Channels Lower Providence Township October 2nd 2014 - Lower Providence Township Board of Supervisors Meeting

/media/flashcomm?action=mediaview&context=normal&id=46
  • 82
  • 0
  • 0
Share
  • admin
  • 220 media
  • uploaded February 19, 2015

For full meeting minutes go to: http://www.lowerprovidence.org/documents/MinutesBOS2014-10-02.pdf

Public Hearing
Mr. Mark Manjardi was present to take a complete record of testimony
A) Conditional Use Hearing – CU 14-06 (2600 Ridge Pike, Dunkin Donuts)
i) Christen Pionzio, Esq. presented on behalf of the applicant.
ii) Solicitor Rice gave background on the project. He entered into record two Board Exhibits:
(1) B1: Review letter from McMahon & Associates dated July 30, 2014.
(2) B2: Ordinance No. 618 adopted by the Board on September 4, 2014.
iii) Rolph Graf, president of Graf Engineering, was sworn into testimony as a civil engineer
expert and was accepted as such by the board.
iv) Ms. Pionzio entered exhibits into the record, noting that this hearing was for use only and
that she will come before the Board in the future with a land development plan.
(1) A1: Ordinance 618
(2) A2: Photos of the applicant’s store in Royersford as an example of the proposed style of
building
(3) A3: A rendered site plan
(4) A4: Aerial photo identifying the property
v) Mr. Graf testified that the building currently on the property, without the canopy is
approximately 877 SF. The current site plan shows two curb cuts, one on Ridge and Trooper,
eliminating two existing curb cuts and that they will work with McMahon & Associates and
PennDOT relative to ingress and egress and internal circulation. He stated the intention was
to raze the current building and build a new Dunkin’ Donuts on the site which will comply
with all ordinances and meet all criteria.
vi) Ms. Pionzio stated that they believe zoning relief may be needed due to inconsistencies found
while surveying the property. This will be determined and brought before the Zoning Hearing
Board but it may include parking and signage. Solicitor Rice stated that if the Board approves
the Conditional Use it would be conditioned upon getting relief from the Zoning Hearing
Board.
vii)Solicitor Rice entered the application, as filed, as Board Exhibit B3.
viii) Supervisor Duffy stated the Board had received a letter from the owner of Germantown
Title raising concerns about traffic. He requested the applicant contact the owner to discuss
concerns.
ix) Ms. Pionzio stated the McMahon and Associates letter had criteria that was not adopted into
the ordinance and stated that they will work with McMahon & Associates to their satisfaction
and go through the subdivision and land development process.
x) MOTION: Supervisor Duffy made a motion to approve the Conditional Use with the
conditions of addressing issues raised in the McMahon review letter dated July 30, obtaining
required relief from the Zoning Hearing Board and compliance with the subdivision and land
development ordinance. Supervisor Zimmerman seconded the motion. The motion passed 5-
0.
4) New Business
A) Authorization to advertise Board of Supervisors 2015 budget meetings for October 8, 2014 and,
if necessary, October 21, 2014 at 6:30 p.m. Lower Providence Township Board of Supervisors Meeting
October 2, 2014
Page 3 of 5
i) Susan Law requested the Board grant authorization to advertise the 2015 budget meetings for
October 8, 2014 and, if necessary, October 21, 2014. Supervisor Sorgini noted there was also
Sewer Authority meeting on October 8 but they should not conflict.
ii) MOTION: Supervisor Zimmerman made a motion to authorize the advertisement of the
Board of Supervisors 2015 budget meeting for October 8, 2014. Supervisor Sorgini seconded
the motion. The motion passed 5-0.
5) Old Business
A) Discussion and consideration of Resolution for S-14-01 (3961 Crosskeys Road) minor
subdivision.
i) Mike Organski, RJC Development, presented his case to the Board.
ii) Solicitor Rice stated that before the board was a final proposed resolution, which included
review letters as well as a list of waiver requests.
iii) Applicant stated he had not received a copy of the Resolution. Solicitor Rice gave him a copy
of the resolution for his review. He also noted that he had not received copies of the review
letters. It was noted that the letters had been addressed to the project engineer.
iv) The applicant agreed to redesign the driveways to provide level area adjacent to garage and
to pay the recreational fee.
v) A discussion was held as to what fees in lieu of would be paid to the Township for relief
from all waivers for roadway improvement based on a savings amount of $30,000 as
determined by Woodrow & Associates. Solicitor Rice proposed a fifty-percent figure of
$15,000. Applicant stated that those funds were not available and if he had to put in
sidewalks and curbs the project would not go forward. He filed the plan hoping to get the
waivers.
vi) Comments from the Board:
(1) Supervisor Duffy clarified what buildings currently exist on the properties and that there
are no existing sidewalks but curbing does exist on Ashton.
(2) Chairwoman Eckman stated only three major developments have sidewalks and
sidewalks in this area would not connect with anything.
(3) Supervisor Duffy saw no reason to require the sidewalks or curbing along Crosskeys, but
would require applicant to pay some sort of fee in lieu of putting in an unnecessary
improvement. Mr. Woodrow stated all the improvements are not unnecessary. He agreed
