CHARLESTOWN TOWNSHIP
|
The first regular business meeting for May was held May 4, 1998 at the Charlestown Elementary School. John B. Sauser, Chairman, Robert C. Wert, Vice Chairman, Irene W. Ewald, Thomas F. Oeste, Esq., Surender S. Kohli, P.E., Linda M. Csete, Secretary, and those on the attached attendee list were present.
The meeting was called to order at 7:35 P.M. and the Pledge of Allegiance was recited.
Embreville Station Commander Lt. Dennis Dougherty was present to provide clarification on an incident which occurred on April 13th when a Three Ponds resident reported a suspicious individual blocking her driveway with his vehicle. Shortly afterward, Charlestown Elementary School Principal Mrs. Hartwick reported that the same individual was seen parked outside the school playing loud bagpipe music from his vehicle near dismissal time. A trooper wasn’t dispatched to the school until 3:20 P.M. as two of those on duty were on the scene of accidents elsewhere, and a third trooper was at the scene of a reported burglary in South Coventry. By the time a trooper arrived, the suspicious person had left the scene.
Lt. Dougherty said that patrol sergeant Barbara Fontana has placed the man’s name and description on the roll call board so all troopers are watching for him, and dispatchers at the barracks have been instructed to address this type of a call from a school as high priority.
Lt. Dougherty described the procedure for a high priority call, stating that a trooper will be called from a lower priority to answer it, or, if not readily available, the State Police will call a local department, such as neighboring East Whiteland, to stand by until they arrive. He stated that the decision for a neighboring police department to answer such a call is their own prerogative.
Lt. Dougherty then opened the floor to questions. Jim Mackey asked why the officer in South Coventry, taking a burglary report, wasn’t dispatched to the Three Ponds where the resident’s driveway was being blocked. Lt. Dougherty responded that the call from the resident didn’t make this situation clear at the time.
Ellen Behrle asked, in light of other recent school incidents, if the State Police could make it a policy to ask neighboring local police to answer school calls and standby as the first action taken. Lt. Dougherty stated that they would first prefer to follow the procedure he outlined earlier where the State Police treat the call as high priority and respond themselves. Calling in a local neighboring department would be done only if the state police couldn’t provide a timely response.
A resident asked if a list of what constitutes a high priority call could be drawn up and distributed to local police departments. Lt. Dougherty responded that the State Police has no authority over local departments and that it is up to them whether to respond to an individual call for assistance outside their boundaries.
Mr. Sauser suggested that the Lieutenant speak to Mrs. Hartwick and her staff at the Elementary School to review how to place a call of this nature to obtain a high priority response. Lt. Dougherty acknowledged that this type of call is relatively common to them, and explaining the situation to the dispatcher is crucial. He noted that the trooper taking the call didn’t treat it as high priority and that it should have been referred to a superior.
A resident asked for a description of the suspicious individual, and Lt. Dougherty described him as a white male, 6’8”, 250 lbs. This resident reported that he was told that, in a separate incident, the Malvern police had taken this individual to the Paoli Hospital after an accident in the borough. He asked if the man had undergone any psychiatric evaluation. Lt. Dougherty responded that he was unaware of this incident and suggested the resident contact the Malvern police.
Stephen Schlichter commented that training should occur at the police level to help them learn how to draw people out who are calling in a report. He stated that it’s the police response and not the public response that should be focused upon.
A resident asked if there is a priority code for schools to use when calling in incidents. Lt. Dougherty responded that there is not a special code, but calls from schools are considered priority calls when school is in session.
Bob Jones asked about the staffing at the Embreville barracks, and Lt. Dougherty answered that they have an allotment of 31 officers, but currently have only 22. Another five are expected by the end of the month. These officers cover Zone 17 & 18, which consists of West Pikeland, West Vincent, East Coventry, South Coventry and Charlestown Townships. One trooper covers Route 202.
A resident asked if there are statistics on average response time, and Lt. Dougherty responded that there are not.
