THURSDAY,
DECEMBER 16, 2004
MEMBERS
PRESENT MEMBERS
ABSENT
STAFF
PRESENT
Robert Leonard, Zoning Administrator
Julie Hoepfer, Administrative Assistant
OTHERS
PRESENT
Bill Troop Bob
Raffensperger
Bill Wewer Steve
Millard
Mitch Kemp Larry
Hartman
Paul Navarro Andy
Thompson
John Murphy Bill
Simon
Joe Uram Mrs.
Simon
Cindy Robinson
I. CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to
order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Zeiters.
II.
ROLL CALL
Noted
by recording secretary.
III.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Mr.
Moyer moved, seconded by Mr. Bailey to approve the November 18, 2004 regular
meeting minutes.
Ms.
Buskirk moved, seconded by Mr. Bailey to approve the December 8, 2004 workshop
meeting minutes. The motion passed with
Mr. Moyer abstaining.
B.
Preliminary or Final
Subdivision/Land Development Plans
1. #04.020 F/LD
2. #04.029 F/LD
Mr. Brulo summarized the history of the plan
by stating it was previously denied by the Planning Commission and Board of
Supervisors. The applicant has
resubmitted the plan addressing the comments which lead to the denial. Mr. Brulo added that his comments are
administrative in nature and his previous comments have been addressed.
Mr. Millard, Dauphin County
Planning Commission, indicated he had no comments.
Mr. Leonard, Zoning Administrator, presented
the following comments and added most of his comments had been addressed:
#2 Metes
and bounds needed for easements.
#4 Appraisal
of one buildable acre for FILO calculations
Ms. Buskirk presented the EAC comments:
Ms. Buskirk asked what the major change in
the plan was. Mr. Murphy stated a
stormwater management pond was added and check dams will be installed.
Ms. Buskirk expressed her concerns about
preserving vegetation. The LOD lines on
the plan encompass the whole site. Mr.
Murphy stated every effort will be made to preserve the large trees, however it
is difficult to pin point which ones until the site work begins. Considerable discussion occurred regarding
impacts to trees and vegetation and stormwater concerns.
Mr. Brulo commented that the engineer did go
through all the necessary steps and calculations regarding stormwater on this
site and at least on paper there is actually a reduction in the volume of water
leaving the site due to the check dams and additional pond. Mr. Brulo added he is comfortable with the
stormwater management on this site and reminded the Commission that Township
Ordinances do not regulate the volume of water.
Additional EAC concerns:
1. Effect on the woodland and wildlife habitat and possible
vernal pone breeding areas by timbering and grading the entire area without a
site analysis plan or following accepted silviculture practices.
2. Existing or potential environmental problems with
destruction of forested area. Currently
adjoining neighbors have experienced some drainage issues from this site.
3. Effect on watershed and drainage basin. Significant impacts will occur to the
watershed areas downstream, as a result of timbering the entire site. Stormwater drainage volume will increase.
Mr. Moyer asked Mr. Leonard if he was comfortable
with the open space shown on the plan.
Mr. Leonard stated yes the plan has adequate open space areas which are
contiguous and do not include stormwater facilities. The plan meets ordinance requirements.
Mr. Moyer asked if fill will be brought in. Mr. Murphy stated he is not sure at this point
in the process. Mr. Leonard stated he
believes fill will be brought in to lift up some areas.
Mr. Brulo asked that the engineer consider a
simpler option for the trash rack detail on the spillway.
Bob Raffensperger,
Bill Troop,
Dave Simon,
Chairman Zeiters stated he is on the
committee to update the MPC. In the past
the State has allowed forestry in any district, however too many developers
have come in and clear cut areas, then brought in plans for development. The legislature is to review forestry again
and hopefully some changes will be made to prevent developers from doing this.
Mrs. Simon,
Mr. Raffensperger noted that on page 4 not
all roofs show drains. Mr. Brulo pointed
out that there is a note on the plan requiring all roof drains to be connected
to the underground conveyance system.
Mr. Murphy agreed to show all roof drains more clearly.
