PALMER TOWNSHIP PLANNING COMMISSION

JUNE 10, 2008

The regular monthly meeting of the Palmer Township Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, June 10, 2008 at 7:00 p.m. with all members in attendance except Young and Rizzolino. Also in attendance were Planning Director George Kinney, Engineer Brian Harmon, Solicitor Charles Bruno and Supervisor Liaison Robert Lammi. Grube convened the meeting by leading those present in the Pledge to the Flag.

MINUTES OF THE MAY – On motion by Rickert, seconded by Grandinetti, and agreed by all, the minutes of the May meeting were approved as written.

GEORGE/BARBARA KISSELBACH – Lot Line Adjustment - Stones Crossing Road – Don Frederickson was present with a lot line adjustment for the applicant. He stated that this property is located along the west side of Stones Crossing Road that has a paved driveway on parcel A which is owned by another resident and is to be conveyed to Kisselbach. This happened when the New Orchard Estates development was created. Kisselbach would like to acquire the lot which is his property. The Township Engineer’s letter was discussed. Frederickson noted they would like to receive a waiver for the improvements along Stones Crossing Road since it is such a small parcel. He would also like to get a waiver for the monuments. Kisselbach is the applicant but both parties would have to sign off on the plan. Frederickson noted there are no intentions for dedication of land and/or the drainage utilities if it has already been done but he needs clarification on this. He feels they met the criteria for a lot line adjustment. He felt under the lot line adjustment requirements there is not a requirement for the road improvements. It was noted that the Board of Supervisors will determine if these requests should be granted waivers or deferrals or nothing at all. The waiver requests need to be submitted in writing. Frederickson noted he did not come upon a deed of dedication. This must be checked on. Commission members did not have any problems with this lot line adjustment. Kinney commented on the number of items in the engineer’s letter and Frederickson noted he would have them corrected and to the township engineer for review before it goes to the Supervisors. On motion by Grandinetti, seconded by Stoneback and agreed by all, the Commission recommended final approval to the Board of Supervisors conditioned that the township engineer’s comments in their letter of June 6, 2008 be satisfied; that the waiver requests be submitted in writing and that they also be approved. Board of Supervisors to determine if waivers or deferrals are necessary.

THOMAS BUCHNER - William Penn Highway – Sketch Plan – Don Frederickson was present with the applicant Tom Buchner requesting approval for an addition to his existing 2 story building and parking spaces along with a new driveway connection on Berkeley Street. Mr. Buchner is in the insurance business and he had converted a house into his business. The proposal is to add 2200+ sq. ft. to the existing building. He proposes to move into the new section and rent out existing section. He submitted two plans but only Plan A has been reviewed by the township engineer. Commission members feel Plan A is the better one especially with the one way scenario and angle parking. Frederickson noted the 10 ft. landscaping is buffering another business, a car dealership. If he were to rent out the one building that would be two businesses on the same tract which Frederickson noted is permitted. He would like the other office to be a professional office. He has 3 office staff now and would like to increase it to 4 and then 5 after the addition is complete. Engineer was asked if Plan B was reviewed and Harmon stated it was reviewed but there were more concerns with Plan B than Plan A. Kinney reminded the Commission that this is in the overlay district for the future site plan review and that the multiple use issue may have to be reviewed by the Zoning Officer.

WESTONS SENIOR RETIREMENT CENTER – Chairman Grube informed the audience that this is just a sketch plan review and there is no action being taken tonight. There was a question from someone in the audience asking if they were allowed to ask questions. Grube noted that there would be limited questions as this is a sketch plan and things could be changed since they will be back various times. Phil Seibert of Ott Consulting was present along with Jenna Strausser from Strausser Enterprises with plans for the senior retirement center. The center will be subdivided from the Villages at Wolf’s Run development. This proposal will be a life care center and would be located on 9.9 acres and will require a conditional use. The building is proposed to be 23,000 sq. ft. and 3 ½ - 4 story building. It will contain 100 units housing up to 200 people. It will be located totally outside the flood plain area but the majority of the parking will be within flood plain and that is permitted by zoning with a special exception. The access to this property would be off of Van Buren Road and there would be 83 parking spaces. Regarding bulk requirements, Kinney noted that the ordinance leads you in many ways and that this has to be looked into. 20% has to be developed as passive recreation. Min. lot area requirement is 6 acres and they have 9. The height proposal exceeds what is allowed and they would like to seek an amendment to go higher than required or to receive an ordinance amendment. Seibert noted the proposed pedestrian path parallels the Schoeneck Creek and would go into this center and would also provide a link from the cul-de-sac. Grube felt it is very important to consider what happens if the people have to be evacuated and the parking area is flooded. How do you get emergency services in to get people out? There is only one way in and there should be more. Stoneback asked how high the building is allowed and was told 35 feet and they are asking for 10 feet higher. Wilkins asked if when they return could we have a sketch of building. Seibert agreed. Wilkins noted he had reservations about the 4 stories. This could shade the homes in the Glenmoor development and he also has concerns about the flood plain area. Last month applicant sTated the construction road would run along the tree line. Obviously this will no longer be the construction access. Seibert noted all construction traffic will use all the existing roads. Asked about the timetable, when would this start. Seibert noted it would begin immediately. Wilkins asked in the very beginning when this plan was first presented wasn’t there an apartment building proposed in the same area. What happened to that? Seibert noted that they found a client that liked the site and was eager to build here. The owner of this property would like to act on this since he has a client.

