Newtown Township
Planning Commission Minutes
February 6, 2001
MINUTES OF 2/6/01: Mr. Lombardi moved to approve the minutes of the 2/6/01 meeting; the motion was seconded by Mr. Kester and passed unanimously with Mr. Baldwin abstaining.
The Newtown
Township Planning Commission met on Tuesday, February 6, 2001, in the Township
meeting room at 8:00 PM. In attendance
were: Chairperson Karen Doorley, members Paul Kester, Vince Lombardi, Frank
Mendicino, Sue Beasley and Jack Bowen (late).
Also in attendance were:
Township Planner Mike Frank and Township Public Works Director Thomas
Harwood.
Chairperson
Karen Doorley called the meeting to order at 8:00 PM.
MINUTES OF
1/16/01: Mr. Kester moved to approve the minutes of 1/16/01; the motion was
seconded by Mr. Lombardi and passed unanimously.
TRAFFIC
ENGINEER’S REPORT: None.
REVIEWS:
CONDITIONAL USE
- 413 OFFICE CENTER - AUTUMN LEAF DEVELOPMENT INC - TMP# 29-3-34: Deferred to next meeting.
MINOR
SUBDIVISION - SEGAL AND BRILLIANT - 391 EAGLE ROAD - TMP#29-3-55: Dina Brilliant and Manfred Heinrici of
Heritage Surveyors and engineers were present to discuss the application to
divide a 7.10 acre property in the Conservation Management District into two
lots. Mr. Heinrici stated that the applicants are not seeking a recommendation
on this subdivision tonight, and will return at a later date.
Mr. Frank’s
letter of 12/21/00 was reviewed. Mr.
Heinrici agreed to revise the plan to show how lot 1 complies with D-1 zoning,
which is permitted by an earlier Zoning Hearing Board decision. He also agreed to increase the area of lot 2
to at least three acres. Mr. Heinrici
will provide photos of the woodlands and show larger trees on the plan.
The applicants
will bring a written list of waiver requests when they return. The requests will include waivers from
requirements for curbs, sidewalks and road widening. Mr. Heinrici said that neither adjoining property has a sidewalk,
but several members of the Commission stated they would like to see a sidewalk
along Eagle Road to connect with future sidewalks in the area, particularly
since there is a school and a development nearby. Mr. Lombardi suggested asking the applicants to provide an
easement for a future sidewalk rather than requiring sidewalk construction
now.
Mr. Frank asked
the applicants if they could connect with public water and sewer services. Ms Brilliant stated she inquired about this
and was told the cost was prohibitive, at least $100,000. Mrs. Doorley suggested the applicants obtain
this estimate in writing. Mr. Heinrici
stated that the septic system for the new lot has been approved by the
County. Ms Brilliant stated that there
is a natural buffer between the proposed dental office and the residential lot;
this will be shown on the revised plan.
The Carroll
Engineering letter of 12/18/00 was briefly reviewed. There was no representative of Carroll Engineering present, and
Mr. Heinrici stated he would prefer to address engineering issues when the
applicants submit a revised plan for the subdivision. He said the applicants question the assessment of a traffic
impact fee. This will also be
addressed when a revised plan is submitted and the Township Engineer is
present.
SUBCOMMITTEE AND
LIAISON REPORTS:
a. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: Mr. Mendicino
reviewed the 1/24/01 Board of Supervisors meeting. The Commission discussed the Board of Supervisors’ consideration
of the Pheasant Pointe application to the Zoning Hearing Board. This led to a general discussion of the
Planning Commission’s role in the Zoning Hearing Board application process
which continued under New Business (below).
Mr. Mendicino also mentioned the conditional use approval of LaStalla
Restaurant, the Swamp Road Traffic Study, the cost estimate for a pedestrian
bridge over Route 413 and the approval of additional engineering services for
the Sycamore Street project.
b. JOINT PLANNING COMMISSION: Mr. Kester reported the Commission will meet
nest week.
c. JOINT ZONING COUNCIL: No report.
d. SYCAMORE STREET COMMITTEE: Mr. Lombardi reported that PennDOT will be
meeting with the committee and the engineers to “scope” the site. Mr. Harwood asked Mr. Lombardi for a copy
of the plans to see how the improvements can be maintained.
e. HISTORIC ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD: No
report.
f.
