| Home |
|
| Board of Supervisors |
|
| Planning Commission |
|
| Township History |
|
| Roads Department |
|
| Planning Commission Agenda |
|
| Announcements and Public Notices |
|
|
| Township Newsletter |
| Township Facts |
|
| Other Resources |
|
| Forms |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MINUTES
OF NOCKAMIXON TOWNSHIP
ROLL CALL: Members Present: Attendees: Phyllis Hamilton , Chair Members Absent: Township Engineer:
OPEN MEETING: Chair Phyllis Hamilton opened the July 5, 2005 Planning Commission Meeting with a salute to the flag at 7:30 PM . APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Chair P. Hamilton tabled the minutes of the June 7, 2005 Planning Commission. SUBDIVISIONS: There were no subdivisions. LAND DEVELOPMENT: Gartner Land Development TMP# 30-11-97 Evan Pellegrino, engineer, presented the land development to the Planners. Steve Parsons from Ruff-Hall attended for the applicant. Mr. Pellegrino gave a background of the site. The 60’x120’ storage building is proposed for the rear of the property located at Route 611 and Tabor Road . The Planners reviewed the Wynn Associates letter of June 29, 2005. 1. More Information Required: The applicant does not believe that they are contractor services (use G-4) as explained in the Ordinance. At this time no determination has been made as to what will be stored in the proposed building. The Zoning Officer has requested additional information in order to make a determination. 2. To be determined: Buffer yards will be based on the use of the property. 3. Will Comply: Wetlands delineation report to be submitted for review. 4. Will Clear Up: EAC comments will be forthcoming. The initial Pa. Natural Diversity Inventory Search (PNDI) indicated one potential conflict with an “ecological resource of special concern” on the site. Applicant will verify existence or nonexistence of ecological resource. 5. To Be Determined: Item #1 and #2 will determine which waivers will be accepted. S. Baluh recommended that the roadside swale along Tabor Road be regraded with slope sides for easy maintenance. 6. Will Comply: Narrative summary of proposed development to be submitted. 7. Will Comply: Plan should clearly identify if the existing stone entrance and parking areas are to be paved. 8A. Requesting Waiver: Stormwater management should be provided for the entire site even though there are existing buildings. An underground stormwater system is proposed within the parking area to the front of the proposed storage building. Items #1 and #2 will dictate. 8B. Will Discuss: After Wetlands report (feasibility study) is received will revisit. Applicant will discuss with Steve. 8C. & 8D. Will Comply: All construction and backfill details will be included on the plan. 8E. Will Satisfy Neighbor: The adjoining property owner has concerns with regard to the drainage. 10. Will Comply: Revised plan to be submitted to the BCCD for approval. 11. No Water Use: No additional sewage disposal is required. The applicant has no plans for using water in this building 12. Will Comply: Area within the ultimate right-of-way of Tabor Road to be dedicated to the Township. 13. Will Comply: Installation of Stop sign on premises 14. Will Comply: Remove Township engineer certification block from record plan. 15. Will Comply: Execute a Development/Financial Security Agreement with the Township. The applicant will supply additional information to the Zoning Officer. The Planners made no decision on the Land Development at this time. The applicant cannot move forward until all items are addressed. Toni Jesilowski, a resident at 8211 Easton Road , presented a list of concerns with regard to the proposed Gartner Group Land Development including lighting, standing water, hours of operation and berms. NEW BUSINESS:Appointment of Planning Commission Member to the Recreation Plan Steering Committee A motion was made by P. Hamilton, seconded by M. Kulp, to appoint R. Balbirer to the Recreation Plan Steering Committee. The motion carried 4-0-0. He will attend the Rec Board meetings on the second Tuesday of the Month while they are compiling a new Recreation Plan. Proposed Amendment to Zoning Ordinance Recovery of Subsurface Oil and Gas Deposits B.C.P.C. – Gas and Oil Lease Zoning Amendment Review – May 4, 2005 Steve Baluh commented that this proposed amendment had been before the Planners in April. He spoke with T.J. Walsh, the Township Solicitor, with regard to his research findings and how it relates to the existing gas and oil well permit requirements in Chapter 146 of the code. The Township has the most power in regulating oil/gas well drilling through a Zoning Ordinance requirement, not a stand-alone permit. He would like to have permit requirements referenced in the Zoning requirements to assure that the state would allow enforcement by the Township. The proposed ordinance is needed whether or not the Township desires to restrict the districts in which an oil/gas well is permitted. If the Township decided there should not be a restriction, that section of this ordinance can be removed. T.J. believes that some form of this ordinance should be enacted to cover the Township. Steve explained the two questions: 1. does the PC agree with restricting wells in certain zoning districts and 2. are there any other general issues in the Ordinance referencing permits that are of any particular concern? R. Balbirer questioned if this ordinance exceeds state and federal regulations for drilling. S. Baluh could not answer that question. He does not believe that it conflicts, but exceeds the regulations by providing information that the State and Federal Government does not address. M. Kulp asked is there any conflict with state and federal government guidelines. The only concern seems to be where wells would be drilled. The Township can choose. C. Bahnck doesn’t understand why it should be restricted to the Quarry and Industrial Zones. There are State Game Lands and other large tracts where the impact would be appropriate. A. Balogh asked that all the questions raised by the residents are addressed before a decision is made. Residents had questions regarding townships Arbor Resources have dealt with in other areas of the country. P. Hamilton requested that information regarding oil drilling issues should be brought to the Municipal office for distribution to the Planners and Supervisors. Steve cautioned the planners not to enact a regulation that would only affect one company and should not wait until Arbor produces their information. They could submit an application under current regulations. Township should not wait too long before updating the Ordinance. Cannot restrict drilling from the State Game Lands, but from a district such as Open Space Management where the lands are located. A. Balogh commented about daily inspections at the drilling site that are included in the ordinance. It was noted that the Township does not have the personnel to make these site visits. The secretary was directed to contact T.J. and send a letter to Arbor Resources. The planners tabled until the August Planning meeting.