Bill Wewer,
Cindy Robinson,
Joe Uram,
Mr. Murphy stated he appreciates the
resident’s concerns but reminded everyone about private property rights and
added that he believes the plan meets the ordinances as they stand today.
Chairman Zeiters reviewed the reasons for
denial of the last plan and stated he feels those items have been addressed in
the revised plan. (Copy of denial letter
is attached to these minutes).
Mr. Leonard noted that the Township Solicitor
stated he was not comfortable with a denial based only on environmental issues
as they are not defensible.
Mr. Murphy stated it is the intent of the
developer to keep the perimeter trees and every attempt will be made to do
that. Ms. Buskirk commented that impacts
would be reduced if all units were two story.
MOTION #1
Mr. Bolt moved, seconded by Mr. Zeiters, to
recommend approval of the following waivers:
1. Section 173-11A Preliminary plan
requirements
2. Section 173-25F(10)(a) Straight curbing
3. Section 173-37B(2)
Mr. Bolt and Mr. Zeiters voted yea, Ms.
Buskirk and Mr. Moyer voted nay and Mr. Bailey abstained.
MOTION #2
Mr. Bolt moved, seconded by Mr. Zeiters, to
recommend approval of final land development plan #04.029 for Lexington Woods,
·
Approval of the sewage planning module by PA DEP
·
Approval of the E & S plan and NPDES Phase II permit by DCCD
·
Paying the fee in lieu of land dedication
·
Approval of waivers by BOS
·
Approval of public sewer design by the WHT Water & Sewer Authority
·
Addressing outstanding comments from the Township Engineer and staff
·
Trees along the perimeter 15” and larger to be identified and preserved
Mr. Bolt and Mr. Zeiters voted yea, Ms.
Buskirk and Mr. Moyer voted nay and Mr. Bailey abstained.
Chairman Zeiters asked the members who voted against the plan to state
their reasons for doing so.
Ms. Buskirk stated site design could be designed to minimize environmental
impact and existing tree and vegetation preservation should be shown.
Mr. Moyer sited LOD concerns and suggested the plan be reworked so the
grading and filling does not impact the entire site, there are still stormwater
concerns and the sidewalks may not meet ordinance requirements.
Mr. Bailey indicated he abstained because he does work for this
developer.
3. #04.010
F/SB Revised Millstone Phase II, S & A Homes - Mitch Kemp, J Michael Brill and Associates
and Andy Thompson, S & A Homes were in attendance to represent the plan.
Mr.
Brulo gave a brief history of this project and stated the purpose of the
revision is to reflect the grading that was completed during the summer of 2004
inconsistent with the approved plan. The
plan has not yet been recorded. The
approved plan showed grading to be done along the roadways, there was
additional fill deposited around the sewer line, which cut off access to the
sewer easement and detention ponds. Mr.
Brulo added that there is some sediment and runoff issues onto
Mr. Leonard reported
that on September 3, 2004, a site visit by
the Chairman of the Water and Sewer Authority, the Township Engineer and Staff
revealed gross earthmoving activities had been done. These activities were done without a Township
E&S permit, and not in accordance with approved plans; in violation of
several sections of our Ordinances. On
September 7, 2004, a meeting was held onsite with the developer, the
contractor, Township Staff and DCCD. The
contractor admitted they had 35,000 cu yd of material to dispose of. The contractor also said they had a letter
dated June 30, 2004, from the developer to proceed with E&S activities.
One of the onsite discussions revolved around the need to resubmit to
the Township an existing contours plan showing the changes, with an explanation
on how the developer can now meet some of the Ordinance criteria. This submission is to satisfy that
requirement. Further discussion involved
the need to apply for an E&S permit as soon as possible. A permit application was received on
September 14, 2004. A notice of
violation was sent to the developer on September 15, 2004, and no response was
received. On December 7, 2004, civil
citations were filed with the District Magistrate.
Ms. Buskirk asked if the grading that was done will impact any other
phases. Mr. Kemp stated no, Phase II
only.
Mr. Kemp reported that at the site there was an abundance of excess
material and the material was placed in areas it was not suppose to be. There was no intention for this to happen, it
was a mistake made on the developers part.