Mr. Sauser asked how many plain clothes detectives are assigned to the barracks in addition to the uniformed troopers and the lieutenant answered that there are five. Although they may also respond to police calls, they are typically usually away from the base handling investigations.
Mrs. Ewald said that Mrs. Hartwick took all the right steps to safeguard the children at the school, who were unaware of the situation. Mrs. Ewald requested that Lt. Dougherty follow up on rumors that the suspicious individual had been seen at other schools, and he agreed to do so. Mrs. Ewald commended the State Police for their change in policy as a result of this incident.
Mr. Wert asked how Mrs. Gorman at the Elementary School contacted the police, and Lt. Dougherty responded that she called the barracks directly at 2:50 P.M., not going through 9-1-1. Mr. Wert asked if the State Police have a preference on how they wish to be called and Lt. Dougherty answered that either way is fine. The Lieutenant gave out the two telephone numbers for the barracks.
Mr. Wert suggested that the license numbers and vehicle descriptions be provided to the township for circulation to the School, Townwatch, school bus drivers and the Charlestown Web Site.
Mr. Sauser announced that Mr. Kohli is working with PECO and the Iacobucci organization to resolve an issue over widening plans for Yellow Springs Road. A letter dated April 27, 1998 from PECO Energy to Frank Iacobucci states that PECO was not informed of the road widening and as a result, 9 recently installed utility poles must be moved as well as an eight inch gas line. Mr. Sauser said that the Township won’t compromise on this issue and that this matter must be resolved in such as a way as to ensure public safety.
Mr. Sauser announced that Green Valley Association is sponsoring a cleanup of the French and Pickering Creeks and has asked the Township Parks & Recreation Board for assistance with the Charlestown portion of the creek. Volunteers are needed between 8 AM and noon on May 9th, and interested persons can speak with Liz Anderson at 933-0486.
Mr. Sauser announced that the Spring Road Tour took place on April 30th and was attended by himself, Mr. Wert and Mr. Kohli. He requested a list of repairs and other work needed from Mr. Kohli for the Roadmaster’s follow-up.
Mrs. Ewald announced that on April 26th she presented Tom Kerrigan with the Township’s Community Achievement Award during his Eagle Scout Ceremony for his efforts in relocating the Horseshoe Trail between Route 29 and Charlestown Road.
Mrs. Ewald said she received calls at her home between 5:00 - 5:30 a.m. from residents reporting that quarry operations were underway prior to the permitted starting time of 6:00 A.M. She asked both Mr. Kohli and Bill Corson of Devault Crushed Stone to look into the situation and for Mr. Kohli to report back in a memo.
Mrs. Ewald moved to approve the minutes of April 6, 1998 as submitted. Mr. Sauser moved to approve the minutes of April 6, 1998 with corrections to page 2 to read as follows: In the second paragraph under Accounts Payable, change “which appears to be excessive” to “which she believes appears to be excessive.” In the last paragraph on page two, change “Pee-Wee football field” to “Pee-Wee soccer field.” Mrs. Ewald seconded and all were in favor.
Mrs. Ewald moved to approve the minutes of the April 20, 1998 with an amendment after the last sentence on page 3, 6th paragraph, which states that “Mr. Wert was concerned that the Pyle acquisition was not an item listed on the proposed budget.” She wished to add a notation that the proposed budget was amended on November 3, 1997 and attach, as an addendum, a copy of the pertinent excerpt from the November 3, 1997 minutes in which the amendment was approved. She said that the proposed budget is prepared prior to the upcoming fiscal year and is an estimate of revenues and expenditures anticipated for that year. If an unexpected cost arises during the year, the budget may be amended, as was done for 1997. Mr. Sauser stated that he didn’t feel the notation or attachment was necessary and moved to approve the minutes as submitted. Mr. Wert stated that he had no objection to the attachment. Mr. Wert seconded Mr. Sauser’s motion and all were in favor.
