PALMER TOWNSHIP PLANNING COMMISSION

October 14, 2008

The regular monthly meeting of the Palmer Township Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, October 14, 2008 at 7:00 p.m. with all members in attendance except Stoneback. Also present was Solicitor Charles Bruno and Engineer Brian Harmon. Chairman Grube convened the meeting by leading those present in the Pledge to the Flag.

MINUTES OF THE MEETING FROM AUGUST – On motion by Rickert, seconded by Wilkins, and agreed by four, Young and Grube abstaining, the minutes were approved as written.

MINUTES OF THE MEETING FROM SEPTEMBER – On motion by Rickert, seconded by Grandinetti, and agreed by six, Wilkins abstaining, the minutes were approved as written.

KONTOS FOODS – 15 McFadden Road – Palmer Industrial Park - Mr. Steve Kontos, Mr. Thomas Maloney, Attorney and Mr. Tony Ganguzza, Engineer and Mr. Jim Vozar, Architect were all present. Attorney Maloney stated his client is requesting conditional use approval to operate his business in an existing building in the Palmer Industrial Park that was previously occupied by Empire Beef Company. Mr. Steve Kontos stated in the future he would be requesting an addition to the building. Maloney asked Kontos various questions in regards to his business. Kontos stated his family started the business in 1988 and there are three principal owners. The business consists of a baking company that makes all varieties of flat breads. He stated they sell world-wide and his products are sold at local stores. There will not be any retail sales at this site so there will not be any traffic other than delivery of supplies. The process consists of the product being mixed, baked, packaged and frozen. It is then loaded into two tractor trailers in the mornings, and transported to their Patterson, New Jersey facility.

They will have 17 employees per shift. He would like to have three shifts within two years. They operate Monday thru Fridays, 24 hours a day. The noise is very minimal as everything is internal. The loudest would be the delivery of the flour that gets pumped into the silos. These silos will also be inside. They are cube shaped silos that are made to fit the building. As far as odors the only smell would be a baking odor which is not an unpleasant smell. Periodically there are federal government inspections, pest control weekly for the interior and exterior. Kontos feels this use is a less intense use than what it was used before since that was a meat packing company which was a lot of wash down of the product. Their waste would consist of approximately 18 yards every other week and they have a trash compactor which is already in place. Asked if there would be any food/byproducts outside? Kontos stated no that everything is contained within the compactor. He stated they have plenty of parking spaces. The Company owns 14 trucks but this location will use only one. Maloney noted they conform with all related township ordinances as well as all Federal and State regulations and the FDA regulations. Kontos was asked if there were are any fire/safety hazards and he stated none and that he would be installing in a fire sprinkler system. There will be minimal impact on the existing traffic with the trucks and vehicles. Attorney Bruno stated their application filed refers to 19,000 sq. ft. and the engineer’s letter states 17,500 sq. ft. Kontos noted it is 17,500 sq. ft. and this request is only for the use of the existing structure not the addition. Wilkins asked if they are having two trucks a day with this existing building, would this increase with the addition? Kontos stated it could go to 6 trucks since they are proposing an approximate 70,000 sq. ft. addition. The addition would consist of an increase from 1 production line to 3 production lines and the majority of the addition would be for a freezer area. Maloney informed the Commission that all their equipment is manufactured and purchased from the Bangor area. Wilkins stated he would like to see that all in-coming trucks travel thru the new roadway.

Kontos informed the commission that in regards to the work load, as production lines increase the workers will decrease due to the long building which is what they were looking for. These long runs decrease employees. He is proposing one 8 hour shift for the first six months; then adding another shift for another nine months and at the two year mark have three shifts. Young asked about the compactor and the silos. Kontos noted they will be inside and approximately 18 feet high. They hold about 1,000 lbs. of flour. Their product has to be inside because it has to be at room temperature. Grube asked if they had any comments on the township engineer’s letter. Maloney stated they would like a waiver for the sidewalks. He was informed that they would have to request a deferral on this. Kontos stated he will be clearing the overgrown detention basin and then check to see that it drains properly. He will submit a letter to township stating the outcome and if there are any repairs needed he will do them and then send another letter stating what he did and that it is repaired. Departmental comments reviewed with no problems. Rickert stated the presentation was quite complete. Harmon stated the plan was reviewed based on the expansion on sheet 2 of the set everyone received. The majority of their comments are specific to this expansion. Since they are asking for just the Conditional Use for the existing building he would modify their recommendation to approve for the use of the building. Maloney stated this letter is very helpful for their use in creating the plan for the expansion in the future.