Mr. Bolt stated he would want to have the revised plan reviewed by DCCD
before making any decision.
Mr.
Brulo presented comments from his report as follows:
#1 The current grading reflects earth berms through the middle
of lots 9-18 but the proposed grading does not reflect any changes to the
berms. These berms will likely need to
be removed for construction of houses.
#2 The proposed grading for the roadways still shows proposed
contours being tied into the old existing contours instead of the current
conditions. Does this mean the old
existing contours will be restored?
#4 Resubmit the E & S plan with revised grading to the DCCD
for review and approval.
#5 For consistency within the Township, specify street name
signs to be 9” high, 6” lettering, 3” suffix with white legend and border on
green background.
#6 Sediment coming down onto
Mr. Leonard stated the Water and Sewer Authority engineer is currently
reviewing modifications to the plan.
The developer requested the plan be tabled until the January 2005
meeting.
Mr. Moyer asked if there is a mechanism to make sure these E & S
problems created by the developer are taken care of. Mr. Leonard stated through the Zoning
violation process. Mr. Moyer indicated
he does not feel the developer’s mistake should have to be paid for by the
neighbors in the area or the Township.
In his opinion the site should have to be restored to its original
grade. This kind of thing has happened
too often in the past year and the Township needs to take enforcement seriously
– a slap on the wrist is not sufficient to prevent others from being
careless. Mr. Moyer also expressed his
disappointment that the developer did not apologize or even explain how or why
this happened.
Mr. Kemp reported that the contractor felt at the conclusion of the pre
construction meeting that the field adjustments were acceptable by DCCD and the
Township. Mr. Brulo indicated his office
was at that meeting and there were some discussions about adjustments to the
way the E & S controls were to be installed, but there was no discussion
about mass grading of the site.
Mr. Thompson apologized for the errors and mentioned he had just
started with S & A Homes and was not the project manager at that time.
Mr. Brulo and Mr. Leonard both agreed that stabilization measures must
be immediately installed on site.
Ms. Buskirk asked what the excavators look at in the field? Mr. Kemp indicated they are supposed to
follow the grading and E & S plans.
Mr. Bolt asked if a cut and fill balance was done for the project. Mr. Kemp stated one was not done by his
office, the contractor may have done one.
Mr. Bolt asked that this information be provided for the next meeting
and on future phases.
4. #04.030
F/SB Bradford Estates Phase VII,
Mr.
Brulo presented the following comments:
#3 As discussed at the pre application meeting, consider
extending the sidewalk along
Mr. Millard presented the
following comments:
#1 Are there any natural, significant steep slope areas in Phase
VII? If there are, the regulations of
zoning ordinance section 195-80 need to be followed.
#2 Are there any wetland in Phase VII?
Mr. Leonard presented the
following comments:
#5 Sidewalks along
#6 Phase II approved F/SB shows pathways all around detention
pond and open space field. A connection
needs to be made to the sidewalk system.
Ms. Buskirk presented the
following EAC comments:
#3 Details for “swale B” should be shown including ground cover
to be used, and level three screening is required. An easement for the swale should also be
shown.
Zoning #1 LOD lines appear to go through the WPOD
at lot 144. This defeats the purpose of
protecting wetlands. LOD lines should be
shown at the limits of the WPOD.
Mr. Leonard added that units 110/111 pads are shown in a proposed
grading area for the basin. Mr. Navarro
stated the grading will be modified and an easement will be provided for the
path.
MOTION
Ms. Buskirk moved, seconded by Mr. Moyer to recommend approval of final
subdivision plan #04.030 for Bradford Estates Phase VII, tax parcel #68-028-115
contingent upon:
·
Payment of the fee in lieu of land dedication
·
Approval of the E & S plan by DCCD
·
Posting of the proper improvement guarantee and execution of a
development agreement
·
Addressing outstanding comments from the Township Staff, Engineer, and
other reviewing agencies.
·
Designation of a ped path through the stormwater easement to connect to
·
Installation of a sidewalk along a portion of
The motion passes unanimously.
VI. NEW
BUSINESS
The meeting adjourned at 9:45
p.m.