Mr. Sauser moved to approve the Treasurer’s Report for April 1 - 30, 1998 and Mrs. Ewald seconded. All were in favor.
Mrs. Ewald requested that in the future, Mr. Wert’s payroll listing, for which the net amount is $0.00 after crediting the full net balance to federal withholding, show the net amount on the report. Mr. Wert moved to approve the Accounts Payable for May 4, 1998 and Mr. Sauser seconded. All were in favor.
Written reports from the Zoning Officer, Roadmaster, Fire Marshal, Historical Commission and Planning Commission have been circulated.
Mr. Kohli referred to the situation on Yellow Springs Road with regard to PECO and the Iacobucci Organization, stating that PECO must relocate the poles in accordance with the approved plans. Mrs. Ewald asked if PECO usually works without plans and Mr. Kohli responded that this is not standard procedure.
Mr. Oeste stated that he spoke to PECO’s counsel today and communicated the Township’s desire to have the road re-opened as soon as possible.
Mr. Wert stated his concern, after speaking with Mr. McErlane earlier today, that the poles aren’t installed deep enough in the ground and that with continued rain there is the danger of one or more of them toppling over. Mr. Kohli responded that there is ten feet of dirt mounded around each pole along with guidewires to prevent this occurrence.
Mrs. Ewald said that she observes people traveling too fast on the road in its present state and that she’s concerned for their safety due to the misplaced poles. Mr. Kohli responded that the road is officially closed and that anyone driving on it is doing so illegally. Mrs. Ewald suggested repositioning the barricades at the bottom of Yellow Springs as they are often moved off to the side giving the impression that the road is open. Mr. Wert suggested that the advertising sign for Charlestown Oaks indicating that the samples are open should be covered or removed until this situation is resolved.
Mr. Kohli stated that following the Road Tour, it was determined that Blackberry Lane and the Pickering Spur should be paved this summer. Also, an inlet on Mary Hill Road needs to be repaired, and reflectors are needed on Rees Road traveling west past Charlestown Brae. Mrs. Ewald asked if a lot of money was spent tarring and patching Blackberry Road in the past year, and Mr. Thompson responded that only necessary repairs to swails and potholes were made. He asked the Engineer if the roll gutter should be extended on Blackberry where it is missing along the Turnpike, but Mr. Kohli suggested using blacktop with vertical curves. He’ll work with Mr. Thompson on the resurfacing plans.
Mr. Sauser moved to direct the Roadmaster to prepare the specifications for the paving work and put them into action with the contractor. Mrs. Ewald stated that she’d like to see the resurfacing project bid separately with the requirement that the contractor be PennDOT certified. Mr. Sauser voiced his concerns that by bidding the work separately last year, additional costs were incurred and delays were so lengthy the project had to be set aside. In any event, the low bidder turned out to be the same contractor that had the Township’s annual road maintenance contract. Mr. Wert stated that all work performed under the annual contract is done on a unit cost basis, and since the low bidders for providing labor & equipment and materials for the year are currently under contract there is no reason to bid the work separately. He seconded Mr. Sauser’s motion. Mr. Sauser and Mr. Wert were in favor and Mrs. Ewald was opposed. Mr. Kohli suggested that the contractor provide an itemized list of hours and equipment for the resurfacing job prior to starting work.
Mr. Zeigler reminded the public that a meeting will be held tomorrow night at the Elementary School at 7:30 P.M. at which time Chester County Planning Commission representatives will present the Landscapes program. Mr. Wert asked if Mr. Zeigler obtained any examples of variant contracts, but Mr. Zeigler responded that he had not located any. Mr. Wert stated that he wants to find out from the County if they will extend the May 18, 1998 deadline for grant applications for the Township. He also wants to ask if the Township can retroactively apply for funds for the Pyle Farm acquisition.
Mrs. Baldwin asked for comments on the presentation made to the Township by the PA Turnpike Commission on April 28th. Mr. Zeigler responded that the discussion was preliminary in nature and that the Planning Commission requested more detailed plans and studies. He stated that the Turnpike Commission expressed their willingness to work with PennDOT and the Township in making road improvements near the proposed slip ramp.
