Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout87-0026IN THE C~DURT OF C~DF~DN pTRAS O? CUMBERLAND,.. ~CO~ ~UNTY, PENNSYLV~lqiA NO. AR/p FROM DECISION OF ZONINC~ G BOkP, D WIILI_AM C. KOI.IAS and WILLIAM C. COSTOPOOI/DS t/a REGENCY SOUTH MDBILE HON~ PARK, Appellants vs. ZONING HEARING BOARD OF MIDDLESEX TOWNSHIP, Appellee NOTIC~ OF APPEAL items 1, 2, 3 and 4. the"REfURN TO" space on the lo this will prevent this card from ~ date of ~ervices ere ix~'(master for fees and cheCk t>oxfest date and address of delivery, Delivery. tO: Lring 'Board of Idles ax Township ;t Street PA 17043 26 civil 87 ce: rticle Number Insured ~COD Pt9 8636615 nature of addressee_Q_cagent and RED, Add~e~ee ivery PI9 i 6 oo RECEIPT FOR CERSIFIED MAIL NO INSUR~ANCE COVERAGE PROVIDED-- NOT FO~ INTERNATIONAL MAIL (~c~ e Reverse) of Middlesex 831 Market Street ~.o., S~A~E ~M~ Z~6DE Lemoyne, PA 17043 POSTAGE CERTIFIED FEE SPECIAL DELIVERY RESTA~YED 6ELig~RY SHOW TO WHOM AND DATE DELIVERED SHOW TO WHOM DATE, AND ADDRESS OF DELIVERY DELIVERY DELIVERY TOTAL POSTAGE AND FEES DATE ~ISENDER: ComCete items l, 2, 3 and 4. Put your address ~n the "RETURN TO" space on the reverse side. Failure to do this will prevent this card from being returned to you. The return raC~~rdaide fo~ the name of the pecson delivered to end the date delivery: For additional fees the following services are available. Consult postmaster for fee~ and check, for service(s) requested. 1. ~ Show to whom, date and address of delivery- 2. [] Restricted Delivery. 3. Article Addressed to: zoning Hearing Board of Middlesex Township 350 N. Middlesex Road carlisle PA 17013 4. Type of Service: Article Number ]lJ~ ~egistered [] Insured Certified []COD p 095 538 905 [] Express Mail Always obtain s~gnature ot' addressee o_Lagent and DATE DELIVERED. E2 5. Signature-- Addressee f~ 6. Signature-- Agent 7e°'?"¢.- ~1~ 8. Addressee's Address (O]V'L Y if requested and fee paidj p 095 538 905 RECEIPT FOR CERTiFiED MAiL NO ~S FOP, ,NTERNAT'ONAL MA, L (See Reverse) l__eseX zone-rig ~ear. a~ .NO.MiddleseX Rd and ZiP code ,ostage edified Fee )ecial Delivery Fee · icted Delivery Fee Receipt Showing Return ~ ,.-.,~,,~ ~elivered tO whom aha ~o,~ - tO WhOm, oTAL Postage and Fees stmark or Date Bd WILLIAM C. KOLLAS and WILLIAM C. COSTOPOULD~S t/a REGENCY SOUTH MOBILE HOME PARK, Appellants VS. ZONING HEARING BOARD OF MIDDLESEX TOWNSHIP Appellee IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 26 CIVIL TERM, 19 87 WRIT OF CERTIORARI COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA) : COUNTY OF CUMBER LAND) SS, TO: Zoning Hearing Board of Middlesex Township: We, being willingforcertain reasons, to have certified a certain action between William C. Kollas and William C. Costopoulos t/a Regency South Mobile Home Park pending before you, do command you that the record of the action aforesaid with all things concern- ing said action, shall be certified and sent to our judges of our Court of Common Pleas at Carlisle, within 20 days of the date hereof, together with this writ; so that we may further cause to be done that which ought to be done according to the laws and Constitution of this Commonwealth. WITNESS, the Honorable our said Court, at Carlisle, Pa., the 7th day of January 19 87 TRUE COPY FROM' RECORD in T'csim ~ w.er~ ~ h ,,:: un::0 set my hand and t',~ , o~' ;~i ; ,:~ ii~le, i-a. Lawrence E. Welker BY: Prothonotary DEPUTY WILLIAM C. KOLLAS and WILLIAM C. COSTOPOULQS t/a REGENCY SOUTH MOBILE HOME PARK, Appellants VS. ZONING HEARING BOARD OF MIDDLESEX TOWNSHIP Appellee IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 26 CIVIL TERM, 19 87 WRIT OF CERTIORARI COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA) COUNTY OF CUMBER LAND) SS. TO: Zoning Hearing Board of Middlesex Township: We, being willingforcertain reasons, to have certified a certain action between William C. Kollas and William C. Costopoulos t/a Regency South Mobile Home Park pending before you, do command you that the record of the action aforesaid with all things concern- ing said action, shall be certified and sent to our judges of our Court of Common Pleas at Carlisle, within_ 20 _days of the date hereof, together with this writ; so that we may further cause to be done that which ought to be done according to the laws and Constitution of this Commonwealth. WITNESS, the Honorable our said Court, at Carlisle, Pa., the ~._ 7th_}__ day of January , 19 ..8..7 . Lawrence E. Welker BY: Prothonotary DEPUTY W!LLI~4 C. KOLLAS and WILLIAM : C. COSTOPOULOS t/a REGENCY : SOUTH MOBILE HOME PARK, : Appellants vs. Z©NING HEARING BOARD OF MIDDLESEX TOWNSHIP, Appe~,.