Rickert motioned to recommend approval of the Conditional Use request for Kontos Foods subject that they fulfill the Township Engineer’s letter dated October 9, 2008 to the extent that it may apply; all departmental comments being complied with; and that this approval is limited to occupying the existing building only and the site plan review and relevant conditions do not include the proposed expansion shown on the plan. Another site plan would be required when and if the expansion is requested. Also, that the sidewalk deferral be approved as there are no others in the area. Grandinetti seconded this motion. Grube asked if there were any questions on the motion. Young verified that this is just for this site and not the expansion. Bruno stated yes this is just for the use of the existing building. Judith Nolan – 116 Glenmoor Circle – asked about the truck traffic and if it would be passing through the residential area or on Hollo Road. Commission informed her that they would be traveling Hollo Road. Another resident asked if they were offered a tax rebate for coming into the area. Applicant noted he did not ask for one and does not want one. Grube called for a vote which was approved by all.

VILLAGES AT WOLF’S RUN – Van Buren Road - Stage 1 – Phil Seibert from Ott Consulting Engineers was present representing his client. Seibert reviewed for the Commission members and audience the location of this proposal and what they are requesting for Stage 1 of the project. Seibert stated they are proposing taking Lot #200 out of the development and making it Stage #1. Seibert noted that the plans that were presented will have to be slightly revised. There is a piece of land that is still under the ownership of Sal Sacco and it is shown as Strausser as the owner. Strausser has an agreement for this piece of land but it is not complete as of yet. So the preliminary plans that were approved are incorrect. They will need to redefine the area of road right-of-way dedication of Van Buren Road when this ownership change goes through. Right now they can only dedicate land that they have ownership of. The land that is Sacco’s property will have to be transferred to Strausser prior to the Van Buren Road improvements. Young asked how can we consider this plan if there is a piece of the plan missing? The preliminary plan was processed through with this incorrect information. Bruno stated he feels the preliminary plan must be revised and approved to be consistent with the staging they are going with now. Young asked if this ownership create a problem. Bruno stated this review could be done since the property is under contract and Strausser can be an applicant but he will have to acquire ownership to go through the process. Commission members felt this should be a revised preliminary plan.

Grube asked if the other issues from the preliminary plan review have been resolved yet? Bruno stated the applicant’s representatives can do their presentation but there will be a problem getting past here. Seibert stated there was a meeting held and that a staging plan was submitted with a minor change. The applicant is proposing 12 stages - 6 in the north area and 6 in the south. The first stage was 22 townhouse lots and Lot #200. The applicant felt for him to be able to move Lot 200 along he proposes to have Lot 200 as the first stage and the other 22 lots be incorporated into the remaining stages. Harmon stated they reviewed the revised preliminary plan showing stages but did not provide a complete review of this as instructed. Seibert felt confident that there were no planning issues that were conditions of the preliminary plan for stage 1. This is just a minor subdivision taking off this lot of the tract.

