January | February | March | April | May | June
July | August | September | October | November | December

Present were: Joseph Solomon, Chairman, Jim Martin, Vice Chairman, Tom Finan and Charles Dunn.

Also present: Kevin Matson, P.E., representing the Township Engineer, Robert Pappano, Township Solicitor, Anthony Hamaday, Township Manager, and Doug Williamson, Council Liaison.

Mr. Solomon indicated that the minutes for the April meeting would be presented for action at the June meeting

None

Special Reports
None

Mr. Solomon indicated that the minutes for the April meeting would be presented for action at the June meeting

Mr. Solomon informed the planners and public that the Trail Plan Committee held a public meeting on May 21, 2007 to solicit input on the Township wide bicycle and pedestrian trail plan. Maps for residents to mark up and submit their trail ideas are available at the Township building.

Blundin Builders Subdivision, 224-226 South Avenue
Gus Houtman, P. E. representing Blundin Builders, informed the Planners that he has addressed the 2 issues raised at the April meeting regarding the proposed 2 lot subdivision. He reviewed revising the plans to attempt to reduce the necessary slope disturbance, including disturbing prohibited slopes as well revising the building design to attach the dwellings further as and found that zoning variances would still be necessary for disturbing the prohibited slopes on the property. As a result the developer opted to leave the plans as original presented to the planners and has submitted an application to the Zoning Hearing board. Mr. Houtman also informed the Planners that he has discussed the matter with the Fire marshal and He preferred the builds separated for fire safety reasons.

Mr. Finan indicated that slope is the biggest issue on the site and while respecting the Fire Marshal’s opinion that the dwellings are safer separated as shown on the plan, it was not an overwhelming factor for not trying to reduce the slope disturbance. Mr. Solomon suggested that the planners were not equipped to discard or ignore the Fire Marshal’s comments and should consider them.

Mr. Matson also brought up 2 issues that were not resolved at the first plan presentation regarding compliance with the tree ordinance and driveway setbacks. Mr. Matson indicated that the plan does not comply with the tree ordinance for the number of tree required to be installed on the site. Mr. Houtman indicated that the due to the site’s wooded areas, new trees would require the cutting down of existing trees so the developer would agree to a payment in lieu of planting to the Township as was done for the 300 State Road subdivision. Mr. Finan asked how many trees would be removed and where would new trees be planted. Mr. Houtman indicated that 9 trees would be removed with 4 new street trees, 12 perimeter trees and 40 shrubs. The remaining 9 buffer trees will be offered as the payment in lieu off.

Mr. Finan asked Mr. Houtman what safeguards and plantings would be installed to prevent the erosion and runoff from the properties on Orange Street. Mr. Houtman indicated that silt fence and geotextile matting will be installed during construction and then crown vetch will be planted on all disturbed areas of the rear slope. He added that crown vetch is a PennDot approved soil stabilizer. Mr. Finan asked Mr. Matson if the proposed storm water facilities are adequate to handle both the on-site and off-site runoff. Mr. Matson confirmed that the facilities meet the required specifications and will handle the runoff.

Mr. Dunn made a motion, seconded by Mr. Finan, to approve the minor final subdivision plan of Blundin Builders subject to the following conditions:

1. Obtaining the necessary zoning relief required for the slope disturbance
2. Compliance with the Engineer’s review
3. Stabilization of the rear slopes areas with crown vetch
4. Obtaining a conditional use from Township Council on the slope disturbance
5. Recommending a waiver for the 5’ driveway setback to allow a shared driveway and payment in lieu of planting the remaining required buffer trees.

Mr. Dunn Yes Mr. Martin Yes
Mr. Finan Yes Mr. Solomon Yes
Motion passed 4-0

Stone River Builders, 441 S. Orange Street – Final Minor Subdivision
Vincent Mancini, representing Stone River Builders, gave an overview of to the planners of the revisions to the subdivision plan presented at the April meeting. Mr. Mancini reviewed the Township Engineer’s report dated 5/14/2007 and indicated that he would satisfactorily address all the review comments. Mr. Mancini also indicated that in trying to address the planners desire to increase the setback of the proposed twin dwelling he reviewed the Zoning Decision. The decision revealed that the Zoning Hearing Board decision did not specifically allow the increase in impervious coverage even though the language is broad. If the building were to be moved back a variance would be necessary and he is not willing to seek such relief.

Mr. Solomon asked the Township Engineer to continue to work with Mr. Mancini to see what could be done to allow the dwellings to be moved back without a variance. Mr. Mancini agreed.

Mr. Martin made a motion, seconded by Mr. Dunn to recommend approval of the Stone River Builders subdivision plan dated 5/4/2007 subject to:
1. Receiving the 5’ driveway setback waiver.
2. Working with the Township Engineer to find a solution top allow the buildings to move 10 back to be in line with the existing dwellings on the street.
3. Compliance with the Engineer’s review dated 5/14/2007

Mr. Solomon Yes Mr. Dunn Yes
Mr. Martin Yes Mr. Finan Yes

Motion passed 4-0

Sketch Plan -Rose Tree Tavern Land Development, Rose Tree Park
Christopher Fazio, P.E, Sandra Baggot, AIA, and Paul Hughes, P.E., appeared on behalf of Delaware County Council to provide an overview of the proposed land development plan for the Rose Tree Tavern. Mr. Fazio indicated that the County Council wishes to make the Tavern usable now that it has been relocated. The plan calls for the conversion of the tavern to office space for the Brandywine Visitors Center as well as a new 300 sq. ft. one story carriage house for use as meeting space for the Center and Delaware County.