~ lee IN THE COURT OF COI~E4ON PLEAS OF CUMBEt~AND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. f7/~ CIVIL APPEAL FROM DECISION OF ZONING HEARING BOARD William C. Koilas and William C. Costopoulos t/a Regency South Mobile Home Park by their attorneys, Kollas, Costopoulos & Foster, appeal the decision of the Zoning Hearing Board of Middlesex Township, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, rendered at a meeting held December 17, 1986, a copy of said decision received by Appellants on December 19, 1986, and in support thereof state the following: 1. Appellants, William C. Kollas and William C. Costopoulos are the landowners of the land directly involved in the decision appealed from situate in Middlesex Township, and do business from their principal place of business at 831 Market Street, Lemoyne, Cu~berland County, Pennsylvania 17043. thirty-five (35) acres of unimproved land situate in Middlesex Township and Silver Spring Township, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, which premises are situate on the southern side of United States Route 11 approximately midway between New Kingstown and the intersection of U.S. Route 11 and U.S. Route 81. 4. On September 23, 1986, A~pellants filed a request for a special exception for that portion of the unimproved land lying in Middlesex Township comprising 18.1 acres zoned Residential Suburban district with the Zoning Hearing Board and the Planning Commission of Middlesex Township to construct a mobile home park which would have a maximum capacity of 100 mobile homes pursuant to the Middlesex Township Zoning Ordinance Article VIII, Section 8.02(D) (3) which allows mobile home parks in residential suburban districts by special exception. 5. A hearing was held before the Middlesex Township Zoning Hearing Board on November 12, 1986, and on December 17, 1986, the Zoning Hearing Board held a meeting for the purpose of rendering a decision. The Board denied the request for special exception and on December 19, 1986, issued the written decision to Appellants, a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A". 6. The action of the Zoning Hearing Board in denying the Applicant's request for a special exception was arbitrary, ~capricious, an abuse of discretion, unsupported by the evidence and/or contrary to law in that: (a) The Board erred in Finding of Fact No. 3 in finding that '~the property in question is subject to surface water flooding." This finding is unsupported by the evidence. (b) The Board erred in Finding of Fact No. 4 in finding "that the drainage swales and grade shown on the plans were inadequate." This finding was unsupported by the evidence. (c) The Board erred in.Finding of Fact No. 5 in finding that "the proposed development did not meet the requirements of the Township's comprehensive plan." This finding is unsupported by the evidence. (d) The Board erred in Finding of Fact No. 6 in finding that "the proposed development will increase traffic congestion on Route 11." This finding is unsupported by the evidence. (e) The Board erred in failing to find as fact and/or to conclude as law that the application, development plan, supplemental narrative, Exhibits and/or testimony offered by the Applicants established as a matter of fact and/or law that the Applicants'~ proposal meets the requirements of Section 8.02(D) (3) and Section 15.04(D) (5) of the Middlesex Township Zoning Ordinance. (f) The