|
NOCKAMIXON TOWNSHIP PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
November 8, 2006
ROLL CALL:
Members Present: Attendees:
Bill Sadow, Chair Supervisors
David Haubert, Vice-Chair B. Keyser
Albert Santopietro N. Janyszeski
Carl Bahnck
Robert Balbirer Township Engineer:
Thomas Keebler S. Baluh
Members Absent:
Mark Kulp
OPEN MEETING:
Chair B. Sadow opened the November 8, 2006 Planning Commission with a salute to the flag at 7:35 PM.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
A motion was made by R. Balbirer, seconded by A. Santopietro, to approve the minutes of the October 3, 2006 minutes as presented. The motion carried 5-0-1, with C. Bahnck abstaining. He did not attend the meeting.
SUBDIVISIONS: Benedict Subdivision Preliminary Plan (3-Lot – Major)
TMP# 30-11-1 – 2519 Church Lane
US Fish & Wildlife Report – Rec’d 11/1/06
Residential/Agricultural Zoning
Wynn Review Letter of 11/01/06
D. Litzenberger, PLS, presented the plan. The applicants, Joyce and Matt Benedict were also in attendance. D. Litzenberger commented that this is a plan that was before the Township four years ago for a lot-line adjustment. M. Benedict constructed four-year fill sites for septic systems. There is an existing dwelling on Lot #2 with a sand mound for sewage disposal. The preliminary plan for consideration is a 3-lot subdivision on a 9.7 acre parcel. D. Litzenberger and the Planners reviewed the Wynn Assoc letter of November 1, 2006
#1 Will Comply: There were no wetlands shown on the property. Site specific information should be submitted based on the Doylestown soil mapped on the property.
#2 Waiver Request: If the Township determines that waivers are acceptable, a fee in-lieu-of $3,000.00 per new lot would be required.
#3 Will Comply: A note on the plan indicates that the proposed lots are restricted from future subdivision. This paperwork should meet all Township requirements.
#4 Will Comply: The driveway within the ultimate right-of-way to be paved in accordance with the Subdivision Ordinance, and should be included with the plan.
#5: Comments should be received from P-Hydro and EAC.
#6 Will Comply: S. Baluh would like to meet with D. Litzenberger and M. Hintenlang, P.E., to discuss alternate stormwater management facilities/design due to the large size of the detention basin on Lot #1. The Stormwater Management Report must be revised to include a Feasibility Study Analysis for use of infiltration type stormwater BMP’s.
#7 Will Comply: Awaiting B.C. Conservation District approval.
#8 Will Comply: Applicant will obtain well permits from the Township and B.C. Department of Health.
#9 Will Comply: Submit plan to the servicing fire company for approval.
#10 Submitted: Lots have perked and Sewage Facilities Planning Modules have been submitted to the appropriate agencies.
#11 Will Comply: Property monumentation will be installed.
#12 Waiver Request: Because this is a major subdivision, street lighting is required along Church Lane. A waiver request will be submitted.
#13 Will Comply: Development/Financial Security Agreement will be executed. An ‘Opinion of Cost’ should be submitted for review.
#14: Additional comments may be generated upon resolution of Item #6.
Addendum: #15: Applicant will pay fee in-lieu-of Park & Rec Open Space of $3,000.00 per new building lot. 10% of the buildable site area is .75/acre.
R. Balbirer suggested that the Engineer inspect the ditch line from SR412, past the Litke property for erosion due to the amount of water runoff after a rain event. A resident also voiced their concerns about the water that now flows over their property. The EAC requested permission of the land owner to inspect their property. For clarification this subdivision will be reviewed under the standards of the 1990 Township Ordinance. The Planners took no action.
LAND DEVELOPMENT: Gartner Building Group Final L/D Plan
TMP# 30-11-97 – Tabor Road & Rte 611
Commercial Zoning
Wynn Review Letter of 11/1/06
E. Pellegrino, Engineer, reviewed the plan. The applicant, J. Gartner, was also in attendance.
#1 EAC Letter: E. Pellegrino reviewed the EAC letter of November 2005 and verified that all the issues had been addressed.
#2 Received: A letter dated, November 3, 2006 was received from the B.C. Conservation District.
#3 Will Comply: Legal descriptions for the right-of-way to be submitted for review.
#4 Will Comply: The applicant will remove the trailers, prior to plan approval. S. Baluh commented that the area has been cleared of all debris.
