PALMER TOWNSHIP PLANNING COMMISSION

JUNE 12, 2007

The regular monthly meeting of the Palmer Township Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, June 12, 2007 at 7:00 p.m. with all members in attendance. Also in attendance were Planning Director Amanda Jensen, Engineer Brian Dillman and Brian Harman, Solicitor Charles Bruno and Supervisor Liaison Robert Lammi. Media was represented by Courtney Lomax of the Express. Chairman Grube opened the meeting and led those present in the Pledge to the Flag.

MINUTES FROM PREVIOUS MEETING – On motion by Rickert, seconded by Grandinetti, and agreed by all, the minutes from the May meeting were approved as written.

MAJESTIC ATHLETIC – 9 McFadden Road - Mr. James Knicos of Nicos Polymers, David Martin of Keystone Engineering and Attorney Edward J. Andres were present for this application which is located at 9 McFadden Road. Attorney Andres spoke in regards to the use of the building as a warehouse company. He stated that they are on the zoning hearing agenda next month for a use variance to allow a warehouse use for this building. Engineer’s comments were reviewed and it was noted that the parking space issue is to be resolved with the zoning officer. Grube asked about retail at this site and was told that they now have retail sales in the Bangor office. Maybe in the future they would consolidate as want retail sales here. Attorney Bruno noted that they have a conditional use request still pending and need an extension due to the deadline. Attorney Andres noted he would send a letter with an extension. At this time the applicant stated they were looking for a favorable recommendation for the Zoning Hearing Board. On motion by Rickert, seconded by Young, and agreed by all, the Commission voted to allow Planning Director Jensen to send a favorable recommendation letter to the Zoning Hearing Board for their request.

PARKVIEW ESTATES – Phase VII – Surrey Drive – Don Frederickson was present for this applicant. He noted he received engineer’s letter and discussed the re-phasing plan. He noted that the next phase, Phase VIII will be the last phase in this development. Frederickson stated his client did not have any problems with the township engineer’s comments. Young questioned the boundary lines for Phase 7 which Frederickson pointed out. Young discussed the tot lot that was to be in the development and there was lengthy discussion on this issue. There were different thoughts on this as to when the recreation tot lot should have been installed noting that it was in the beginning phase and it was being pushed back to later phases. Frederickson noted Mr. Chrin offered the land of dedication for open space, which was substantial and was told to do it at a later time. He noted it was almost 10 acres. Young and Jensen researched and noted that there was to be a tot lot in the early phase of the development. Young feels that this needs to be resolved and it has to be done at the Board of Supervisors level. He also noted that the tot lot could be put in this phase or the next phase but that it should not be completely forgotten. Jensen also feels this is to be resolved with the Supervisors. Frederickson stated that he was very concerned that this was discussed at the last meeting. Wilkins noted that this was not discussed at the last meeting at all. Young then noted that it was discussed at the Recreation Board meeting. Their recommendations go through the Board of Supervisors. Young discussed the bike path and Frederickson noted that it is in and blacktopped but there may have to be something repaired at the end. This is to be looked at before it goes to the Supervisors but should not hold up this plan at this stage. Frederickson noted there was a tot lot at the beginning as well as the sidewalk around the development. Dillman stated there should be a request for the plan which has run out as well as a written waiver that is being requested. Stoneback asked where a tot lot would be placed if the township wants it and Frederickson noted it would take a building lot from the development. Township departmental comments were reviewed. Zoning officer’s comments asked when the sales trailer was being removed. Jensen will check on this as there is still building in progress. Rickert and Stoneback both noted they remember the issue of the tot lot and the adjoining of lots with Hillcrest. Dillman showed the preliminary plan and pointed out which lot was for a tot lot. Young reiterated that there were two lots in the beginning phases for the tot lot. Frederickson stated he did not remember this. Everyone is to research their records. On motion by Young, seconded by Stoneback, and with no comments from the audience, agreed by all, the Commission recommended final plan approval for Parkview Estates Phase VII, subject to comments in the township engineer’s letter dated June 7, 2007 being satisfied; township departmental comments dated June 8, 2007 being satisfied; the issue with the tot lot gets discussed and resolved of the satisfaction of the Board of Supervisors; recommend approval of the 50 foot interval waiver requested and the waiver for the expiration of the preliminary plan.

PLANNING DIRECTOR’S COMMENTS – Jensen noted that the applicant, IDI the warehousing facility proposed for Lower Nazareth Township has applied for a conditional use with that township and our Board of Supervisors has voted to send representation to this meeting. Solicitor Bruno and Engineer Brian Dillman will be attending. It is scheduled for 7:00 tomorrow night at the Nazareth Middle School. Commission did discuss some issues with this.

Jensen noted that WaWa has opened and she would also like to start planning another tour of the township for the fall. Young noted that the roof at WaWa was slanted so the light is deflected from shining across the street in the homes. They did a good job with this.