Bruno stated this stage 1 is not the same stage 1 as on the preliminary plan; 22 lots have been removed and redistributed throughout the stages. Bruno asked Seibert if didn’t he feel that the removal of the 22 lots is a substantial revision. Seibert responded that he didn’t think it is too much of a change. Each stage is slightly larger. Bruno asked him if he had a problem with this Commission and the Board of Supervisors reviewing this plan as submitted. They can review the plans but not make recommendations until the revised preliminary plan is submitted in its entirety. Rickert asked if the new preliminary plan should include bridge, show all stages and all improvements. Seibert stated they cannot complete the full improvements of Van Buren Road until Strausser has ownership of property of all the property. Young asked if the engineer is not recommending approval of this until the bridge is taken care of. Harmon stated the bridge and improvements of Van Buren Road are a condition of the preliminary plan in their letter of September 5, 2008 and applicant stated they will be secured as part of stage one. Harmon also noted that the difficulty is that until the bridge is designed they can’t identify the cost to get the security for this first stage. Engineer’s comments of October 9, 2008 were reviewed and Seibert had questions and comments on only four. The one was in regards to the consolidation of the remaining lots. The Sacco parcel has a structure on it and Seibert noted the house will remain as stage 1. Plan will be revised to show this. There is an existing 20 foot wide Med Ed easement that crosses Strausser’s property. Applicant inadvertently labeled this to be removed in stage 1. This is needed and will be changed at a future stage. The plan will be revised to show entire property and plan will show that they can’t dedicate portion until Strausser has ownership of all property. Bill Dengler – asked to see the see map and where this property was.

Wilkins motioned to table action on this plan. Motion was seconded by Young. Grube asked if there were any questions on the motion. One resident asked why the comment was made that this should be processed for the developer. Asked what the hurry was. Bruno explained the process and that the applicant has a right to be heard at a meeting and review the comments by the engineers.

Betty Bergbower - 102 Glenmoor Circle stated it is imperative that the Commission see pictures of flood.

Grube stated this is just for the motion. Seeing no other comments he called for a vote which was agreed by all to table action on Villages at Wolf’s Run Stage 1 plan.

ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT FOR HEIGHT OF LIFE CARE FACILITY – Phil Seibert was present with this request along with Todd Palmer who is the designer of the project. Seibert stated this proposal is located in a HDR2 district. The amendment asks for a change of the maximum building height to be increased to four stories. The proposed site is on a 9.9 acre site. A portion of the building would be four stories and a portion would be three. Seibert noted that the first floor elevation is 10 feet lower that the first floor of the existing Glenmoor properties. They are proposing a dense screening and widened the buffer to a full 20 foot buffer. Mr. Randall Weston, President of the Weston Group was present to describe his proposal of the building and Mr. Todd Palmer was present to describe the use of the proposed building. Mr. Dangler asked if the Commission was doing each item separately. Grube informed him that they would be doing each item separately and hearing some things from the applicant’s representatives for each one.

Fran Schlessinger – 19 Canterbury Lane – asked about the comment made in regards to the proposed building being 10 ft. lower. Is this the first floor or the entire building. Seibert told her it would be the ground floor.

Mr. Weston stated he owns several of these facilities in the Lehigh Valley. He feels this is unique to this area. Usually facilities are an up front fee. This facility is based on a rental. They have a skilled nurse center and it could be a facility that a person leaving the hospital would go to for 20 to 100 days then transfer out to go home or to another unit on the grounds. There is various levels of living at this facility. There is an assisted living with different stages of care up to the independent apartments. There are more amenities with restaurant=style service included in these higher end apartments. The different levels come down to economics. State funding if available for those who can’t afford these types of facilities. He feels his facilities are a little more than a normal life care facility. They have services come in to the people. The various care/life styles are the reason for the additional height. The appearance will be natural material, stone and/or stucco. Palmer did not bring a rendering of the plan. Weston stated the area behind the Glenmoor homes will stay at three stories. Young asked who prepared this proposed amendment. Bruno stated it was drafted by the applicant’s attorney. Planning Commission members would like to see the full amendment. Young stated the township needs to think about where this would go for the future of the township, for future applicants if this were to be approved. He has a problem with an ordinance that is so vague and feels there will be a problem in the future. Bruno noted this could affect not just this site but other sites in the township. Young asked where there are other HDR2 districts in the township. Township zoning map was reviewed. There is an area east of Milford Street and south of the bike path. This is a large open lot right near home. Young stated this is a perfect example of what could be erected in a residential area. Grube does not feel anyone here is fully informed and would like to look at this proposed amendment. He also stated he has an issue with 4 stories. Wilkins noted the applicant should add something stating what good this would be for Palmer Township, not just for this facility. Commission would like to discuss this with the Planning Director. Rickert feels this has to be tabled until everyone is fully informed. On motion by Rickert motioned to table action on this plan. Wilkins seconded this motion. Grube asked if there were any comments on the motion to table action on this request.