Board erred in failing to find as fact and/or to conclude as law that the evidence offered in opposition to the Applicants' request failed to meet the burden of proof necessary to support a denial of the special exception request on any lawful basis. (g) The Board erred in Conclusion of Law No. 1 in concluding that the "proposed development plan will cause excessive water problems and traffic congestion resulting in safety problems." There is insufficient evidence upon which to support such a conclusion. The conclusion is also contrary to the applicable law. Moreover, design of the surface water management system is not a specific requirement of the special exception approval process. The requirements of surface water management stated in the township's land development and/or subdivision ordinance must be complied with in a separate approval process. (h) The Board erred in Conclusion of Law No. 2 in concluding that "mobile home park will reduce the tax base of~ the municipality." There is insufficient evidence to support such a conclusion nor is there a finding of fact to support it. Moreover, such a consideration is totally irrelevant and impertinent to the issues for consideration in a special exception request. The conclusion is therefore contrary to the applicable law. (i) The Board erred in Conclusion of Law No. 3 in concluding that "the requirements of compatability, suitability and assessability set forth in the ordinance have not been met." The requirements of Section 15.04 (D) (5)c. 2, 3, 4, are general requirements which the Applicant has no burden to prove. Those opposing an application for a special exception have a heavy burden to prove that the proposed special exception will cause an adverse effect upon the public greater than would be expected in normal circumstances. There is insufficient evidence to support such a conclusion. (j) The Board erred in placing a greater burden of proof upon the Applicant than may by law be imposed; and/or in making findings of fact and/or conclusions of law unsupported by the sufficient evidence in accordance with the applicable burden of proof placed upon those who oppose a special exception request. WHEREFORE, Appellants request your Honorable Court to reverse the decision of the Zoning Hearing Board of Middlesex Township and to direct that Appellants be granted a special exception for the mobile home park development as requested in this Application. Respectfully submitted, KOLLAS, COSTOPOULOS & FOSTER William C. Kollas, Esquire 831 Market Street P. O. Box 222 Lemoyne, Pennsylvania 17043 Telephone: (717) 761-2121 Attorney for Appellants TRUE: COPY FROM RECORD II1 l'{~!;rO:~'y wcor.~ t h., ~no sst my MIDDLESEX TOWNSHIP ZONING HEARING BOARD IN RE: Application of Kollas and Costopoulos t/a Regency South Mobile Home Park DECISION After notice and hearings on the :~boYe Application, the denies the request' 5 o 6 o The Applicant seeks a special exception for r. he purpose of constructing a mobile home park upon land zoned RS. Mobile home parks are not permitted uses but Article ViII section 8.02(D)(3) does make such a use available by special exception. From testimony and photographs offered by residents and others opposing the request it is evident that the property in question as well as surrounding properties are subject to surface water flooding during periods of precipitation. The Township engineer received the applicant's plans and advised in writing that drainage swales and grade shown on the plans were inadequate. The Township engineer was~not prese~t at the hearing, but his report was a part of the planning commissions recommendation. The Planning Commission advised that the proposed develop- ment did not meet the requirements of the Township's compre- hensive plan. The proposed development will increase traffic congestion on Route 11. CONCLUSIONS The Board coocludes that the proposed development will cause excessive water problems and traffic congestion resulting in safety problems. The B~ard believes