The proposed plan calls for 23 parking spaces adjacent to the tavern and 8 additional spaces in a second parking lot near the carriage house. The planners questioned the available parking and suggested the need for additional spaces due to the uses in the building especially the carriage house and its large open meeting room as well as outside patio area. Mr. Fazio indicated that the proposed parking plan and uses within the building would be re-evaluated.

Mr. Fazio indicated that infiltration beds under each parking lot would handle the storm water from the site. The system will be designed prior to formal plan submission. Mr. Hughes indicated that the sketch plan prepared would require 5 waivers. They are: a waiver form parking lot curbing, planting Island width, off street parking area distance, Storm water calculations and possible parking space reductions.

Sandy Baggot provided the planners with an overview of the proposed tavern renovations to office space as well as the proposed new carriage house. She indicated that since the tavern is on the historical registry, rehabbing the building will need to comply with specific architectural standards.

Mr. Fazio reviewed Kelly Engineer’s review letter and will address the comments for preliminary plan submission with specific attention to the parking. Mr. Fazio indicated that he was looking to reduce impervious surface and run off with the original design but will address the number of parking spaces as well as uses in the building.

Mr. Hamaday asked Mr. Fazio if the County would consider installing internal sidewalks from the intersection of Providence Rd and Rose Tree Rd to allow pedestrians quick access to the interior of the Park. Mr. Fazio would address that concern with the County. Mr. Dunn also suggested low-level lighting along all the interior sidewalks. Mr. Martin question whether there where any steep slope issues involved with the construction of the new carriage house. Mr. Fazio indicated that he believed there were none but would review.

Mr. Solomon indicated that he was glade that the tavern would now be used and asked about the proposed use and the proposed tree removal. Ms. Baggot indicated that most of the existing trees will remain and Mr. Fazio added that the proposed use is similar to the other County office uses within the Park. He added that the County will need a variance for the use since the new RO zoning of the property prohibits commercial use. Ms. Hunter asked for clarification on the Historical registry of the property. Ms. Baggot indicated that the required paperwork is being prepared for submission to the State with regard to the taverns historical significance.

The planners thanked the applicants for the County for their presentation and indicated they looked forward to the formal submission.

Ordinance reviews

Billboard Ordinance Amendments
Mr. Pappano reviewed the Steen advertising Zoning Board case as well as his memorandum regarding case law on billboards. Mr. Pappano suggested that there are code requirements concerning billboards such as location, height, size, and issues affecting the health, safety and welfare of the community, etc than can sustain a court challenge.


Mr. Solomon asked Mr. Pappano to prepare a draft ordinance for the planners to review regarding amendments to the sign ordinance for billboards.

Construction within Flood Plains
Mr. Solomon indicated that the planners had received a memorandum from Kevin Matson regarding possible changes to the Township’s current flood plain regulations. The memorandum compared several local municipal flood plain ordinances and indicated that there were no local municipalities that banned construction within the flood plain. Mr. Kelly indicated that prohibiting construction in the flood plain would be very risky and could amount to a taking of land by the Township. He supplied information to the planners regarding flood plains and potential dangers of restricting construction he obtained from Floods.org, a website dealing with flood plains.

Mr. Solomon indicated that he believes Wilkes Barre does prohibit construction with the flood plain and would try to obtain additional information. The planners indicated that regulations for construction in the flood plain are necessary for insurance reasons as well as a safety measure.

Mr. Kelly would be preparing additional information for the planners continued review of the subject.

Subdivision Application Procedure
Mr. Solomon provided an overview of the need to have additional procedures in place regarding subdivision plan submission. He mentioned an incomplete application that was submitted to beat an ordinance change. Mr. Kelly suggested a committee review procedure be considered to initial review an application before it proceeds through the process. He added that Concord does this and would obtain additional information for the planners.

Mr. Solomon also indicated that the issue of subdivision and land development applications receiving zoning relief before being submitted to the Planning Commission is also a problem. Mr. Pappano provided an overview of a procedure previously discussed where any subdivision or land development applications needing zoning relief must first be submitted to the planning commission before going to the Zoning Hearing Board. He pointed out that it may not be legally enforceable pursuant to the regulations of the MPC but some Townships have such a provision in place.

Mr. Solomon asked Mr. Pappano to prepare a draft ordinance with both a procedure for completeness and submission to the Planning Commission before the Zoning Hearing Board application.

Mr. Hamaday also added that the planners should consider time limits for granted zoning relief and would provided additional information for the next meeting.

 Mr. Solomon suggested that the Planning Commission contemplate sending a recommendation to Township Council that a subgroup or task force under the Planning commission direction be established to oversee the Comprehensive Plan. The Planning Commission, as a whole, originally believed that they could oversee the Comprehensive Plan but their workload each month provides little meeting time to go over the Plan’s action steps.

There being no further business, Mr. Martin made a motion, seconded by Mr. Montgomery to adjourn the meeting at 8:00 PM. The motion was unanimously approved.

Respectfully submitted,