Joyce Kline - 14 Somerset Lane – asked what the restriction is pertaining to the fire department for putting up a 4 story building. Grube noted the fire department did review this plan and he and the Planning Director will meet with the Fire Commissioner.

Thomas Nolan - 116 Glenmoor Circle – asked about the first floor being below Glenmoor Homes. Are they going to back fill the area and raise it up when they build and make the land higher? Seibert stated no, the area will not be raised.

William Curtis – 8 Canterbury Lane – Stated one reason for a planning board is to review applications and to have idea to pass onto the Board of Supervisors and also to make sure that the developer is not submitting something that would not be beneficial to area. He stated he has personal experience with a facility like this. Since it would be on the south side it would be blocking the sun and feels it definitely is not an asset to property owners next door. Why doesn’t Strausser build this on the south side of the stream near the houses he is building there?

John Halligan - 12 Canterbury Lane – There was a comment made earlier tonight that a building like this could be hidden in the development because of the elevation. He takes exception to this. He feels if this proposed building is forced into 2 acres it will dominate the area with 4 floors. It would be set back 40 feet from line. If they put up a four story building shouldn’t the set backs change?

Bill Dengler – 138 Glenmoor Circle – He asked the Commission to visualize looking out their back door and seeing a wall.

Schlessinger - 19 Canterbury Lane – He asked which houses in the Glenmoor development was Seibert stating would be backed at this 3 floor and would be at the first floor elevation. Seibert stated Lot #69 and the 4 homes in the adjacent area. Schlessinger felt all the homes along there would be affected.

Dengler – asked if there are any buildings in Palmer that are four stories or 50 feet in a residential area. He submitted a picture for the height and asked the Commission to please consider this.

Grube then called for a vote which was agreed by all to table action on the zoning amendment request.

WESTON LIFE CARE FACILITY - CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST – This request is to approve the use to have a life care facility in this zoning district. Phil Seibert was present for this request. He noted there are utilities in the area which is a requirement. It is a higher density area of the township; adjacent within a development of townhomes and age restricted homes. He feels this would be an appropriate site since it has the infrastructure in place that would use this site. Rickert asked if the engineers reviewed this. Harmon noted they have and there is a review letter. Bruno doesn’t typically comment on a conditional use request. The proposed land development and conditional use request should run concurrently. This is for the use of the property. If their other applications are dependent on this then they could have a problem. Young stated that there are things on this application that can’t comply. He feels everything should be done together when it is all complete. Wilkins motioned to table action on this plan. Grandinetti seconded this motion. Grube asked if there were any comments on the motion. A resident ask what the procedure was and Bruno explained it. Seeing no other comments Grube called for a vote which was agreed by all to table action on the conditional use request.

WESTON LIFE CARE FACILITY – Preliminary/Final Plan – Young questioned how the Commission could review a plan that the ordinance does not allow. Bruno stated they could but the applicant was taking a risk that the ordinance is not approved. Seibert noted there are four issues to discuss that all other issues will be incorporated in future submissions. He noted they have been requested to provide an emergency access road which would have a gate to limit access to only emergency services vehicles. Set back would be 41 feet from property line. This emergency access roadway would be a 15 foot wide access line behind building. He asked if the Planning Commission would consider supporting applicant since this is only used for emergency access could they include this 15 ft. wide access as part of their setback. There are parking spaces located in the 15 feet of the building. He felt they would take out the spaces and reduce the number of spaces. Grube stated he would like to speak with the Fire Commissioner and Wilkins stated he also. Seibert noted he did speak with Mr. Grube who stated he will not take his vehicles onto this access way but does want it for other emergency access incase evacuations are necessary. Seibert also informed the Commission that Grube asked for a link to the “construction road” so that there would be a secondary access. Young noted that where any of the bike paths meet roads there are barriers so vehicles can not enter. Seibert noted this road is going to initially be a construction road but it will then be used as a pedestrian/bike path and sewer facility workers will also have access as well as emergency vehicles.

