PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES –
The regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the
Those present:
Planning Commission: Karen Friedman, Chairman
William Taylor, Secretary
Fred Allan, Member
John Pazdera, Member
Others: Nancy Frick, Director Zoning, Inspection & Planning
Jennifer McGrath, Township Solicitor
James Majewski, Township Engineer
Drew Wagner, Township Engineer
Absent: Cynthia Harrison, Planning Commission Vice Chair
Frank Fazzalore, Supervisor Liaison
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Mr. Taylor moved, Mr. Pazdera seconded and it was unanimously
carried to approve the Minutes of
#563 – RAWLINS, RAYMOND & LINDA – APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY/FINAL PLAN
Mr. Edward Murphy, attorney, was present and stated this is a Lot Line Change for
Mr. and Mrs. Rawlins who are present this evening. Mr. Murphy stated they have owned
two lots at the corner of West
Ferry and
They currently reside on
proposing to relocate the westerly
most lot line on
approximately 19 feet from the edge of the corner of the Rollins’ home. The lot line is
proposed to be moved 65 feet to the west which increases the lot size somewhat and will
decrease the lot size on
provide a greater side yard for
would like to preserve on
to the intersection of West Ferry
and
creating any new lots.
Mr. Murphy noted the PCS review letter dated
and #2. Item #3 relates to the easements, and to the best of their knowledge there are
none. Item #4 was noted, and Mr. Murphy stated he feels all the trees have been
identified. Mr. Majewski stated SALDO requires that they indicate the species of the
trees. Mr. Murphy stated they would request a Waiver on the species issue because of
the time of the year. Mr. Majewski asked if they will save the
trees on
Mr. Murphy stated they would address this as part of the Building Permit review in the
future if a Building Permit is ever submitted. They would ask that this be deferred and
would agree to having such a Note on the Plan. They will comply with Item #5. Item #6
was noted which talks about the access to the street of the lowest hierarchy dealing with
once a Building Permit is submitted and will be subject to Township review at that time.
Item #7 was noted and Mr. Murphy stated they do not propose any curbing or widening.
A Waiver is requested. Item #8 was noted, and Mr. Murphy stated he does not feel
anything would be appropriate at this time as it is only a lot line change. He stated
sidewalks already exist on West
Ferry but none exist on
He does not feel a Waiver is required. They will comply with Item #9. With regard to
Items #10, #11, and #12, to the extent that anything is applicable, they would comply.
He stated he does not feel Item #12 applies since no new lots are being requested.
Mr. Allan noted the number of trees on the corner, and Mr. Murphy showed these on the
existing features plan.
Ms. Frick stated much of this will come up again if they come in for a Building Permit
for
There was no public comment.
Mr. Allan moved, Mr. Taylor seconded and it was unanimously carried to recommend to
the Board of Supervisors approval of the Lot Line change as submitted subject to the PCS
letter dated
#549 – FIELDSTONE AT
Mr. Michael Stadulis, Mr. Michael Macaninch, attorney, and Mr. John Hako, engineer
were present. Mr. Macaninch stated they received the PCS
review letter dated
He stated that in the interim Mr. Hako and Mr. Stadulis have met with the Township
engineer. There are a few items they would like to discuss this evening to get feedback
from the Planning Commission.
A Plan was shown showing minimum improvements to
pavement taper. Mr. Hako stated they met with Mr. Majewski and discussed some
modifications to the access site. They were able to create a 40’ decel lane to get a car off
the road. He stated there are no drainage problems in the area, and they are reducing
stormwater run off to the roadway. Mr. Hako stated they are not widening the entire
length because of the existing bridge 500’ east of the site entrances. They feel by not
widening it will have the effect of providing traffic calming. He stated their access drive
will be pulled off somewhat from the roadway. They did move the access over by one lot
for sight distance reasons. Mr. Majewski stated this is now at the
Mr. Allan asked if this is where the fruit stand was previously located, and a
representative of the Harris family stated it was in this location and showed this on the
Plan. Mr. Allan stated he agrees that this is the best place to put the entrance.
Mr. Allan stated he feels the turning lane needs to be brought up more toward the left and
the Applicant agreed to do this. Mr. Allan stated he would lengthen it on the other side
and well, and the Applicant agreed. Mr. Hako noted the existing telephone pole but
stated they could still lengthen this somewhat without impacting the telephone pole.
Mr. Hako stated this could be approximately 60’ and then taper it back to the telephone
pole.
Mr. Macaninch stated they also need to discuss Long Acre Lane. He stated there was
discussion about narrowing it as you go to the culvert to help reduce speed. Mr. Allan
noted the possibility of speed humps on the road. Mr. Stadulis stated they have heard that
this could impact liquid fuels but they would agree to look into this. Mr. Majewski stated
there are guidelines on this. He stated he will check, into this with PennDOT.
Mr. Stadulis stated possibly they could do this at the time of the final pavement.