that mobile hov~e park ~,~J ii reduc~,~ the tax ha~e of 'the municipality. ,~ . ,~ ~ fo~Lh in the Ordin~:':c~ ~iave ~o'~ )~ee~i :~c:~. MIDDLESEX ZONING HEARING BOARD ~-lvin E. Spahr~air.ra~n 914 N. MOUNTAIN RD. HARRISBURG! PA. ~ Sept. 18 1986 Bridging Tomorrow Today CONSULTING ENGINEER Phone 717- 652- 9106 Civil Engineering Sanitary Engineering Structural Engineering Building Plans Surveying REGENCY SOUTH MOBILE HOME PARK P~OJECT DESCRIPTION Regency South proposes the develop~nent of a 100 unit mobile home park to be located in Middlesex Township, Cumberland County, Pa. on the southwest corner of the intersection of U. S. Route 11 and Appalachian Moad. The tract encompasses 23.4 acres;, lg.1 acres are situated in Middlesex Twp., and the remaining~.~= = acres lie within Silver Spring ~;:p. The project is to be develope8 as need arises for spaces and is expected to be completed within five years. A total of t00 soaces or units are proposed which yields a density of 4.27 units per acre over the 23.4 acre residentially zoned portion or 5.5 units per acre over the portion located within Middlesex Twp.; both of which are within the maximum permitted density factor of 7.0 units per acre. The average lot area v~ll be 5088 sq. ft. and no lot will be less than 5000 sq. ft. Units will meet or exceed the minimum setback requirements and units will be separated by a distance of no less than 30 feet. Streets will be paved to a width of 30 feet and will be construct- e~ in accordance with Township specifications. Minimum grade will ~.' °' ~o off- be 0.50 ;'~ and maximum grade will not exceed 2.22 ~. street parking spaces will be provided for each unit. Water will be provided by the Middlesex Tovmship authority via e×tension of the existing 12" main located along US Route 11. ~EG~WING at a point at the lands of Leon K. and Dorothy R. Sunday, said point being approximately 300 feet South of U.S. Route 11; thence by same South 64° 04' 05" East 245 feet North to the township lir~; thence along to%~ship line South 37° 35' 27" East 1200 feet more or less to a point where tD~ township line intersects with lands of Clarence E. Gutshall; thence by lands of Clarence E. Gut~hall South 0° 08' 30" East 105 feet more or less to a point on the lands of Jack K. Sunday; thence by same South 80° 21' 55" West 1044.67 feet to a point; thence by same North 03° 03' 02" East 1227.08 feet to a point, THE PLACE OF BEGINNING. CONT~INING thsr- ein 1~.06 acres more or less. addresses of the adjacent property c~mers: Brian Sunday, 145 ~palac~hian Road (uses mailing address as 7107 Carlisle PJ_ke) Kesmemh Wag~er, 141 Appalachian Road Jcb~n Early, 139 ~alachian Road (uses mailing address Box 77 Ne~ Kensington) Clarence Go,shall, 137 Appalach/an Poad R~/K OF THE P~DPERUf: J. K. Sunday Y,L~_~_ PR~PER2~Z LLNE: Brian Sunday CP~S ITE SIDE: J. J. Snyder REGENCY SOUTH page 2 The design water useage rate for the 100 units totals 35,000 gpd, while the actual useage rate is expected to be '22,500 gpd. Sanitary sewers and a sewage pumping station will be installed to collect and convey the sanitary wastes to the Middlesex Twp. Authority sewer system. Connection is proposed at manhole 305 located along the south side of U. S. Route 11 near the northwest property corner. Storm water runoff will be collected and stored in a series of detention ponds and swales to effectively control runoff in such a manner so as not to exceed pre-development runoff conditions. Storm water runoff will be released to exis~ting storm water cul- verts located along U. S. Route 11. A 25 feet landscaped buffer zome will be provided around the per- imeter of the proposed park to visually screen the site. Inter- nal landscaping will also be provided to create an asthetically pleasing atmosphere. Recreational facilities will be furnished at designated areas and will encompass a 2½ acre area. James A. Cieri, PE Consulting Engineer James A. Cieri Halrilburg. PA 17112 ~AL~LAT~ ~¥ ~ D~TE CHECKED BY ' ' DATE / ?//8/8¥ 914 N: Mountain Rd. Phone (717) 652-9106 -~7~or~ ._~'-~.