Mr. Sauser asked Mr. Thompson if he had reviewed the materials sent by PennDOT on the “Agility” program, and Mr. Thompson responded that he recently received the information and will review it shortly. Mr. Wert asked the Roadmaster if he believes the Township is paying too much for its road maintenance and whether he kept a tight rein on costs by scheduling jobs, supervising the work and inspecting it afterward. Mr. Thompson assured him that he does follow this procedure, indicating that his mileage expense report is a good indicator of when he is out at various locations in the Township.
Mr. Sauser asked if the VFSA had responded to a resident’s inquiry regarding a silo proposed for Schuylkill Township. Mr. Winckelman answered that she had been sent information, and added that the silo will reduce odors.
Mrs. Baldwin indicated in her report that the HARB recommended that the Board issue a Certificate of Appropriateness, being drafted by Dale Frens, to Donald Andersen. The matter will be placed on the Board’s May 18th agenda.
Prior to the work being done, Mr. Sauser said he requested specifications and a Certificate of Insurance from Kent D. Spotts, the restoration architect who will be repairing a portion of the Revolutionary War Cemetery wall.
Ellen Behrle asked if the Township maintains Ashenfelter Road, and Mr. Sauser responded that Schuylkill Township maintains this border road in exchange for Charlestown Township maintaining a similar length of Buckwalter Road, also bordering the two townships. Mrs. Behrle asked why the Charlestown road crew was working on a pipe extension under Ashenfelter Road if Schuylkill Township should maintain the road. Mr. Thompson responded that the pipe was under Charlestown’s portion of the road and this type of work is not included in the understanding.
Mrs. Behrle commented on the decision not to bid the 1998 resurfacing contract separately from the annual contract. She feels it’s a good general business policy to attempt to mitigate costs and that a separate contract helps keep the contractors honest. As a taxpayer, she stated that she would like to see resurfacing jobs bid separately. Mr. Sauser reiterated his earlier comments that bidding it separately last year led to higher costs and delayed the job. He said it would be unfair to repeat the process this year. Mrs. Behrle asked if the scope of the job changed from last year and Mr. Sauser responded that it had not. She asked if the delay last year was due to the prevailing wage issue on the state level, and Mr. Sauser responded that it was not. Mr. Wert said he believes it would be a disservice to the contractors to bid the resurfacing job separately, the practice of which will eventually lead to fewer bidders and higher costs to the Township.
Mr. Sauser explained the process being undertaken by the Board to review candidates for the position of Township Land Planner. He said that he personally contacted all those who expressed an interest but was only nominally acquainted with one or two of them. Each of the Board members were welcome to make similar contacts, although he is the only one who did so.
Mr. Sauser stated that the Board interviewed several candidates for Planning Consultant and that all three board members were in agreement in their selection of the top ones for the Planning Commission to meet with. He expressed his hope that the Planning Commission would make a recommendation, but instead they recommended that the Township retain the current planner until the end of the year. Mr. Sauser said he then contacted another candidate who recently met with the Planning Commissioners. The Planning Commission responded with the comment that Mr. Turner was highly qualified, but they voiced concerns over the firm’s high level of previous activity with commercial clients. They repeated their earlier recommendation that no change be made in the short term. In response to Mr. Sauser’s question, Mr. Zeigler stated that Mr. Turner’s background and credentials were on par with those of the current planner.
Charlie Philips commented that the Planning Commission was concerned about Mr. Turner’s involvement with developers who have had, or are likely to have, projects in the Township, such as Realen Homes, Rouse Chamberlin, Toll Brothers, and Trammell Crowe. It would be a concern if a planner found it necessary to recuse himself too frequently. Mr. Sauser asked if a vote was taken, and Mr. Zeigler responded yes. He added that one member of the Planning Commission was concerned about a reference Mr. Turner made to working for a private interest group in the Township. The planning commission member was chairman of that group and stated that they had not hired Mr. Turner, who responded that he was paid for his work but didn’t recall who paid him.