Ms. Friedman asked how this would impact snow removal. Mr. Majewski stated this is a
concern and it would have to be signed on either side that there is a speed hump.
Mr. Taylor asked the speed limit on this road, and Mr. Macaninch stated it would be 25
miles per hour.
Mr. Stadulis stated they have to proceed with the Application through DEP and one of the
things they will be piggybacking on that discussion is what type of culvert they will have
and how wide it will be. They would like to know if they can go to the Board of
Supervisors to get this issue resolved. Mr. Hako stated the proposed cartway is 36’ and
they were showing narrowing to 26’ with a 5 foot taper on either side. Mr. Stadulis
stated there are no lots on either side in this area and no parking. Mr. Allan stated he
would like them to narrow the road and install a speed hump. Mr. Allan stated he would
like to have the Fire Department comment on narrowing the road to 26’. Mr. Stadulis
stated he would agree to do this. He stated the Plan was shown at 36’ wide and at the
direction of the consultant they are trying to show traffic calming measures.
March 14, 2005 Planning Commission – page 4 of 7
Ms. Friedman stated she would agree that the Planning Commission feels it would be
advisable to narrow the road to provide traffic calming subject to approval by the Fire
Department to determine the appropriate width. This will help preserve more of the
stream line and result in a smaller culvert. They should also investigate the installation of
a speed hump. Mr. Wagner stated he feels the outrigger would be the only piece of fire
equipment that could present a problem and since there are no houses in this area, he does
not feel this should be a problem.
Mr. Macaninch noted the stormwater management issue, noting that Mr. Majewski
recommended installation of additional inlets as shown on the plan by Mr. Hako.
Mr. Hako stated they feel the design on the Plan does meet the Ordinance requirements.
Mr. Macaninch stated they would agree to put the additional inlets in but when the
Ordinance nets out easements for lot areas, they do not want to lose lot area so that it
impacts lot yield. Mr. Majewski stated this is a Zoning requirement. Mr. Stadulis stated
historically this is never something that the Ordinance has required. He stated it was
specifically to net out large utilities, etc. He noted specifically the Farmview and Loberg
plans and stated area was never netted out for storm or sewer inlets. Mr. Majewski stated
it does state “excluding areas for pipelines.” Mr. Hako stated this will involve nine lots.
Mr. Taylor asked how the stormwater gets to the basin, and Mr. Hako showed on the plan
how it is collected and than piped to the basin. Mr. Stadulis stated they feel the Plan is
consistent with the drainage guidelines. Mr. Hako stated this will be an 18” pipe at the
minimum depth approximately four feet below surface. The possibility of a Waiver was
discussed. Ms. Friedman stated she would not want to compromise the usability of the
back yard and this would make it drier. Ms. Frick stated in the alternative, it would also
limit the property owner’s use of the rear yard because there would be an easement in
those locations.
Mr. Allan asked the kind of inlets they are using, and Mr. Stadulis stated they would be
the large metal ones. He stated he would like to have the flexibility of working with the
Township engineer on this. Mr. Hako stated they would have to put three in the yards
and one in the street to make the connection. This would take ten feet minimum off the
back of the yards because they are using 18” pipe. Mr. Hako stated the cross slopes in
the yards are approximately 4%. Mr. Stadulis stated the area of the farmhouse is not flat
going out to the stream. Mr. Hako stated they could swale it without the inlets.
Mr. Stadulis stated they would have to make sure that the swale is not obstructed so that
it would work properly.
Mr. Allan noted what they are doing in
approach. Mr. Wagner noted they are doing seepage pits, etc., but there is a maintenance
issue, and these would be on private property. Mr. Wagner stated he feels it is better not
to have to correct drainage problems in the future, although he does recognize the
problems Ms. Frick will have with people not being able to place anything in the
easement. Mr. Hako stated typically when there are problems with wet rear yards it is
March 14, 2005 Planning Commission – page 5 of 7
because there is a minimum slope and they here they have a sufficient slope to provide
positive drainage. He noted an area where they will have swales to take the water to the
road. Mr. Majewski
stated possibly they could move the
further toward the property line and further away from the house before it starts breaking
around. Mr. Hako stated they could go to a 6 ½% driveway.
Ms. Friedman stated where the rear property line is they could possibly have a 4’ natural
planted area. Mr. Majewski stated they could put up a slight berm so that the water can
soak in before it goes to the lower lots. Mr. Allan stated he feels the best solution is to
install the inlets and the residents will have to live with smaller back yards. Mr. Stadulis
stated they would agree to work this out with Mr. Majewski. He asked if the easement in
the definition includes storm sewer easements which will have to be netted out.
Mr. Macaninch stated if they get to 20’, they would only need a Waiver. Mr. Majewski
stated he feels 20’ is sufficient room to work in this area for this depth of pipe. Ms. Frick
stated they need to put a Note on the Plan that indicates that nothing can be placed in
the easement.