~'~r- ~'>G,~ ~9~ DRAINAGE AREA TIME RAIN- '- ' ' NLF.T '" FALL DIS- LF.IqGT~ SLOPE TYPE ~-A INT£1~- CNARGr CF' OF' OF NO' AA C /.~Z.0 ~AC~ AT ~T SITY D:~ pipe PiP[ N ~A~K p~p[ ~LOCl~f FLYING " I 0 rbLL A~ES AS~E~ ACR[S MIN. MIN ~N /H~ C r S fEET rT I '~ r~s Ct5 ., /~ ./, 9 o.~~ m,~ ~.o~ ~,/ ~,/ ~,/ /~.~ I ~' ~.~o~ ~ .~z~ j_~-/m,lm~ xJ,/ ~-/~~ , -- ~ ' , ' , ~ . ~3'~2' /,7 ~/.~ ~ ~'~/~ ~,~o o.~o.~ I,g~ ~ ~ 1~ 7 ~ 7 771 /~o' Do/ ~e/e ~ ~.~ ~,~o I,~7 ~,~ ..... /,/~ .~,~'~ ~.~ ~.7 /~.~ ' ' t "'~ "' Glace sse¢ia es, Ir ¢. April 9, 1986 CONSULTING ENGINEERS 396,~1. LEXINGTON STREET HARRISBURG. PENNSYLVANIA 17109 {717) 657-5800 (717) 6S7-S80"1 Middlesex Township Board of Supervisors 350 North Middlesex Road Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 Gentlemen: Re: Regency South We have reviewed the referenced project and submit the following comments: 1. The Township Authority has capacity in the sewerage system to serve the proposed development. 2. Since the proposed development will be privately owned, the development is considered'as one tap and 155 connections. e It appears that the water system is proposed as a private system. The developer should be advised that'the Authority's water system is within 1,000 feet of the proposed subdivision and that, in accordance with the Township ordinances, an extension to the Authority's water system may be required. If you require additional information, please advise. Very truly yo~gj~r. Ts, ? ' LA RENCE ~.//ZIMMERMAN Presi dent LCZ/mds cc: Richard C. Snelbaker, Attorney Middlesex Township Municipal Authority NOTICE A public hearing will be held by the Zoning Hearing Board of Middlesex Township, Cumberland County, at the ToWnship Building, 350 North Middlesex Road at 7:30 p.m. on Wednesday November 12, 1986, for the purpose of considering an application by William C. Kollas and William C. Costopoulos, 831 Market Street, Lemoyne, Pennsylvania 17043, for the special exception to construct a mobile home park on lands along U.S. Route 11 and Appalachian Road. Ail persons interested in said applications are invited to attend. ZONING HEARING BOARD MIDDLESEX TOWNSHIP Edward W. Harker, Solicitor MIDDLESEX TOWNSHIP ZONING HEARING BOARD IN RE: Application of Kollas and Costopoulos t/a Regency South Mobile Home Park DECISION After notice and hearing on the above Application, the Board denies the request for a special exception. FINDINGS OF FACT 5 o The Applicant seeks a special exception for the purpose of constructing a mobile home park upon land zoned RS. Mobile home parks are not permitted uses but Article VIII section 8.02(D)(3) does make such a use available by special exception. From testimony and photographs offered by residents and others opposing the request it is evident that the property in question as well as surrounding properties are subject to surface water flooding during periods of precipitation. The Township engineer received the applicant's plans and advised in writing that drainage swales and grade shown on the plans were inadequate. The Township engineer was not present at the hearing, but his report was a part of the planning commissions recommendation. The Planning Commission advised that the proposed develop- ment did not meet the requirements of the Township's compre- hensive plan. The proposed development will increase traffic congestion on Route 11. CONCLUSIONS The Board concludes that the proposed development will cause excessive water problems and traffic congestion resulting in safety problems. The Board believes that mobile home park will reduce the tax base of the municipality. The requirements of compatibility, suitability, and accessi- bility set forth in the Ordinance have not been met. ZONING ORDINANCE, section 15.04(D)(5)C-2,3,4. MIDDLESEX ZONING HEARING BOARD Spah~~irman ' State of Pennsylvania, County of Cumberland. SS: Proof of Publication Sherlene W. Clifford, Classified Supervisor of THE SENTINEL, of the County and State aforesaid, being duly sworn, deposes and says