, patio, etc. and the impervious surface will be used up very
quickly. Ms. Harrison stated she feels it may behoove them to make it 19% up front.
She feels it would be better to consider it now than to have to address it down the road.
Mr. Allan stated he is in favor of the underground systems as opposed to a detention
basin and he thanked the Applicant for coming in with this proposal.
Ms. Friedman stated it appears the Planning Commission would be in favor of providing
for 19% impervious surface. She stated they should work with the Township engineer as
to where the system should be located. Mr. Allan suggested that they keep it away from
the adjacent properties as much as possible. Mr. Majewski stated someone from his
office does go out onto the site when the systems are installed to make sure that it is done
Ms. Harrison stated they did previously discuss fencing. Mr. Rose stated they have
proposed fence corners at all four corners so that visually there will be no doubt where
the property lines are located. He stated they would also have a line of trees. They feel
it would be cost prohibitive to provide fencing all along the property. They feel it would
be just as easy for someone to toss something over a split rail fence as it would be for
someone to walk onto the property. Mr. Fazzalore stated they could install a PennDOT
type II fence that they require be installed adjacent to Farmland Preservation properties.
Ms. Harrison stated this will maintain the property line and not disturb the farm. She
stated people do dump onto the farms if they do not have a fence.
Mr. Kiriakidi apologized for his past behavior regarding this matter but stated he is very
much opposed to the fence idea. He stated he does not like the way a fence looks. He
stated if a property owner dumps onto the farm property, the Police should be contacted.
Ms. Friedman suggested that the Planning Commission agree to the corner fences as
proposed by the developer, but request that they install enhanced plantings such as white
pines. Ms. Friedman stated she feels that if you can see your neighbors back yard, you
will not dump onto it as visually you are now connecting yourself to it as opposed to a
fence which they do throw things over and forget about it. Mr. Rose stated they have
proposed white pines already. He stated they are not requesting any waivers on
stormwater management and are agreeing to improving the swale and feel they have been
flexible and helpful. Mr. Rose noted the plantings they have proposed on the Plan and
asked if the Commission feels these are sufficient. Ms. Friedman stated she feels they
should also consider some lower-growing plants. Mr. Rose noted other plants they have
proposed. Ms. Harrison stated she felt that they had heard that the sap from white pines
can negatively impact farm properties. She asked that something else be installed if this
is really a problem.
Ms. Sandy Guzikowski,
for her. She stated if there is not a permanent 6 tall stockade fence, it will not prevent
problems. She stated she gets athletic equipment, cement, stones, etc. and her mowers
then hit this debris which causes damage to her equipment. She stated they have also had
light bulbs and pet waste dumped onto her property. She stated if there is a fence, it
makes a visual separation. Ms. Harrison stated she is concerned that if it is a fence that
you cannot see through, it will be even more of a problem since the people will then
throw things over and not be concerned because they do not have to see it.
Mr. Allan asked the estimated cost of the fencing, and it was estimated to be
approximately $15,000 for a stockade fence. Mr. Kiriakidi stated despite the cost, he
would still not be in favor of it since he does not like the appearance. Mr. Allan asked
about Ms. Guzikowski and the developer splitting the cost of the fence. Ms. Guzikowski
stated she would be open to paying a portion of it, and would also like to be responsible
for the maintenance of it so that the homeowners cannot take it down. Mr. Kiriakidi
stated he would be vehemently opposed to a stockade fence, and Ms. Guzikowski stated
she should only be in favor of a stockade fence. Mr. Allan asked about a board on board
fence, and Mr. Kiriakidi stated he would be opposed to this as well and does not feel the
homeowners would want to see this. There was further discussion on the PennDOT
Type II fence, but most present agreed that this is not an attractive fence. Ms. Harrison
stated she would prefer a split rail fence and if they do not want to do it all the way
around, they could break it up with a cluster of plantings. Mr. Kiriakidi stated he feels
the corner fences and trees would look nice and accomplish what they are looking for
without going to a fence. He noted the corners are not required by Ordinance and they
have agreed to do this. Mr. Allan asked about a row of arborvitaes. Ms. Guzikowski
stated they already have vegetation and the people still cut through. She stated only a
stockade fence will help her situation. She stated they could put the vegetation inside the
fence if they wanted it to look nicer. Ms. Friedman stated they could have a split rail
fence with chicken wire and no plantings and the homeowners could then install the type
of plantings they want to install. Mr. Taylor stated people could still throw debris over
Mr. Allan asked if they are going to come back and show the Planning Commission
where they are going to install the stormwater systems. Mr. Rose stated they were
hoping to get a recommendation prior to meeting with the Board of Supervisors.
Ms. Frick noted the Board of Supervisors is not meeting again until the first week in
Ms. Harrison moved, Mr. Taylor seconded and it was
unanimously carried to recommend to the Board of Supervisors approval of the
1) Compliance with PCS letter dated
2) Compliance with CKS letter dated
3) Stormwater management facility be constructed to handle 19%
maximum impervious surface;
4) Installation of corner split rail fencing proposed by the developer and
plantings as shown on the Plan and enhanced with additional plantings
as approved by the Township engineer and substitution of white pines
with another species. Plantings and location of the seepage beds to be
approved by the Township engineer before going to the Board of
Supervisors. Farmland Disclosure statement to be added to the Plan.
Mr. Kiriakidi asked who will come up with the Disclosure Statement and it was asked
that he prepare this and present it to the Township for review by the Township Solicitor.
Ms. Friedman stated on April 20 from to , they will have a low impact
development seminar at the Township.
There being no further business, Mr. Pazdera moved, Mr. Taylor seconded and it was unanimously carried to adjourn the meeting at
William Taylor, Secretary