Mr. Macaninch noted the comment in the PCS letter regarding the timing of the clean up.
Mr. Stadulis stated the cover letter indicates that the clean up of the landfill will occur
before approval is granted, and this is not what is proposed. Mr. Stadulis stated they
would like to get approval for the Plan, and the clean up would happen just like anything
else on the site as far as earth moving, etc. The first thing would be the landfill
remediation work. He stated they should not be expected to do the clean up without
having approval of the Plan and vesting on what they can do on the site. Mr. Allan stated
they do not want any construction until the site is cleaned up. Ms. Friedman stated there
should be no construction until the site passes inspection. Ms. Stadulis agreed.
This matter will go before the Board of Supervisors for their input before the Applicant
comes back to the Planning Commission with revised plans. Mr. Macaninch asked if
they could come back for Preliminary/Final Approval, and Ms. Frick stated they do not
do this on Major Subdivisions. Mr. Macaninch agreed to go through the process.
#532A – FLOWERS-MADANY TRACT PRELIMINARY PLAN DISCUSSION
Mr. David Shafkowitz and Mr. Chuck France, engineer, were present. Mr. Shafkowitz
stated they were asked to obtain the Zoning Hearing Board relief needed, and this was
obtained. They were
also to look into the access to
they previously discussed access alternatives, and the Planning Commission had
recommended one of the alternatives but asked that they go
to
their input. Mr.
Shafkowitz stated they did go to
Commission asked that they meet with the neighbors and resolve this issue with them.
They did meet with the neighbors in the area, some of whom are present this evening.
March 14, 2005 Planning Commission – page 6 of 7
Most of these are
proposes a relocation of
a new location. Parcel D was noted which will be conveyed to Mr. and Mrs. Majewski.
They will have their driveway extended to take access to the new road. They will also
extend water and sewer to that property. They were also able to retain the tree buffer
along the frontage and create a new lot in
with Ms. English and they will provide a sewer lateral to her property as well as
additional landscaping along the property of the new homes.
Mr. Shafkowitz stated
cartway. They are trying to narrow this down as they get to the curve as a traffic calming
measure and to blend it back to the rural character of the road. They went back to the
Newtown Township Planning Commission and they indicated that they were in favor of
their plans. They have to engineer it and go back for approval.
Mr. Shafkowitz noted Parcel E which is open space proposed to be maintained by the
Homeowners’ Association. He stated it is in a natural state and should not be difficult to
maintain.
Ms. Friedman asked about road maintenance, snow removal, etc. and Mr. Shafkowitz
stated this will need an Inter-Municipal Agreement.
Mr. Majewski stated they will need Zoning relief from
Mr. Shafkowitz stated they would like to pursue a phased project. They are asking the
Planning Commission to consider Preliminary approval for the entire Subdivision and
Final approval for Section I based on the issues in the PCS review letter. They would
then proceed to prepare a record plan showing the twenty-two
lots in
Township. He stated they can draw a line at the boundary of the cul-de-sac. He added
that Mr. Majewski suggested that they put the open space and the basin in Phase I. Once
they get approval from
approval of Phase 2 and proceed with that.
Ms. Frick stated she understood that they were going to ask for phasing and then come
back with a Preliminary Plan showing it in this way. She stated she does not have any
Preliminary Plan to act on showing what they are now proposing. Mr. Majewski stated
he felt they were going to re-submit a new set of plans showing a future Phase 2.
Ms. Friedman stated she is not comfortable approving the entire Plan with the one section
not well developed from an engineering standpoint as there may be changes which will
occur. She noted they do not have a problem with Phasing. Ms. Frick stated they never
approve a Preliminary Plan without having a fully-engineered set of Plans.
Mr. Shafkowitz stated the only difference is the sheet they are showing the Planning
March 14, 2005 Planning Commission – page 7 of 7
Commission this evening. Mr. Allan suggested that they get that sheet done
and come back in two weeks. Mr. Majewski stated they should have a Plan with a
section line drawn, and Mr. Shafkowitz agreed. Mr. Majewski stated if they want Plan
approval for Section I and Section II they do have to have the new proposal shown on the
Plan. Ms. Friedman stated she feels they will only be able to give Preliminary approval
for Section I since there are still outstanding issues on Section II.
There was no public comment.
OTHER BUSINESS
Ms. Friedman stated the EAC heard a presentation from Mr. Majewski on low impact
stormwater management. The EAC is also having a seminar regarding stormwater
management on April 20 from 7:00 P.M. to 9:30 P.M. and she stated she hopes the
Planning Commission members will attend. She stated there will be a speaker coming
from
EAC, Byron Roth, has
been called to serve in
Neely will be the Acting Chair during his absence.
There being no further business, Mr. Pazdera moved, Mr. Taylor seconded and it was unanimously carried to adjourn the meeting at 8:50 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
William Taylor, Secretary