Carol Blazo of Northampton Villages, Inc. was present and discussed the facility. She noted there are different levels of age. A person can become a resident in the complex and be independent but have meals prepared for them. Than they may require a little more care and be moved from personal care to skilled care, which is also skilled rehab. People will stay at this facility and age in place. They would move to different parts of the complex depending on their physical abilities. If there is a couple and one becomes disabled they could still be in the same development, but different areas. Rickert asked what the rooms were like, how many bedrooms, etc. Blazo noted they are 1 room units which are 250-450 sq. ft. which could hold 1 or 2 people. There could be two people to a room if financially needed. So realistically there could be 200 people in building. People go to these assisted living communities to be able to stay in one community throughout their years. Patty Graft Regional Director of Northampton Village, Inc. noted residents will be there unless there is care that is needed beyond what they provide. Residents have daily/monthly care as long as it is affordable. They have regulations that they have to go by as far as how many personnel for each resident. They also have dietitians and activity coordinators available. They also provide transportation and some residents will use public transportation. Commission members felt that parking could be an issue as some residents would have their own vehicles and then they would get visitors. The parking doesn’t seem to be enough for this. There is a community center area; activity area and a common area for the residents. One requirement for this community is that they provide nursing care which they do. They also provide a community dining hall and a hair salon/spa. Members noted the construction traffic route has to be worked on. Wilkins asked the status of the bridge. The bridge has been moved up in the construction time table. This will be discussed at the next meeting they attend for the Villages.

Kinney noted a portion of the proposed 4 story facility will run parallel to several homes in Glenmoor and there should be additional attention paid to improving the architectural appearance. Conditional use provisions for life-care centers require public transportation. Looking for how provided and tie into local networks. Also feels the Commission as well as the township staff should encourage the developer to have a community meeting with the neighbors and get feedback to him and the Commission.

Jean Hvidding – 122 Glenmoor Circle asked about the parking lot lights. How would lighting impact the Glenmoor community? Seibert stated the township has ordinances that limit the amount lighting that is allowed to shine onto adjoining properties. This will be addressed when submitted on a plan.

A resident asked about the lights inside the building. Would they shine outside onto the adjoining residents homes? Seibert noted there would be residential units on the first 3 floors. The lights would probably be out at night and Blazo noted they have a ruling that residents’ windows must be covered.

Betty Bergbower – 102 Glenmoor Circle asked about the previous plans with the apartments. It was taken away and now it is back. When she purchased her home she was told that there was not going to be building in this wet lands. Their development does not get any services from the township; they have to pay for everything and feel they are an asset to the township. They feel if this goes through it would depreciate the value of their homes. They will have to put up with the dust/dirt/noise and the construction in the area.

Al McHugh – 16 Glenmoor Circle stated there is an industrial building being built with 800 employees. The traffic will be increased with all these employees as well as this development. Too much in a small area.

Mary Dengler – 138 Glenmoor Circle asked what about the flood area. How can you build in this area? Seibert explained the meaning of this area and noted parking was allowed as a special exception. She asked if anyone has anyone looked at contour and was told various township staff/officials have.

Betty Bergbower – felt there was going to be problems with water.

Richard Milberg – noted at a meeting previous it was discussed that there was a 2 year period for the approval and installation of the bridge. He asked what goes in first and Seibert noted the bridge can’t go in until a Penn Dot permit is approved and received. They will submit plans soon and it could take a year for approval.

William Dengler – asked the meaning of the conditional use for this piece of property. Seibert explained.

There were no further questions at this time from neither the residents nor the Commission. Grube noted to the applicant that they have their comments as well as comments from the residents. Seibert noted they will take them into consideration.

Planning Director’s comments. – Kinney informed the Commission that he met with the engineer and they are moving forward with the lighting issue in regards to getting lights on in developments before it is complete. He also noted they will be having a meeting with the public utility company on this. He also informed the Commission that he had an opportunity to take an evening training session on the Pennsylvania Planning Code and could have some ideas to bring to them. He is compiling list of legislation acts regarding planning that are going thru the process. He will be keeping everyone informed.

Stoneback thanked Kinney for the list she received for on-going projects. Felt it was a great idea. Some members didn’t receive it so it will be re-sent to all.

Grube thanked Brian H. for sitting in for Brian D.

Lammi noted he felt the document from Kinney was very useful for the Board of Supervisors as well as the Planning Commission. He also stated that there is a lot of legislation at this time on land use and noted that Representatives Freeman and Wonderling are very interested in land use.

Wilkins wanted the Commission members to know why he hesitated on the Kisslebach item. He felt there were too many items in the engineer’s letter for it go forward but also that it was just a lot line adjustment and felt there shouldn’t have been that many items.

Lammi noted to the commission that the Board of Supervisors never grants a waiver for sidewalks/road improvements. It would always be a deferral.

Public comment – None.

On motion by Stoneback, seconded by Wilkins, and agreed by all, the meeting was adjourned at 8:30 p.m.

Diane Grube, Corr. Sec.