Chairman Thomas Zug convened the December 19, 2002 meeting of the Warwick Township Planning Commission at 7:00 p.m. Present were Commissioners Thomas Zug, Jane Boyce, John Hohman, Brian Slinskey, and Craig Kimmel. John Gazsi, Kelly Gutshall, and Daniel Garrett were absent. In attendance were Township Manager Daniel Zimmerman, Township Engineer Chuck Hess, Mike Skelly, David Pusey, Daryl Weaver, Joel Snyder, Matthew Plant, Allen W. Martin, Michael Glass, Jim Wenger, and Roy Martin.

COMMUNICATIONS: The Commission received a copy of the Lititz Borough Planning Commission’s December 3, 2002 meeting minutes.

CONSIDER THE DARYL M. WEAVER SKETCH PLAN, PREPARED BY FISHER ENGINEERING, DATED 12/5/2002: Michael Plant, representing Fisher Engineering, detailed the existing features of the site. He explained that the property owner wishes to subdivide the approximate 6.5 acre tract and create an approximate 3.8 acre flag lot (lot 1 of the plan) and an approximate .5 acre lot which would contain the existing home on the lot. In addition, lands would be added to the existing "Weaver’s Garage" property creating an approximate 2.4 acre lot. The plan proposes an addition to the garage and a proposed access drive extending from Orchard Road. The access drive would also serve the proposed home on lot 1. The proposed access drive to the garage would be created by subdividing a portion of property owned by Norman and Violetta Weaver and conveying it to the garage property. Fisher explained that the existing access points along East Newport Road that access the garage would be remain as part of this plan.

The applicant is requesting a Waiver of Section 602.15.D which states that "no part of any structure shall be located within 30' from the cartway edge of an access drive". The applicant’s consultant has requested a Waiver of the requirement to allow the proposed access drive to be within 5' of an existing garage. The Township Engineer commented that, as in the past, as long as some sort of protective device is provided to guard the structure, they have no objections to granting the Waiver. Since all access drives are required to be constructed with vertical concrete curb this may be sufficient; otherwise, bollards could also be installed to further protect the existing garage structure from vehicles traveling along the access drive. If these protective facilities are provided, they would support the Waiver request. On a motion by Slinskey, seconded by Hohman, the Commission unanimously recommends approval of the Waiver request contingent upon the Township Engineer’s comments being addressed.

Fisher addressed the Township Engineer’s December 11, 2002 comment letter. The Commission inquired whether or not the applicant has received permission from the utility companies for the proposed construction activities and improvements that will be within each right-of-way. Fisher responded that they have not received permission from either utility company to date. Fisher stated that the Township Engineer commented that although the proposed access drive intersection with Orchard Road would only be 200' rather than 300' as required by the Ordinance, a Waiver may be warranted due to the limitations caused by the configuration of the property considering the intent to reduce the traffic accessing directly onto Newport Road. Fisher explained that the existing access points along East Newport Road meet sight distance requirements, and the proposed access along Orchard Road would meet sight distance requirements (to the intersection). The property owner (Daryl Weaver) described the traffic movement patterns on the garage property for the benefit of the Commission. He explained that the existing macadam drive on lot 2 accesses the garage property. Fisher explained that the plan proposes no change to the configuration.

Fisher stated that the Township Engineer commented that the proposed access should be constructed with vertical concrete curb and inquired whether or not the Commission would be agreeable to granting a Waiver of the requirement to provide for storm water to sheet flow across the property. Zug inquired where would the storm water flow.

Fisher outlined the proposed storm water management facilities on the site and explained that underwater detention facilities might be proposed. Zug explained that if underground facilities are proposed, it may be feasible to install concrete curb along the access drive to convey storm water on the site.

Fisher explained that the plan will require zoning approval for lot 2 of the proposed plan. The Township Manager explained that he will provide a copy of the Planning Commission’s recommendations to the Zoning Hearing Board for their review.

CONSIDER APPLICATION TO MODIFY THE NEWPORT SQUARE CONDITIONAL USE DECISION, PREPARED BY RGS ASSOCIATES: Joel Snyder, representing RGS Associates, outlined the modifications for the benefit of the Commission. The current proposal is to eliminate all "commercial space" on lot 153 and lot 173 plus the convenience store on lot 153. The only remaining commercial space is the existing barn that would be converted to a restaurant facility. The new proposal is to construct 10 fee-simple townhomes on the five (5) current single-family lots (lots 146 through 151), 30 fee-simple townhomes on current commercial lots 152 and 153, and 21 rental townhomes on the current commercial lot 173 and a 1,430 square feet addition to the existing barn structure. He explained that the builder (David Pusey) previously submitted a plan proposing the construction of 10 fee-simple townhomes on the five (5) current single-family lots (lots 146 through 151); however, the Commission was not agreeable to providing for access to these units via the previously approved commercial area. Snyder explained that the previously approved commercial area is not marketable; in addition, since Lititz Borough is currently revitalizing its downtown economic district, they did not want to detract from this area in the Borough. He explained that the current real estate market in this area is townhomes. He noted that they are not requesting any approvals at this evening’s meeting.