VILLAGES AT WOLF’S RUN – Van Buren Road - Sal Panto and Phil Seibert were in attendance for this proposed development. Township engineer’s comments were reviewed and Panto stated they were okay with the comments noting that they feel the only situation is with the bridge with Meilinger property that the engineer has addressed everything in the letter except the bridge issues. He noted they did attend the Board of Supervisors meeting and asked the township for condemnation at applicant’s expense, if necessary. He stated that the Supervisors agreed if they could not come to an agreement they would proceed with this on behalf of the township at the developer’s expense. Panto stated he believes there will be resolution with this. He also stated that they still need to get the construction easement from Mr. Graack on Van Buren Road. They need the construction easement and permanent utility easement around the bridge/culvert on both sides of the road. Panto pointed out on the plan what they were proposing for the Meilinger’s driveway. Graack and Mandy Enterprises were contacted and now they have legal descriptions for each of them. Dillman asked that the right-of-way plans and descriptions be forwarded to them. There are a considerable amount of issues that need to be resolved and some, such as the condemnation if necessary, that have to be resolved with the Board of Supervisors. The improvements along Van Buren Road are of the utmost importance with the township. Seibert discussed one issue that was in the township engineer’s letter which was on the profile of Van Buren Road. This is to be formally submitted in writing as a waiver to the township. Young questioned the path way. There was lengthy discussion on this proposed pedestrian path as to where it should go, along an existing farm drive that goes over the culvert and proposing a new connection to existing farm drive or following the path of the sanitary sewer easement; from the cul-de-sac to soccer fields as recommended by the planning director. There were different ideas and Panto asked what the width should be. Dillman stated the township paths are 12 feet wide. Young stated that the Sewer Authority, in the past, has not wanted anything along their easement due to manholes, etc. Jensen to check with the Sewer Authority. Panto was asked about the shared driveways/access. He noted they property owners would have to have an agreement/deed restrictions and it would have to be shown on the plan. Panto noted the home owner’s declaration is going to be very extensive for the complete development and then there will be specific ones for specific areas. Bruno suggested there should be a special covenant for the shared drives. Rizzolino asked if Meilinger would own her driveway and Panto responded yes. Rizzolino stated they should buffer this. Panto was questioned when the bridge work is done would Van Buren road be close, and if so anticipate how long? Panto did not know this yet. Dillman stated the concept is rather rapid with the construction, but of course, depending on weather. There definitely would have to be a detour. Young asked when the Wolf’s Run 9 development was introduced was this acreage included? Panto stated no, this was separate. Young asked about the Socco lot, such a goooooood eye!!!!!!!!!!!!!! There was discussion again on the placement of the pedestrian/bike path. It was suggested along Van Buren Road on the one side in lieu of sidewalk and keep easement along creek just in case. It should be dedicated along Van Buren Road and have the property owners keep it maintained until township wants to put recreation path in. Have this path there instead of the sidewalk. Eric Littman of 121 Scotty Drive asked about the trees, who would be responsible to remove them. He was told the developer. It was stated that the bike path would be 12 feet but the easement would be 20 feet and the trees could be in that. This is all to be worked out with the Board of Supervisors. No other comments by Commission members. Young motioned to table action on this plan. Seconded by Rickert. Grube asked for any comments from the audience. Littman asked if there was a traffic study done on the impact of area for this proposed development. Dillman noted yes and it is at the township building for anyone to review. Littman asked about the voluntary traffic contribution what it was and what it is used for. Littman asked about construction vehicles and their access to the property. Dillman recommended no construction vehicles be allowed to enter along roads in Wolf’s Run, which would consist of Scotty Drive and Stephanie Lane. Panto noted access would be off Van Buren Road.

Dr. Phil Taverna – 2663 Northwood Avenue – submitted to Grube a six page packet of issues. Copies will be made for all Commission members. Taverna went on to discuss the flooding for the Meilinger property and the Schoeneck Creek and the addition to this creek by the developers in the area. Taverna furthered his comments to say that he was not allowed to review township records without making prior arrangements with the township. Bruno stated what has to be done for him to review the site plan and will follow this up with a letter to him. Panto responded that he uses the word Strausser and Chrin and millions of dollars and noted that both of these developers have followed all requirements by the township, DEP, Northampton County Conservation District and every other organization. He also stated the township’s engineer is very strict and very good with these requirements and he stated he takes exception with what was said about Mr. Strausser and Mr. Chrin. Taverna brought up Northwood Center and the Chairman stated we are not discussion this tonight and noted that his letter will be handed out to everyone and will be made part of the public file. Grube called for a vote for Parkview Estates Phase 7. Vote was all aye.

PUBLIC COMMENT - None

On motion by Stoneback, seconded by Rickert, and agreed by all, the meeting was adjourned at 9:10 p.m.

Diane Grube, Corr. Sec.