Mrs. Ewald said that the Planning Commission has twice strongly recommended that Mr. Comitta be retained and that the interviews shouldn’t be continued.
Mr. Wert questioned the term “strong recommendation” as he felt it was weak considering the length of time the current planner has been with the Township. He noted that the Planning Commission indicated the need for better direction from the Board and Commission in the hope of correcting the planner’s deficiencies in the position for the remainder of the year. Mr. Wert said that the planner shouldn’t need this direction; he should be more proactive. He stated his interest in interviewing Mr. Turner for the position. Mrs. Ewald said the strongest testament to Mr. Comitta’s work is to look around the Township for signs of careful guidance and an excellent job, making Charlestown a leading township for land planning.
Mr. Sauser moved to terminate all association with Thomas Comitta Associates and to withdraw all work in progress until a new planner is selected. There was no second. Mr. Wert said it would be unfair to the Planning Commission to work without a planner in the interim period. Mr. Wert stated that he wants to meet with Mr. Turner and obtain more information on whether frequent recusals will present a problem. He said he is not concerned that Mr. Turner has worked on behalf of many developers in the past as this gives him broader experience and knowledge of both sides of an issue that can be used in the Township’s favor.
Mr. Sauser stated that he’ll contact Mr. Turner for a follow up interview with the Board and that they will consider the concerns raised by the Planning Commission and obtain more information.
Mr. Wert recused himself from this matter, reserving the right to vote in the event of a tie. Mr. Panizza was present to review documents submitted to the Township for signature, namely the Subdivision Escrow Agreement and the Subdivision & Land Development Agreement. He requested that the documents be signed and held pending resolution of finalizing all agreements with the neighboring property owners. He indicated that Mr. Zaro was close to agreement but wishes to sign after all other agreements are made, which should take place within 2 or 3 days.
Mr. Wert indicated that he read the Homeowners’ Documents and found them to be satisfactory. He asked if Mr. Oeste had received them, and Mr. Panizza responded yes.
Mrs. Ewald asked if there are land exchange agreements or lot line change agreements to be incorporated in these documents, and Mr. Panizza responded that there were no changes since the plan was approved. Mr. Zaro will sign an agreement of sale for a small parcel needed for a portion of the road construction.
Mr. Oeste stated that the Subdivision Escrow Agreement and Subdivision and Land Development Agreements are consistent with those required by the Township. He noted that there is no escrow agent at the present time so the Subdivision Escrow Agreement must be held and released to the title company at settlement for recording.
Mr. Sauser moved to approve the Subdivision Escrow Agreement and Subdivision and Land Development Agreement with the understanding that the township solicitor hold the escrow agreement for release to the title company at the time of settlement, and release further subject to the satisfaction of all other outstanding issues. There was no second. Mrs. Ewald said that all documents must be in order and submitted as a complete set before she will vote. She offered to sign the documents earlier than the next meeting and simply ratify the vote at the May 18th meeting if Mr. Panizza can provide all necessary documents that quickly.
Gary Mooney and Greg Britcher were present to discuss growth and development plans for the soccer club, some of which would require assistance from the Township. Mr. Sauser stated that he received an outline from Mr. Britcher of these plans, and suggested that a application deadline extension be sought from the County, as the deadline of May 18th is very close.
Mr. Britcher said that the PASC includes over 600 children, most under the age of eleven who come from the entire Phoenixville area. Projects they wish to undertake include:
With regard to Item #1, Mr. Kohli stated that he can specify what needs to be done to correct the trench situation, but it will be up to the Soccer Club to undertake the work required.
Mr. Sauser said that the Township is a strong supporter of the program and has extended credit to the PASC in the past for some of their projects. He wants the Parks and Recreation Board to review the Park as a whole and determine budget limits for the Township, making a proposal and recommendations to the Board so it can review the overall plan relative to other park projects.