that THE SENTINEL, a newspaper of general circulation in the Borough of Carlisle, County and State aforesaid, was established December 13th, 1881, since which date THE SENTINEL has been regularly issued in said County, and that the printed notice or publication attached hereto Js exactly the same as was printed and published in the regular editions and issues of THE SENTINEL on the following dates, viz Copy of Notice of Publication December 15 and 16, 1986 Affiant further deposes that he is not interested in the subject matter of the aforesaid notice or advertisement, and that all allegations in the foregoing statement as to time, place and character of publication are true. Sworn to and subscribed before me this January 87 5 day of Notary Public My commission expires: MARIETTA FIC;<~L, Not.ary Public Carlisle, Curnberler~d Co., PA My Commlssion Expires Dec. 15, 193g Docket No. lVLIDDLESEX ZONING HEARING BO/~RD APPLICATION 2. 3. 4. 5. 0 e To the Zoning Hearing Board of Middlesex Twp., Gumb. Co. , Pa. Name and address of (A~t) (Applicant): William C. Kollas and William C. Costopoulos, 831 Market Street, Lemoyne, Pennsylvania 17043 Name and address of Attorney for Applicant: Same Interest of Applicant: owner If interest is other than "owner", furnish name and address of owner: Subject property is described, located, and presently used as follows: LEGAL DESCRIPTION AT]?ACHED HERETO List present zoning cla. ssification of the property and the section of the Zoning Ordinance under which the interpretation, exception, or variance is .requested; Residential/suburban - Article VIII, Section 8.02 D.3 We are seeking a special exception The grounds for appeal, for interpretatiOn, or reasons for special exception or variance (Why are you seeking this relief?): So that we might construct a mobile hcxae park For an appeal for interpretation, attach a true copy of the order, requirement, decision or determination of the Zoning Officer. 9. Name and addresses of the adjacent property owners: ATTACHED Signature of ~) (Applicant) ********************************** Received: Fee: $ Date Rec'd: Publication: N oti c e s: ~/ Hearing: Property Notice: Decision: BEGINNING at a point at the lands of Leon K. and Dorothy R. Sunday, said point being approximately 300 feet South of U.S. Route 11; thence by same South $4° 04' 05" East 245 feet North to the township line; thence along township line South 37° 35' 27" East 1200 feet more or less to a point where tb~ township line intersects with lands of Clarence E. Gutshall; thence by lands of Clarence E. Gutshall South 0° 08' 30" East 105 feet more or less to a point on the lands of Jack K. Sunday; thence by same South 80° 21' 55" West 1044.67 feet to a point; thence by same North 03° 03' 02" East 1227.08 feet to a point, THE PLACE OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING therein 15.06 acres more or less. 9. Nam~ and addresses of the adjacent property owners: Brian Sunday, 145 Appalachian Road (uses mailing address as 7107 Carlisle Pike) Kenneth Wagner, 141 Appalachian Mad John Early, 139 Appalachian Road (uses mailing address Box 77 New Kensington) Clarence Gotshall, 137 Appalachian Road BAf~ OF THE PR~PERP/: J. K. Sunday NEXT PROPER~Y LINE: Brian Sunday OPPOSITE SIDE: J. J. Snyder WILLIAM C. KOLLAS AND WILLIAM C. COSTOPOULOS t/a REGENCY SOUTH MOBILE HOME PARK, APPELLANTS, vs. ZONING HEARING BOARD OF MIDDLESEX TOWNSHIP IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 26 CIVIL 1987 CERTIFICATION The undersigned hereby certifies that the attached documents constitute the entire record of proceedings before the Middlesex Township Zoning Hearing Board in the above matter. .:2.-.-- Respe~c.