Seibert noted they have not provided a tractor trailer loading area because Mr. Weston said he absolutely does not need a tractor trailer for this site. They would only have small trucks/vans for any deliveries to this facility. Seibert stated they would like relief from this but know that they need a determination by the zoning officer on this.

The applicant is requesting a deferral from the cartway widening, curbing, sidewalk and street trees along the Van Buren Road property frontage.

Seibert noted that the proposed site would not have any full size bus use and would request that they not have to make any special provisions for one. He noted that the township’s fire truck and any trash trucks would fit in the area, but not a full size bus. This is something the planning director can discuss with the fire commissioner. Wilkins and Rickert noted they did not have a problem with the road improvement item. The parking area would be a special exception and they would have to file an application with the Zoning Hearing Board. Seibert noted he has an application filed but it won’t be heard until the conditional use is approved. Commission member asked that they get a copy of the special exception application to review.

Rickert motioned to table action on the Weston Life Care Facility. This motion was seconded by Wilkins. Grube asked for any comments pertaining to the motion.

Betty Bergbower – 102 Glenmoor Circle – stressed to the Commission that it was imperative that they sees pictures of the flooded area. She is very concerned that this proposed building would create floods to homes in the Glenmoor development. Concerned about the water around the homes; the spouting/gutters, where does this water go. She was informed that all storm water issues are addressed by the township engineer.

Thomas Nolan - 116 Glenmoor Circle – only had one issue in regards to the relief from loading dock requirement. He noted that Mr. Weston stated they wouldn’t need a loading dock for a full size tractor trailer. Haven’t seen a facility yet like this that doesn’t get a tractor trailer delivery of some type. This is something the Commission should think about.

Fran Schlessinger - 19 Canterbury Lane – He was told in the past that this land could not be built on due to it being wet lands. How is it now that this land can be built on? The Schoeneck Creek floods. That is the reason for the bridge improvements. She asked Grandinetti his reason for his comment regarding the property values not being a criteria for the Planning Commission. He stated this Commission can not hold something back due to the values. This commission is concerned on planning issues and what is beneficial for the township. She asked that the Commission consider the residents and not the new kid on the block.

Joyce Kline - 14 Somerset Lane – The township has known about all this flooding and wetlands so why is this even being considered? Young stated there is a large piece of land that is outside of 100 year flood plain. There will always be some type of zoning that would allow building on this property. The building portion is outside this line not the parking.

Art Schlessinger - 19 Canterbury Lane – stated he was looking at the plan and noticed the lines for flood plain. There is now another line. Why is this? Harmon noted this was pre-construction and post construction. Schlessinger asked why is there a change? Harmon stated this is the identification of 100 year flood plain and they receive analysis by the developer. With the comments/concerns from the developer they had to revise the location of flood plain line.

John Halligan – 12 Canterbury Lane noted that the parking lot is going to have cars in it during a storm. This is a safety issue with everyone out trying to move them out of the parking lot. Also, how can there be an emergency access road that will flood?

There being no further comments Grube called for a vote which was agreed by all to table action on the plan for the Weston Life Care Facility.

PUBLIC COMMENT - Several comments by residents –

Resident felt the developer/architect is very deceptive since they came to a meeting without an artists rendering of the building.

This has been going on for several years and it takes two years to get permits for the bridge. Are they even applied for? Seibert stated no.

Asked if the bridge is contingent on getting approval of this facility? Bruno noted the current preliminary plan for Villages at Wolf’s Run was approved with the bridge.

This development has so many changes every month. How can this Commission keep things straight, know what’s going on? How do you follow what is going on? What happens if the economy gets worse? How can anyone rely on this developer with so many changes.

There being no further business to come before the Commission on motion by Rickert, seconded by Young, and agreed by all, the meeting was adjourned at 9:50 p.m.

Diane Grube, Corr. Sec.