Mr. Sauser said that he’s been concerned for years that the PASC and PMYC attract primarily outsiders to the park and that not enough is done to draw in the residents of the Township. Part of this is due to the location of the park in the corner of the township, and that while its the most populated area of the township, it’s difficult to reach the park on foot because of the need to cross busy Coldstream Road. Mr. Britcher distributed a flyer to the Board that was to be handed out to students at Charlestown Elementary School, indicating that they are trying to bring in more people from the township.
Mr. Sauser said that a prioritized list of improvements and budgetary estimates is needed before Mr. Britcher’s items can be addressed.
Chuck Dobson of Chester Valley Engineers and Robert Campbell were present to discuss the 4/15/98 Final Plan for Mr. Campbell’s proposed subdivision off Howells Road.
Mr. Dobson stated that with regard to Mr. Comitta’s review letter of April 9, 1998, the applicant agreed to township monitoring of the clearing limits along Lots #3 & #4 and to replace screening as needed. Note #19 was added to the plan to reflect this understanding.
Mr. Dobson said there were two comments on Mr. Kohli’s review letter to be addressed. First, with respect to marking an equestrian trail on the plan, Mr. Campbell decided after consulting with his attorney that it was not in his best interest to allow equestrian access to his property. This matter was discussed at the Planning Commission and the members accepted Mr. Campbell’s decision. Second, the review letter indicated that screening should be shown on the plans for Lot #2 relative to the Spring Meadow Farms subdivision. As Mr. Campbell currently enjoys the viewshed as it is, they propose to wait until Spring Meadow Farms is constructed to determine what, if any screening is needed. He also wants to reserve the opportunity to consult with any new owner of Lot #2 in order to take their preferences into consideration. Note #21 addresses this issue, stating that the landscaping plan for Lot #2 will be subject to review by Charlestown Township at the time a building permit is issued.
Mrs. Ewald asked if the shared private driveway issue had been resolved. Mr. Dobson explained that the new owners of Jeff Slobodian’s former property had not been notified of the subdivision by certified mail, since Mr. Slobodian was still the owner of record and the notice had gone to him instead. They were unaware that the driveway they used was in fact, owned by Mr. Campbell with a right of way granted them to access their property. Since then, Mr. Campbell has met with the new owners, the Barnharts, and believes that their concerns have been answered. They were notified of this evening’s meeting and chose not to attend. Mr. Campbell offered to allow them to select the private driveway name, and their first choice was Wild Berry Lane. Mr. Campbell agreed to add this name to the plans.
Mrs. Ewald said the Board requested that the equestrian trails be included in the plans and that the Planning Commission ignored this direction. Mr. Sauser disagreed, stating that this was not a direction from the majority of the Board. Mr. Campbell said he spoke to Michael Main, developer of Spring Meadow Farms, and that although Mr. Main expressed a desire to see the trail marked on the Campbell plan, it wasn’t needed to make the Spring Meadow trail viable. Mr. Campbell stated that no trail was ever indicated on the Slobodian’s deed to the property, and that he intends to remove the existing road toward the back of his property that may have been used in the past for this purpose.
The question of equestrian trails was discussed at length. Mr. Campbell remained adamant that he did not want to provide them, and Mr. Sauser acknowledged that he has no obligation to do so. Mr. Sauser asked if there was any way Mr. Campbell could consider accommodating a trail to allow the through flow of equestrian traffic to contiguous trails, but Mr. Campbell declined. Mr. Sauser asked if Mr. Campbell would consider discussing the possibility of providing a trail to any subsequent buyers of his lots, and he agreed to do so as a good faith effort. Mr. Wert asked Mr. Zeigler if the Planning Commission was unanimous in its view that a trail was not a necessity and Mr. Zeigler indicated that they were unanimous.