~ fully S~bmitt ~d; ~ Edwa~fd W.J Harke~, SoYficitor for the Z~ning Hearing Board WILLIAM C. KOLLAS and WILLIAM C. : COSTOPOULOS t/a REGENCY SOUTH : MOBILE HOME PARK, : Appellants, VS. ZONING HEARING BOARD OF MIDDLESEX : TOWNSHIP, : Appellee. : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 26 CIVIL 1987 APPEAL FROM DECISION OF ZONING HEARING BOARD NOTICE OF INTERVENTION NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Township of Middlesex, the municipality :erested in the above Appeal, intervenes in said Appeal pursuant to Section of the Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code (53 P. S. 11009). ~o~sh~ Solicitor : February 13, 1987 LAW OFFIC;ES SNELBAKER, ELICiKER & SILVER LAW OFFICES SNELBAKER, ELICKER & SILVER CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I am this date serving a true and correct copy of the within Notice of Intervention upon each of the attorneys noted below by sending the same by first-class mail, postage paid, addressed as follows: Dated: William C. Kollas, Esquire Kollas, Costopoulos & Foster P. O. Box 222 Lemoyne, Pennsylvania 17043-0222 (Attorney for Appellants) Edward W. Harker, Esquire Farmers Trust Building 1 West High Street Carlisle, Pennsylvania.~t~3 (Attorney for Appellee) /~ ........... ~- ~,~__~---~Ric~ard C. Snelbaker SNELBAKER, ELICKER & SILVER P. O. Box 318 Mechanicsburg, PA 17055-0318 Township Solicitor February 13, 1987 PRAECIPE FOR LISTING CASE FOR ARGUMENT (Must be typewritten and submitted in duplicate) TO THE PROTHONOTARY/OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY: Please list the within matter for the next: [] Pre-Trial Argument Court Argument Court CAPTION OF CASE (entire caption must be stated in full) (Plaintiff) VS. VS. (Defendant) No. L~ Civil 19 ~; ? 1. State matter to be argued (i. e., plaintiff's motion for new triM, defendant's demurrer to complaint, etc.): 2. Identify counsel who will argue case: (a) for plaintiff: (b) for defendant: I will notify all parties in writing within two days that this case has been listed for argument._ (Attorney for fli~c, tl 4-~JT ) Dated: WILLIAM C. KOLLAS and WILLIAM : C. COSTOPOULOS t/a REGENCY SOUTH MOBILE HOME PARK, Appellants Vo ZONING HEARING BOARD OF MIDDLESEX TOWNSHIP, Appellee IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW NO. 26 CIVIL 1987 APPEAL FROM DECISION OF ZONING HEARING BOARD IN RE: APPEAL FROM ZONING HEARING BOARD'S DENIAL OF SPECIAL EXCEPTION Before HOFFER~ J. and HESS, J. ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, March 5, 1987, after review of the record and appellants' brief, the appeal is sustained. The decision of the Zoning Hearing Board is reversed and a special exception shall issue. By the Court, Edward W. Harker, Esquire ~~ ~j~ a~s/s~ For the Appellee ~.~' William C. Kollas, Esquire C~~ ~ 3]-.~/$q' For the Appellants ~P MIDDLESEX TOWNSHIP ZONING HEA~RING BOARD IN RE: APPLICATION OF KOLLAS AND COSTOPOULOS t/a Regency South Mobile Home Park Stenographic record of hearing held at Middlesex Township Municipal Building, West Middlesex Drive, Middlesex, Pennsylvania, Wednesday, November 12, 1984 7:00 p.m. Melvin E. Spahr, Chairman Paul B. Adams EDWARD W. HARKER, ESQ. Farmers Trust Building One West High Street Carlisle, PA 17013 Kollas, Costopoulos & Foster 831 Market Street Lemoyne, PA BY: WILLIAM C. KOLLAS, ESQ. For the Board For the Applicant GWEN A. LEARY 6313 Salem Park Circle Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania (717) 691-8016 17055 Middlesex Township Planning Commission 350 North Middlesex Road Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013 Telephone 249-4409 November 3, 1986 Middlesex Township Zoning Hearing Board 350 North Middlesex Road, Carlisle, Pa. 17013 Gentlemen: It is our decision, Regency South Mobile Home Park~ should apply to the Middlesex Township Zoning Heard Board, for a hearing, applicable to their particular situation. It is the opinion of the Middlesex Township Planning Comm- ission, the Regency South Mobile Home Park, does not meet the requirements of the Middlesex Township comprehensive zoning plan. In addition, the attached report from the Middlesex Town- ship engineer, shows corrections that should be made in order to conform with proper developing. Ve_ry truly yours~ /2 MiddleseX~TownshiP Planning Commission CONSUL TING ENGINEERS and PLANNERS 55 South Richland Avenue