that most improvements are unwarranted but there was some disagreement as to the
necessity of sidewalks.
(4) Supervisor Sorgini said fees in lieu of improvements is a conversation that should be had
going forward as waivers and relief are frequently requested and they have an applicable
dollar figure but without some sort of identifiable policy applying that to this application
seems arbitrary.
(5) Mr. Woodrow suggested the Board only use the $3,500 figure associated with the
sidewalks since that was the one waiver in question. The applicant stated he could put in
sidewalks for less than $3,500 and would be willing to do that since Planning
Commission said they could be put in without curbing. Supervisor Duffy stated while he
also does not like an arbitrary application of fees but this is a significant reduction in fees
for significant waivers. Solicitor Zimmerman stated they must defer to Mr. Woodrow
over the Planning Commission. Solicitor Duffy noted that if you put in sidewalks, curbs
would then be required and then there would be an issue of storm water management. Lower Providence Township Board of Supervisors Meeting
October 2, 2014
Page 4 of 5
vii)MOTION: Supervisor Zimmerman made a motion to approve Resolution S-14-01 and grant
approval of waivers and impose a fee of $3,500 in lieu of all of the requested improvements.
Supervisor Thomas seconded the motion.
viii) Sorgini expressed concerned over the nature of the arbitrary nature of the fees. Supervisor
Thomas said these fees are determined on a case-by-case basis. Chairwoman Eckman said it
would be easier if there were a policy standard but this is an unusual request for waiving all
roadway improvements and they are assessing less than 10% of the value of the waivers.
Motion passed 4-1 with Supervisor Sorgini in opposition.
B) Discussion and consideration of draft Residential Trash and Recycling Bid.
i) Mr. Woodrow explained why it was necessary to prepare the documents or the board and
reviewed the detailed specifications. (see attached)
ii) Comments from the Board:
(1) Supervisor Zimmerman clarified that the e-waste disposal fee would be in the contract.
She asked for an explanation of how more than one toter would affect cost.
(2) Supervisor Sorgini stated he would like to see a once and twice a week bid.
(3) Supervisor Thomas would like to let homeowners select whether they have one or two
toters while only have once a week service. He noted that many residents didn’t want a
single hauler but realizes that is a moot point.
(4) Chairwoman Eckman stated the Board has received some comment and that Supervisor
Duffy has compiled them into a list. Supervisor Duffy said he is aware of 30 comments,
split 50/50 as to satisfaction. In a Township of 6,000 residents that indicates we are
offering good service at a reasonable price. He stated he is not sure how the Township
could make 6,000 customers completely happy
(5) Chairwoman Eckman said that one frequent complaint was failed pick-ups and
unhappiness at response of hauler. Mr. Woodrow stated that there is a penalty section in
the current contract and the Township would be able to terminate the contract for a
certain percentage of failed pick-ups. He can research this and strengthen the language
for the next contract. Chairwoman Eckman agreed and noted residents need to be aware
of this.
(6) Supervisor Duffy stated that the hauler, as well as the Township needed to educate
residents on what can be hauled and how it should be put out for pick-up. Chairwoman
Eckman agreed.
(7) Discussion was held regarding the cost of the service compared to other townships. Mr.
Woodrow stated he would be willing to look at various components of the bid to save
costs. Some ideas included reducing yard waste during the off-season and how to handle
bulk pick-up.
(8) Supervisor Sorgini stated that if a once a week pick-up fell on a holiday, the pick-up
should be scheduled for the next day. With twice-weekly pick-up, it would be the next
pick-up day.
(9) Supervisor Thomas noted some residents were unhappy with the color of the receptacles.
(10) Mr. Woodrow will adjust bid documents to incorporate the suggestions and will
bring back before the Board for approval.
(11) Discussion was held regarding leaf pick-up options in the Township. Supervisor
Thomas stated that there have been no comments regarding the way the Township
currently handles leaf pick-up. Lower Providence Township Board of Supervisors Meeting
October 2, 2014
Page 5 of 5
(12) Chairwoman Eckman said this proposal is still open for comments. A brief
discussion was held regarding recycling. Decision was made to strike Recyclebank from
the bid.
iii) Public Comment:
(1) Christine O’Donnell, Stoughton Road, stated that the County does take e-waste. Mr.
Woodrow said he was looking for a way to make it easy for residents. She clarified they
were discussing a per bag recycling cost, stating she did not want to see this be an option
as residents could only pay for one bag of recycling and the rest will end up in the trash.
Mrs. O’Donnell discussed the importance of recycling and its impact on the Township.
She feels it is important to keep yard waste pick-up at once a week. She said there a lot of
good ideas were discussed and this is a good start.
(2) Supervisor Thomas said that residents have expressed desire for ability to pause service.
Chairwoman Eckman stated the current contract has that option. Mr. Woodrow will make
sure that is added to the specifications.

Categories: Government
Show More

More Media in "Lower Providence Township"