Mr. Sauser moved to approve Robert Campbell’s Final Subdivision Plan dated 4/15/98 subject to Mr. Kohli’s and Mr. Comitta’s review letters of April 1, 1998 and April 9, 1998 respectively, with the exception of removing the requirement for equestrian trails and agreeing to waive landscaping and screening requirements as indicated in Mr. Kohli’s note #5 and Mr. Comitta’s note #8 and instead revisiting these issues after Spring Meadows construction takes place. The motion was conditioned on a positive response from the Chester County Conservation District and further conditioned upon Mr. Campbell entering into an escrow agreement for future road improvements or the completion of those road improvements prior to recordation of the plan. Mr. Wert seconded the motion. Mr. Sauser and Mr. Wert were in favor. Mrs. Ewald was opposed, stating her objections over the removal of equestrian trails as discussed earlier in the evening.
Mrs. Behrle asked if the applicant is required to provide trails. Mr. Connolly said that equestrian trails were identified in the Township’s 1993 Open Space Plan, although none are shown on the Campbell property. He stated that the trails designated in this plan were expressed as a community benefit, and when such an expression is shown in a planning document, the Board and Planning Commission have a responsibility to reflect these values or revise the documents. Mr. Wert responded that although these kinds of facilities are of value to the community, in this instance there are alternative trails in the area achieving the same results, so the Planning Commission’s recommendation should be upheld.
Mrs. Ewald moved to approve the Land Development Plan dated 4/27/98. Mr. Wert seconded. Mr. Sauser called for discussion. He asked if Sprint will forward a copy of their plans to the Turnpike Commission per Mr. Comitta’s recommendation in his May 4, 1998 review letter and the applicant agreed. Mr. Sauser called the vote and all were in favor of approving the plan.
Mr. Sauser asked Mr. Oeste to respond to Jeffrey Laudenslager’s request for a letter of intention for two parcels the Township indicate as tax exempt.
Mr. Sauser asked what was being done about a request from the Charlestown Hunt Homeowners Association for a street light at the intersection of Route 29 and Charlestown Hunt Drive. Mr. Kohli responded that he has been in contact with Mrs. Kelley of the Association and with PECO and that arrangements are being made for a street light of minimal intensity that serves the purpose of lighting the entrance to the Hunt without disturbing existing homes on Route 29. The Homeowners Association will be responsible for electric bill payments.
Jeff Fried, owner of a parcel of land off Conestoga Road, asked for clarification on the requirements for improvements to the shared driveway leading to this parcel at the time a house is built on it. Mr. Kohli explained that the driveway already serves two houses, and according to the 1/16/89 William Cranden subdivision plan, the third house to be built would trigger the requirement that the driveway be brought up to the standards specified in the current subdivision and land development ordinance. Mr. Fried questioned a letter dated 1/25/94 which he received from Mr. Kohli prior to his purchase of the lot, which indicates that the lot has a right to access the driveway onto Conestoga Road. Mr. Kohli affirmed that this is correct, but it doesn’t relieve the owner from the responsibility of bringing the driveway up to the standards outlined in the ordinance. Mr. Fried is negotiating with a potential buyer, Joan Kistler, who is concerned about the cost of upgrading the private lane if she purchases this lot. Mr. Kohli stated that the Board has the power to waive some of these requirements, but in order to do so, a driveway plan must be submitted to them for consideration.
Kevin Kuhn commented that he attended the recent County Planning Commission presentation of Landscapes 2020 and saw members of the Historical Commission, Parks & Rec Board and Planning Commission, but was very disappointed to see that none of the Supervisors attended.
Mark Connolly asked about plans for constructing Broadwater Lane this spring. Mr. Kohli stated that Realen has notified the Township they will be constructing the road in the 50 foot right of way after relocating a power line.
The meeting was adjourned at 11:30 P.M. A joint meeting of the Board of Supervisors and Planning Commission will be held on May 5, 1998 at 7:30 P.M. at the Charlestown Elementary School. The next business meeting of the Board of Supervisors will take place on May 18, 1998 at 7:30 P.M. at the Charlestown Elementary School.