#5 Will Comply: Declaration of covenants, easements and restrictions will be prepared. Smoke and heat detectors will be tied into the fire department.
#6 Will Comply: Plan will include installation of wheel stops/fencing to protect the existing sewage disposal system.
#7 Will Comply: The applicant will respond to any issues deemed relevant by the servicing fire department
#8 Will Comply: Development/Financial Security Agreement will be executed.
#9 Will Comply: Detail for the stop sign will specify 30”x30” sign.
A motion was made by C. Bahnck, seconded by A. Santopietro, to recommend to the Board of Supervisors approval of the Gartner Building Group L/D Plan located at Tabor Road & Rte 611 contingent upon satisfying all outstanding issues in the Wynn review letter of November 1, 2006. The motion carried 6-0-0. Waivers were addressed at a previous meeting.
NEW BUSINESS: There was no new business.
OLD BUSINESS: Proposed Lighting Ordinance
Wynn Review Letter of October 26, 2006
S. Baluh and the Planners reviewed the Wynn letter of October 26, 2006.
#1 Remove: Definition of No. 17 – ‘light disturbance’
#2 Amend: Sec. D.2 – may not need to specify due to SALDO and Zoning Ordinance. S. Baluh recommends amending a specific reference but keep in that it would be reviewed by the appropriate entity. R. Balbirer questioned the jurisdictional powers of the EAC, since this is not addressed in the MPC. Another concern was lighting situations that may arise between two parties and how it would be rectified. The ordinance will be reworded to address how complaints would be handled by the Zoning Officer. The Planners requested that Steve, along with the Solicitor, make the ordinance work.
#3 – Sec. D requires that all fixtures meet ‘full cut-off’ criteria and Met-Ed may not have street lighting to meet this requirement. Steve suggests language that specifies the closest available.
#4 – Sec. D.2.C – The Township may want to include a specification of what might be exempt e.g. low wattage fixtures. Steve will check with surrounding municipalities.
#5 – Sec. D.3.d – A non-residential lighting requirement that outdoor fixtures should be extinguished from 10:00PM to dawn, unless permitted by the BOS.
#6 & #7 Remove: Section D.4.c conflicts with the ordinance. Section E for ‘recreational’ field lighting is not addressed in the Zoning Ordinance.
#8 – Sec. F.1 can be made part of the land development and/or subdivision or part of an individual building permit. Options: 1. a regular spotlight is not a full cut-off and not permitted, 2. allow a wattage exemption and 3. an interpretation of light that trespasses off the property (hazy). These are the questions you will have if you apply these regulations to residential. It was the consensus of the Planners to remove single-family residence from this requirement.
#9 – Section G.3 will be incorporated into the Zoning Ordinance, there are enforcement options already in place.
#10 Remove: Sec. H has conflicting language and subsection B will be removed.
#11 – Sec. H.1.a concerns outdoor lighting on commercial buildings. He suggests that the building should conform with the Ordinance when 50% of the existing lighting will be replaced. The Planners agreed.
#12 Remove: Sec. I - already covered by the Zoning Ordinance.
#13 Exemptions: Include lighting that will be used temporarily by Emergency Services.
#14 Chart: Add a note to exempt/modify for street, highways and pedestrian facilities (page 5).
#15 Illumination: Only non-residential canopies can be illuminated above for signage, all are permitted for lighting below.
#16 Exemptions: All agricultural uses.
He confirmed that this ordinance will exempt single family residential and agricultural uses. As a safety/security issue for Commercial Uses it requires that some of the lights remain on due to liability issues. The Planners requested that Steve, along with the Solicitor, make the necessary changes to the ordinance.
SKETCH PLAN:
Park View Estates (10 Lot)
K. Clauss, of Schlosser & Clauss, representing Prime Properties, presented the ten-lot sketch plan. Preliminary approval was granted by the BOS for a 15-lot subdivision, with a proposed street. They are approved for spray irrigation and sand mounds. The applicant has requested that an amendment be made to the approved plan and is seeking input from the Planners. This plan contains ten lots, no public road, only two of the spray irrigation sites remain, sand mounds will be installed on the others. He clarified that the Planning Modules for the 15-lots was submitted to the BOS for signature and approval however, it was tabled when it became apparent that another plan was being considered. Four houses would be included on one drive with one entrance on Fink Drive and one entrance on Foellner Lane. K. Clauss commented that each driveway would become a private lane and that a driveway maintenance agreement would be included with each deed. The Planners recommended that each resident have a separate driveway and that a grass strip be placed between each one. S. Baluh agreed with the Planners. He also commented that 1. The proposed lots are irregular, and that comes with a reduced number of lots and no new roads, additional waivers would be needed and 2. With preliminary approval of the other plan, no improvements were required to Fink Drive however since five new drives will have access it may be necessary to upgrade the roadway. The Planners requested deed restriction of the larger lots. K. Clauss will consult with the applicant.