Proposed Amendment to Nockamixon Twp. Zoning Ordinance Rezoning of Properties from VC, Village Center , To R, Residential – Revere Village S. Baluh commented that this proposed amendment was written by T.J. Walsh at the request of the Supervisors based upon the rezoning of the Revere Village Center (VC) District. The proposed amendment to reduce the size of the VC district in Revere Village and rezone to Residential was recommended by the Bucks County Planning Commission at the Comprehensive Plan Meeting. There will be a reduction of all the VC districts throughout the Township including Bucksville, Ferndale , and Kintnersville. The discussion continued with residents requesting more information about how and when property owners will be notified. S. Baluh gave a short explanation of the timetable. M. Kulp explained what the rezoning will mean with regard to the density/placement of cluster housing and the areas it will be allowed. Joan Comly wanted to know what, if any difference would be forthcoming as far as a reduction of property taxes. H. Nast commented that the only time taxes change is when the County does a reassessment, not when changing the zoning district. E. Gawronski added that her property, in the Residential District, went from one acre to two acres and she has seen no reduction in her taxes. A motion was made by R. Balbirer, seconded by C. Bahnck, to table the proposed amendment for rezoning of properties from Village Center to Residential in the Revere Village . The motion carried 4-0-0. The planners encouraged residents to attend the Comprehensive Plan Meeting on the third Wednesday of the Month.
OLD BUSINESS: There was no old business
SKETCH PLAN:Theodore Zajac, III – 4 Lot SD TMP# 30-4-109 Dennis Litzenberger, Land Surveyor, represented the applicant Dr. Ted Zajac. The property is located in the Village Center (VC) District which requires one acre building lots. The sketch plan illustrates a four-lot subdivision on ten and one-half acres located on Lookover Lane , which provides access to this property. One of the proposed lots will be accessed from Fairhill Road . Soil testing is favorable for on-lot sewage disposal systems, one within the building envelop and one outside the building envelop. Lot #4 has an existing house, barn and driveway. Access to Lot #2 and Lot #3 would be from Lookover Lane and road improvements, an extension of Lookover Lane , would be necessary. S. Baluh commented that there may be a problem with the layout of Lots #1 and #4. The VC district requires lot frontage of 175’ which is not provided for those lots where they are located. A bulb/turnaround should be added to the extended roadway in order to be accepted for State liquid fuels funding. This might bring Lot #1 into compliance. Lot #4 has a different issue, but by adding a standard cul-de-sac and extending Fairhill Road to Township specs and adding a driveway, it may be acceptable for lot frontage and meet zoning requirements. It was suggested by R. Balbirer perhaps the roadways could meet behind the existing homes and made into a square block. A more in-depth review will be needed with regard to wetlands and the topography of the land. When questioned by Steve regarding the type of sewage systems to be installed, D. Litzenberger commented that they perked for drip and sand mounds. The BCDH will have to make a determination as to the type of alternate systems for the lots. R. Balbirer questioned the number of houses that are permitted along a cul-de-sac. S. Baluh commented that the Ordinance allows no more than 15 houses. Other issues discussed were stormwater runoff, drainage and traffic problems at the intersection of Fairhill and Rte 611. Drain pipe may be necessary for Fairhill Road .
PUBLIC COMMENT: H. Nast spoke with PennDOT and they will be reopening Rte 32 from Rte 611 in Kintnersville, southbound only. The official detour will be 611 South to 313 East to Gardenville to Point Pleasant Pike. CORRESPONDENCE: A. Rakowsky Subdivision – 120-day extension letter – June 8, 2005 B. Palisades High School – PennDOT HOP – June 23, 2005 C. DelVal – Water Res. Imp. Study Prop. Tabor Rd Tract – June 14, 2005 (2) D. Wynn Assoc. – Quarry Permit Renewal – June 24, 2005 E. Wynn Assoc. Sub/Land Development Plan Status – June 29, 2005 A motion was made by R. Balbirer, seconded by C. Bahnck, to extend the Rakowsky Subdivision (Land Development) for 120-days. The motion carried 4-0-0. Steve Baluh commented on the plan status of the Harold Subdivision which does not have Planning Module approval. An extension will be required. A motion was made by R. Balbirer, seconded by C. Bahnck, to request an extension letter, or receive the Planning Module approval for the Harold Subdivision, prior to the Board of Supervisors meeting of July 19, 2005. The motion carried 4-0-0.
S. Donovan wanted to know if the Planning Commission will be revising Act 537, the Wastewater Facilities Plan, in the near future. S. Baluh commented, if a plan is revised, that public sewers will have to be addressed, but not necessarily recommended. He does not believe that updating would make the Township more vulnerable than it may be today. Grants are available from the State, along with applications and direction for the process. M. Kulp commented that there is a legal requirement that it is the municipality’s responsibility to prepare. He noted that Montgomery County only received $9,000 to renew Act 537 for the entire county. The Planners commented that renewing this Act may be the direction to take rather than revising.
ADJOURNMENT: A motion was made by R. Balbirer, seconded by M. Kulp, to adjourn the Planning Commission meeting at 9:20 PM . The motion carried 4-0-0.
Respectfully submitted,
Arlene Eichlin Recording Secretary
|