RECREATION
BOARD: No report.
g. TRAIL COMMITTEE: No report.
h. PARK & OPEN SPACE COMMITTEE: No
report.
i.
COMMUNITY
CENTER COMMITTEE: Mrs. Beasley reported
that the committee was recently asked to rate several parcels of land in the
Township for their suitability as a community center site.
j.
PLAN
EXPIRATIONS: None to be addressed.
OLD
BUSINESS: None.
NEW
BUSINESS:
ZONING
HEARING BOARD: Mrs. Doorley said she is
concerned that the Zoning Hearing Board is making planning decisions without
Planning Commission input, and the Board of Supervisors is is not well informed
when they make decisions about whether to oppose ZHB applications. Mrs. Doorley said the Segal/Brilliant
subdivision plan reviewed earlier tonight is an example of this problem; the
ZHB permitted a D-1 office use without any review of this issue by the Planning
Commission.
Mr.
Frank read an excerpt from the Municipalities Planning Code that requires the
ZHB to notify the Planning Commission and other parties regarding upcoming
hearings. In another section the MPC
requires that the Planning Commission review all matters of a planning or
zoning nature. Mr. Mendicino noted that
applicants sometimes go through the review and approval process with the
Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors and then go to the ZHB to ask
for changes in the approved plan.
Mr. Kester moved to request the Board of
Supervisors to have the Solicitor prepare an ordinance amendment to require
that applications to the Zoning Hearing Board must be reviewed by the Planning
Commission before they are heard, and that once a plan is reviewed and approved
the applicant can not go to the Zoning Hearing Board for relief of a
requirement in the approved plan. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Lombardi.
Discussion
of motion: Mr. Mendicino and Mrs.
Doorley said they understand that the Solicitor disagrees with this
proposal. Mr. Harwood said he prepares
a worksheet with his comments on each application before the ZHB and provides
it to the ZHB secretary and the Board of Supervisors. Mrs. Beasley suggested the Commission could schedule a discussion
of an application and notify the applicant that he or she can attend, thus
addressing the problem within the current structure. Mr. Harwood was not sure there would be time for a Planning
Commission review in the present procedure, since the “clock starts” on an
application when he receives it and requires only that the application be
advertised for two consecutive weeks.
He added that the law allows the process to take up to 60 days. Mr. Kester said the MPC gives the Township
the right to establish procedures. Mr.
Harwood suggested the Commission ask Mr. Harris to meet with them to discuss
this issue, as there may be a way to resolve this without seeking an amendment.
Mr. Kester withdrew his previous motion.
Mr. Kester moved to respectfully request
that the Board of Supervisors consider the possibility of amending the
ordinance to require a review of Zoning Hearing Board applications by the
Planning Commission, and to prohibit applicants from seeking relief from the
Zoning Hearing Board from conditions of final plan approval. The motion was seconded by Mrs. Beasley.
Discussion
of motion: Mr. Frank and several
Commission members said that the Township can not prevent applicants from
seeking relief from the ZHB as described in the second half of the motion. Mrs. Doorley said she did not want to ask
the Board of Supervisors to amend the ordinance.
Mr. Kester withdrew his previous motion.
Mr. Lombardi moved to respectfully
request that the Board of Supervisors establish a procedure that requires that
applications coming before the Zoning Hearing Board be reviewed first by the
Planning Commission. The Commission
also requests that Township Solicitor Steve Harris and the Zoning Hearing Board
Solicitor meet with them to discuss this issue and possible solutions. The motion was seconded by Mrs. Beasley and
passed unanimously with Mr. Mendicino abstaining.
Mrs. Doorley
noted that the Commission is not suggesting that reviews by Heritage
Conservancy and Carroll Engineering be required for this process.
GENERAL
DISCUSSION:
TOPP21
CONFERENCE: Mrs. Doorley asked that any
Commission members who want to attend this conference on 3/24/01 get in touch
with her.
PARKING AT
VILLAGE AT NEWTOWN: Mr. Kester
expressed a concern about frequent parking in fire lanes at the Village at
Newtown.
ADJOURNMENT: Mr. Kester moved to adjourn. With no objections, the meeting was adjourned at 9:50 PM.
RESPECTFULLY
SUBMITTED,
______________________________
Gretta Stone,
Recording Secretary