Snyder explained that the barn would not meet code requirements for a kitchen, therefore, the plan proposes an addition to the barn. In addition, a maintenance building is also proposed as part of the plan. Snyder explained that the proposed plan would increase the density of the original plan from 5.6 units per acre to 6.1 units per acre. The applicant submitted renderings of the proposal as viewed from Newport Road.

Zug inquired whether or not the applicant has considered maintaining the single-family lots rather than creating townhome lots in order to decrease the proposed density of the plan. The developer (Michael Glass) expressed the opinion that this area of the plan could be improved and inquired whether or not the applicant could meet with Township staff to further discuss this area. Hohman suggested that a portion of the previously approved commercial area be maintained as part of the project. He added that a "general store" could be created. Glass explained that they attempted to market this area. He added that they discussed the location with several convenience store owners and to date, there has been no interest. Boyce inquired whether or not a market study was performed before the project began. Glass explained that a market study was performed; however, the market in Lititz has changed since the study was prepared.

The Township Manager inquired whether or not any of the proposed units would be available through LHOP. Pusey stated that 5 units have been sold through LHOP to date. Snyder requested the Commission’s comments regarding the plan. Boyce inquired what would happen to the barn if the developer is unable to lease the structure as a restaurant. Glass explained that an individual has expressed interest in leasing the barn as a restaurant. Boyce expressed concern that the concept of the original plan to create a Village is being replaced by a rental community. She recommended that the developer continue to market the area for commercial purposes. Glass inquired whether or not retail stores should be provided along Newport Road. Boyce stated that this was the original purpose of the development. Hohman suggested that the developer consider village uses such as a coffee shop, a bookstore, a video rental store, or a similar use that residents in this area could use. Snyder explained that the small size of the commercial spaces limits the type of uses. Boyce inquired what type of uses the developer originally intended. Snyder explained that these were the types of uses they had anticipated; however, they have not been successful in attracting interest. He added that the Ordinance does not require commercial uses within a Village Overlay. Boyce maintained that this was the concept originally presented to the Township and reiterated that the developer should continue to try to market this area for commercial uses. Slinskey inquired whether or not the developer would be agreeable to reserving a portion of the site for commercial uses in order to accommodate any market change in the future. Snyder inquired whether or not the Commission would be agreeable to the developer creating a commercial area within the site. Boyce stated that she would not be agreeable to any of the originally approved commercial area being eliminated. Slinskey concurred with Boyce’s comments. He added that although a market study was performed to support the commercial area, no additional information has been submitted supporting that the concept will not work at this time. Slinskey stated that the developer should also attempt to reduce the density on the site. Glass requested clarification on the Commission’s comments. Zug clarified that the developer should provide additional background on the feasibility of commercial uses in this area for the Commission’s review.

The Commission members stated that there are no signs at the site indicating that commercial lease space is available and that more advertising should be done. He added that he is not able to obtain financing for commercial space. The Township Manager suggested that the developer begin by creating the restaurant in order to establish a commercial use within the complex. The issue was discussed at length. Zug stated that he would be agreeable to the proposal to maintain the commercial area on the west side of Oak Street and to modify the lot on the east side of the roadway. A majority of the Commission members are agreeable to modifying the east side of Oak Street, and for the developer to actively advertise the available commercial lease space on the west side of Oak Street. The developer indicated that they will revise the plan in accordance with the Planning Commission’s recommendations.

REVIEW OAKFRONT LIMITED PARTNERSHIP PROPOSAL (VERSATEK): Jim Wenger, representing Derck and Edson, stated that Versatek is proposing to occupy the building previously occupied by Yerger Brothers. He explained that one of the affected lots is bisected by the municipal boundary with Lititz Borough. He explained that the site is currently vacant and the property owner wishes to place a warehouse on the lot. Wenger stated that this lot is zoned R-1 Residential in the Township, and they wish to have the property rezoned to Industrial and to apply for zoning approval. He explained that a double row of evergreen trees would be planted at the rear of the property. The Township Manager inquired whether or not any of the existing mature trees on the lot could remain on the property. Wenger stated that they would retain as many of the existing trees on the property as possible. He outlined the site layout for the benefit of the Commission and explained that a portion of the building would be located within Warwick Township. On a moton by Hohman, seconded by Kimmel the Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the rezoning request.

ADJOURNMENT: With no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 9:15 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Daniel L. Zimmerman
Township Manager