ROLL CALL:

Members Present:
Phyllis Hamilton , Chair
Anne Lyons
Carl Bahnck
David Haubert

Attendees:
Supervisors
H. Gawronski
K. Gross
B. Keyser
A. Santopietro

Members Absent:
Bill Sadow, Vice-Chair
Robert Balbirer
Mark Kulp

Township Engineer:
Steve Baluh

OPEN MEETING:

Chair Phyllis Hamilton opened the May 3, 2005 Planning Commission Meeting with a salute to the flag at 7:35 PM .

APPROVAL OF MINUTES:

A motion was made by A. Lyons, seconded by C. Bahnck, to approve the minutes of the April 5, 2005 meeting as presented. The motion carried 4-0-0.

REQUEST TO BE ON AGENDA:

Arbor Resources – Terry Goodell
Oil/Gas Leases Presentation

Arbor Resource representatives Terry Goodell, Project Manager, Dave Schriml, Petroleum Landsman, and A.H. Walton gave a presentation to the Planners and residents. Mr. Goodell brought a map showing 118 properties that have been contracted for gas leases, approximately 2000 acres. He also gave a short history of Arbor Resources. They are here because they feel there is a natural gas source in this area that is worth quite a bit of money. Mr. Walton explained the geology of the area and why it may contain gas deposits. The size of a drilling parcel, environmental concerns including the size of a wellhead, and the water used in this drilling process were discussed. When questioned about where water will be obtained for the drilling process, Mr. Goodell commented that the County will be contacted and water may be trucked into the site from Lake Nockamixon . They do not normally drill water wells on site. S. Tenney wanted to know the timeline for obtaining all the paperwork for the drilling of the first well. The date could be sometime this summer. It would be approximately 90-120 days from the completion of leases, the testing for gas wells, State hearings, to the start of drilling. Noise may also be a problem. Mr. Goodell did not know the decibel levels of the gas drilling rigs. A. Balogh wanted to know what they would do, the type of equipment used and the amount of time to clear land surrounding the wellhead. A pipeline will be built from each well to the processing plant to assure the quality of the product. Several local residents requested the name of residents in other areas of the country who have wells near their homes. D. Shriml commented there are state requirements that need to be complied with before starting to drill. Robert Hansen commented about clearing the land for a pipeline and how much time is needed. It was noted that a pipeline can be installed near existing pipe or power line easements. When questioned about the royalty structure for each person who signs a lease it was noted that is dependant upon what the well produces. Can the Township tax the revenues of a gas well? Mr. Goodell has paperwork to lease Township property. T. Stone asked if Arbor Resources had read the Township zoning ordinances. The Secretary will send a copy of the ordinances to Mr. Goodell. Additional information about this company is on Pennsylvania ’s website.

CONDITIONAL USE: Glenn Neebe/Harrow Station
TMP# 30-11-29
Wynn Associates Review Letter of April 14, 2005

Mr. John VanLuvanee, an attorney from Eastburn and Gray, presented the Conditional Use Application for the Glenn Neebe/Harrow Station commercial development at Route 611/412. A proposed gasoline facility had been shown on the Final Approved Plan and under the provision of Township Ordinance #112 there are regulations for a gasoline storage tank (Use H10 – Regulated Storage Tank). The only reason they are at this meeting is to apply for and obtain a Conditional Use. Experts were present to answer any technical questions. Ultimately a legal explanation will be required from the Township Solicitor advising the Board if this tank complies with Ordinance #112.A copy of Section 37 PA Code of the State Regulations governing fuel storage tanks as it relates to both commercial and non-retail facilities was provided. A tank requires a permit since there are regulations to govern these facilities. He pointed out the following items: Section 14.2 addresses the physical requirements for a vault and Section 14.2(p) explaining that a steel tank installed in a vault has to be a tank approved for above ground use. P. Hamilton requested the explanation of a vault and what is required. Mike Grapsy, PE from Rotondo Pre-cast explained that a vault is a large concrete structure that is buried in the ground to house the steel tank containing fuel. It provides a secondary containment should there be a rupture in the steel tank and a means of egress and entrance into the vault for inspections and routine maintenance. The state code requires that vaults for retail distribution must be constructed below grade. The Ordinance deals with above ground steel tanks, but the tank goes in the vault which has to be below the surface of the ground. A Conditional Use Hearing is scheduled for May 19, 2005 . The Planners were concerned with several issues including that the vault would be buried, not the tanks; that the top of the vault would be at ground level and how blasting at the quarry would impact the tanks. State standards require that vaults are wind, earthquake and blast resistant. Seismic readings have been taken on Harrow Station property and were below permitted parameters. Steve Baluh gave some background concerning the original Harrow Station Development which was approved with conditions, but never finalized. A note on the plan acknowledged that the service station was included but would not be constructed unless it met all current regulations. Concerns were raised by residents and the Township with regard to the watercourse. This ordinance establishes boundaries for the watercourse and if you are within 1,000’, which the proposed service station is, it requires the installation of an above ground tank instead of the typical underground tank. That particular requirement may be conflicting with State regulations. However it does allow gas station construction in other areas where underground tanks could be installed. Peter Bent, Township Zoning Officer, offered comments about the Storage Tank Ordinance and that the Planners cannot vary the ordinance. The solution would be a variance, if it is determined that the ordinance causes a hardship. Other concerns by residents were with regard to the overall length of the quarry and the extraction zone. Setbacks would prevent the quarry from coming close to the service station. An audience member questioned how often the vault is monitored – this is done 24-7, 365 days a year for liquids, fuel or water vapor and includes all lines from the tank to the dispensers. If air pressure should be lost, or if the vault cracks and liquid is present it shuts the system down. A. Balogh wantedto know who would be responsible for monitoring the system. The company installing it, Keystone Petroleum Equip. Ltd. has an automatic, self sufficient system with sensors that constantly monitor. Ultronics of Bethlehem will make the necessary phone calls should the system be no longer up and running. If any problems arise with the lines taking product from the tank, the pump will be turned off. A monthly report is required by PADEP, but a system report can be run up to a year. Should a catastrophic leak occur than a hazmat team and/or fire department would be deployed.

