PUBLIC MEETING MARCH 9, 2010 7:00 P.M.
PALMER LIBRARY COMMUNITY ROOM
The regular monthly meeting of the Palmer Township Planning
Commission was held on Tuesday, March 9, 2010 at 7:00 p.m. with the following
in attendance: Vice Chairperson Virginia
Rickert, Secretary Jo-Ann Stoneback and members Ron Grandinetti, Rich Wilkins,
Robert Blanchfield and Chris Briglia.
Also in attendance was Planning Director Cyndie Carman, Engineer Brian
Harman and Solicitor Dennis DeEsch.
Rickert called the meeting to order and led those present in the Pledge
to the Flag.
Minutes of Public Meeting of January 12, 2010 – On motion
by Wilkins, seconded by Grandinetti, and agreed by all, the minutes of the
January meeting were approved as written.
OLD BUSINESS –
1.
MANDY PARTNERS - Proposed Zoning Text Amendment –
Marc Brookman was present and reviewed the proposed zoning text amendment. He reviewed the original that they had prepared as well as the revised one. They are proposing that special exceptions that presently go before the Zoning Hearing Board to now go before the Board of Supervisors. He stated the first eight revisions they are okay with. Proposed amendments from nine to 14 are ones they would like amended. There was considerable discussion on these amendments. They are proposing 13 dwelling units per acre. They also would like an amendment to the set back requirement which presently requires a 100 ft. setback buffer from adjoining industries or commercial properties. They are asking for it to be a 50 foot setback. Brookman explained that they are using the flood plain to calculate this and feels this is sufficient. They are also asking for an amendment to allow a greater height for retaining walls. He stated there is a density bonus for traditional villages which starts at the proposed 13 dwelling units and 7 townhouses. Carman asked how they came up with 13. Brookman stated they picked a number in between the county’s requirement of between8 to 20. Brookman stated they definitely need 11 dwelling units per acre to get this plan to work. Stoneback asked if they are proposing just garden apartments or townhouses. Brookman informed the Commission that they are all garden apartment buildings. At this time they showed the proposed concept. Rickert asked Harman if he had any comments and he stated with regards to their requested amendments, they are not engineering related so from their standpoint no comments are required. Blanchfield asked why they are asking for the setback change. Brookman stated there is a PPL easement in the area which makes it an unbuildable area. The other portion is unbuildable due to Northampton Crossing owning this piece of property. DeEsch stated the setback request should not be a conditional use or special exception request. It is a requirement by the zoning officer/zoning hearing board. Wilkins noted they say they need 11. Carman stated the Lehigh Valley Comprehensive Plan’s density ranges from 8 to 20 units per acre but the Township’s Comprehensive Plan calls for 6 units per acre. Brookman noted they recognize that different municipalities have different needs. Grandinetti noted he felt the exceptions are acceptable but it’s the process that is questionable in his eyes. Carman stated she doesn’t feel they are necessarily unacceptable but that some of the amendments apply only to the traditional village concept and if these are approved they would be scattered throughout the ordinance. Briglia noted this could be taking the teeth out of the Zoning Hearing Board. Some changes are warranted but not all. Traditional village is great for transportation other than vehicles, such as walking or riding bikes to area stores/restaurants. This is the perfect site for this type of community. Carman stated if this density was changed for the HDR district it would apply all HDR districts Township wide. We have always been a suburban township and the density bonus for the tradition village district allows greater density where warranted. Brookman stated that an idea would be to develop a formula for density bonuses that would be applicable throughout the township based on the value of additional improvements being provided. DeEsch stated that the Planning Commission has to make a recommendation on what is before them now, not getting into formulas/ways to make the density work throughout the township. He stated they are just making a recommendation on what is before them tonight but stated that the discussion on this had some very valid points to discuss in the future. Rocco Caracciolo stated there is a 25% contribution to the township due to the public improvements and that there is a flood plain goes through this property. Commission members felt the proposed plan without anything else is a great plan for the area but we have to think about the rest of our community if these text amendments would be approved. Rickert stated she feels some of these items are a special exception now and feels they should be kept as is and ruled as individual requests and not have this throughout the township. Stoneback agrees with this.
Wilkins motioned to recommend the following to the Board of Supervisors - Text amendments one through eight to be approved as recommended by township staff; #9 to not be approved; #10 to consider an increase in the density but not as high as proposed; #11 to be approved; #12 to not be approved; #13 to not be approved; #14 increase be permitted to approve allowing as a special exception rather than a conditional use. Motion was seconded by Blanchfield. Rickert asked if there were any questions or comments on the motion. Seeing none she called for a vote which was approved by all.
2.
Proposed Zoning Text Amendment– Parking of commercial
vehicles within the Township -
Carman informed the Commission that this was sent to the Lehigh Valley Planning Commission for review. They did not have any comments on this since it would be a matter of local concern only. She also noted that this amendment would make it easier for code enforcement due to using Penn Dot classification rather than wieght. Blanchfield motioned to recommend approval of this text amendment to the Board of Supervisors. Motion was seconded by Wilkins. Rickert asked for questions or comments by the audience. Seeing none she called for a vote which was approved by all.
3.
Proposed Zoning Text Amendment– HDR-2 District and
Carman informed the Commission that this was sent to the Lehigh Valley Planning Commission for review. They did not have any comments on this since it would be a matter of local concern only. For the HDR-2 District this is just cleaning up the language in the ordinance. Some regulations in HDR District didn’t turn over into this district when it was created. These amendments are not for any particular site/project. The life care center would be for adding in an external property line building setback and in the maximum gross density the word “buildable” needs to be added as well as a small correction that restricts retail facilities for residents only. Stoneback motioned to recommend approval of this text amendment to the Board of Supervisors and Grandinetti seconded the motion. Rickert asked if there were any questions on the motion. Seeing none she called for a vote which was approved by all.
NEW BUSINESS –
1. Proposed Zoning Text Amendment – General Commercial District –Carman stated this is
an administration
sponsored amendment. In the GC District
it allows for retail uses as a replacement but not for new construction. She recommends that new retail uses should be
a permitted use in the GC district. When
2.
Land Development
Plan – This plan proposes a subdivision of three lots.
PLANNING DIRECTOR COMMENTS - None
PUBLIC COMMENT – None
On motion Wilkins, seconded by Stoneback, and agreed by all, the meeting was adjourned at 9:25 p.m.