Harrow Station/Glenn Neebe – Land Development
The applicant, G. Neebe, reviewed the revised 55+ housing sketch plan with S. Baluh and the Planners. In addition to the exit to SR412, he proposed a roadway that goes through the shopping center to Tower Road. The Planners were in agreement that the egress to Tower Road was safer, but voiced concerns about using the pre-existing driveway during hours of high traffic on SR412. The applicant has completed shoulder improvements on Tower Road and is waiting for Wehrung’s to finalize their plans so the remainder of the road work can be completed. PennDOT’s condition for the installation of the traffic light is contingent upon the amount of traffic coming from Quarry and Tower Roads at the intersection, not SR611. Contributions for the traffic signal have been received from the Quarry and G. Neebe. A contribution will be forthcoming from Wehrung’s. C. Bahnck questioned if there is enough room for easements to the exit on SR412. G. Neebe along with S. Przyuski agreed to allow an easement up to 65’. A. Santopietro asked about the sewage facilities plant and the capacity availability. It is currently running well under the 15MGal/Day capacity. G. Neebe will take the suggestions given by the Planners and come back in a couple of months with a preliminary plan.
Harmony Village Project
H. Van Blank, attorney for the applicant, was in attendance as well as C. Camps, of Transactionable Property Solutions, and A. Alberto, architect of the plan. This is a 35-acre parcel on SR611. A. Alberto is an architect and expert planner and he presented the concept to the Planners. There is a 70-acre parcel that may also be purchased by the partners. After a short presentation, the Planners advised that the area under discussion is now zoned “Residential”. Only a four-acre parcel remains “Village Center”. They were under the understanding that this property was still zoned Village Center. Revere rezoning was completed in January 2005, Ordinance #123. It was the consensus of the Planners that they were not interested in the plan.
PUBLIC COMMENT:
-T. Stone gave a brief report on the workshop that the Upper Bucks EAC gave on Act 537 on October 26, 2006. They gave an oversight of the planning process for this act. Goals: plan for future development and address the current septic problems that Townships are experiencing with failing systems. S. Baluh commented that he is in the process of obtaining information from the Township and B.C. Dept. of Health. A. Santopietro asked if the Township has any mechanism in place for the Zoning Officer to follow up with residents who have controlled fills for sand mound systems to be sure that they are doing the necessary testing. S. Baluh commented that a letter from the Zoning Officer would be sufficient. The Planners recommended that the Board put a policy in place. It was the consensus of the Board to have the Secretary request that the Board of Supervisors enact a policy to have the Zoning Officer follow up with each development after four years advising that testing is a requirement of the plan.
CORRESPONDENCE:
A. Wehrung L/D – BCCD letter of adequacy – 10/13/06
B. Wehrung Phase II – Extension letter to March 31, 2007 – 10/19/06
C. EAC minutes 9/14/06
D. PADEP – Cobbler Road, Earth Disturbance Report – 10/13/06
E. Sal Lapio (Harrow Manor) – PADEP, incomplete report 10/16/06
F. Sal Lapio (Harrow Manor) – BCCD letter of inadequacy 10/24/06
G. Wehrung Phase I – EAC letter 10/30/06
H. D. Blessing – Request/removal from 11/08/06
I. Hanson Quarry – Quarry Quarterly Report
J. Wynn Sub/Land Development Plan Status 11/02/06
Addition to Correspondence:
EAC - Cobbler Road review letter – 10/19/06
B. Sadow commented that a letter was received withdrawing the Brill L/D Plan.
G. Neebe noted that when a Zoning Ordinance is purchased that a booklet containing additional ordinances should be included.
ADJOURNMENT:
A motion was made by A. Santopietro, seconded by C. Bahnck, to adjourn the Planning Commission meeting at 10:30 PM. The motion carried 6-0-0.
Respectfully submitted,
Arlene Eichlin,
Township Secretary
|