H. Gawronski wanted to know if a ceramic coating is applied – a ceramic fuel resistant coating is on the outside to prevent the water from seeping into the vault. A. Lyons commented that if the tank held in the vault is below grade then a variance will be required by the Zoning Hearing Board. Mr. VanLuvanee indicated if you interpret the ordinance that way then no retail gasoline facility can ever be installed within 1000’ of the creek. It may be a problem that is resolvable. The Ordinance should not conflict with a State Regulation or a competing rule. If it is in conflict with State regulations then the Board of Supervisors (BOS) should take a look at it. It’s too late for this application, has to be taken as it applies. The planners should recommend the issues to the BOS so that they can review.

S. Baluh commented that the Planners, when making a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors, should consider the issues of access to the property, public safety and is it the appropriate location. They are valid recommendations to make but this isn’t only a definition question there is the overriding Conditional Use for the service station (storage tanks). There is a legal issue which should be addressed by the Township Solicitor. After hearing the comments from the companies involved with the storage tank including installation and maintenance, the Planners were in favor of this type of vault and storage tank. They suggested that input would be needed from the Township Solicitor with regard to any legal issues concerning Ordinance #112. In addition the Planners commented that the applicant might want to request a variance. A motion was made by A. Lyons, seconded by D. Haubert, to recommend to the Board of Supervisors that the proposed gasoline tank vault be installed. That they explore a variance to the Ordinance that would permit installation at grade and the installation below grade as it pertains to Ordinance #112. The Planners recognize that Terry Clemons input is still required. The motion carried 4-0-0.

SUBDIVISIONS: None

LAND DEVELOPMENT:None

NEW BUSINESS: There was no new business

OLD BUSINESS: Palisades School District
TMP# 30-4-71
Route 412/Church Hill Road Improvement

Steve Baluh updated the Planners that the Board of Supervisors acted on the land development, conditional use for the Cybersonics Team building. The building was approved with the condition they would not issue a building permit until the PennDOT permit has been issued for road improvements. Additional correspondence has been received from the School District confirming they have awarded a contract for the roadwork and other on-site paving in anticipation of the PennDot permit.

SKETCH PLAN: There were no sketch plans.

PUBLIC COMMENT:

-T. Stone brought the stormwater problems in Kintner Ridge to the attention of the Planners. He wanted to know if the applicant brought a request for a design change to the stormwater basin at Kintner Ridge. Steve Baluh commented that within the easement for the basin, they are not permitted to build a retaining wall by Township Ordinance. Preemptively Steve Baluh is advising the builder of that regulation. If the change is not substantial than it is handled in-house, if it concerns an Ordinance regulation, it would then go before the Board of Supervisors for a revision. T. Stone also commented about the work being done on Ealer Hill concerning stormwater drainage. It was suggested he attend a Board meeting.

-J. Souderberg wanted the definition of the McArdle Subdivision Extension letter.

CORRESPONDENCE:

A. J. Souderberg – McArdle Subdivisions – April 8, 2005

B. BCPC – Rakowsky Land Development Letter – April 8, 2005

C. Schlosser & Clauss – Park View Estates Extension Letter – April 11, 2005

D. Wynn – Randy Giovino Subdivision Letter – April 11, 2005

E. Intex Env. Group, Inc. – Arbor Resources – April 11, 2005

F. BCPC – Rakowsky Land Development Letter – April 8, 2005

G. PADEP – State Water Plan and Act 220 – April 11, 2005

H. Altner – McArdle Subdivision – April 20, 2005

I. McArdle 5-Lot Sub. – Extension Letter – April 27, 2005

J. McArdle 2-Lot Sub. – Extension Letter – April 27, 2005

K. P. Hydro – Park View Estates, Foellner & Fink Review Letter-March 15, 2005

L. EAC – Sal Lapio Sub. Review Letter – April 25, 2005

M. Wynn/Subdivision and Land Development Plan Status – April 28, 2005

With regard to the Wynn letter of April 28, 2005 , Steve Baluh commented that there are three sites that will require extension letters: Harold Subdivision, original Lake Warren Partnerships/Tabor Road and Moyer Subdivision. He recommends that these projects be denied unless an extension is granted by the applicants before their deadlines. It was the consensus of the Planners that these be denied if correspondence is not received by the May 19, 2005 Board of Supervisors meeting.

ADJOURNMENT:

A motion was made by C. Bahnck, seconded by D. Haubert, to adjourn the Planning Commission meeting at 10:15 PM . The motion carried 4-0-0.

Respectfully submitted,

Arlene Eichlin

Recording Secretary