I P.O. Box M-55 I York, Pennsylvania 17405 Telephone (717) 843-5561 Telex No. 820403 Mr. Robert E. Preston, Secretary/ Township of Middlesex Board of Supervisors 122 North Middlesex Road Carlisle, PA 17013 From: Date: Mr. Melvin E. Spahr Middlesex Township Planning Commission 3501 Spring Road Carlisle, PA 17013 Neal A. Horst, P.E.ff~ October 20, 1986 Review of Plan for Special Exception Regency South Mobile Bm Park We have reviewed the plan for general conformance to Township requirements and found it adequate with the following comments: 1. The grade shown on drainage swales is inadequate. A minimum of 1% and preferred 2% should be provided. 2. The narrative indicates a "series of detention ponds" but only one pond is shown on the plans. PennDOT approval will be required for the proposed access on U.S. Route 11 and for storm water flows to culverts along Route 11. NAH/sac Offices: Baltimore, Man/land Charleston, West Virginia Lewisburg, Pennsylvania Memphis, Tennessee Sub$1cllary o! PACE Re,out. a, Inc. /A Total Re$ourc~ Company New Orleans, Louisiana Williamsburg, Virginia Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania York, Pennsylvania .A. PP LICA*TION 2. 3. 4. 5. e To the Zoning Hearing Board of Middle sex Twp., Cumb. Co., Pa. Narr. e and address of (A~;~.lla~t) (Applicant): William C. Kollas and William C. Costopoulos, 831 Market Street, Lemoyne, Pennsylvania 17043 Name and address of Attorney for Applicant: Sarr~ Interest of Applicant: owner interest is other than "owner", furnish name and address of owner: Subject property is described, located, and presently used as follows: LEGAL DESCPd}:~_TON A_q~AC~ HERETO List present zoning classification of the property and tl~e sec~on of the Zoning Ordinance under which the interpretation, except[on, or variance is .requested; Residential/suburban - Article Vii!, Section 8.02 D.3 We are seeking a special exception The grounds for appeal, for interpretation, or reasons for special exception or variance (Why are you seeking this relief?): So t,hat ~ might construct a mobile hcrae park For an appeal for interpretation, attach a true copy of the order, requirement, decision or determination of the Zoning Officer. 9. Name and addresses of the adjacent property owners: A~TAr~-IED Signature of ~%ppc!~) (Applicant) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 44 right on top of you. We will have numerous accidents there, because we have numerous accidents down at Leiby's. I know because I live back there and I am with the fire company. MR. CIERI: I don't know. I have had several occasions coming out from Appalachian Drive, and I don't remember sitting there more than half a minute. MR. GUTSHALL: Come out when there is traffic in the morning and see how long it takes you, especially making a left turn. MR. CIERI: We have -- Mr. Fitzpatrick has a business right there. MR. FITZPATRICK: at peak traffic times, morning and evening and The highway is designed for it, four never wait. lanes. I have been in and out MR. HARKER: The Board will take judicial notice of the Township's comprehensive plan as mentioned by Mr. Huganir. Anything further, ladies and gentlemen? (No response.) MR. HARKER: Members of the Board, do you wish to deliberate on this matter at this time 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 45 or reserve your right to decide within the next 45 days? MR. ADAMS: Well, there are quite a few things to look into, nothing bad, but it might be a good idea to study it for ten days or a couple of weeks. MR. SPAHR: Under the circumstances, I guess we will opt to reserve our opinion and make a decision within the next 45 days. In the meantime, we will do research on the project. MR. HARKER: The record is closed. There will be a further meeting and notice will be duly advertised of that meeting, at which time the members of the Board will vote. They will not vote or take any additional action prior to that meeting. MR. KOLLAS: There will been no additional testimony at that meeting? MR. HARKER: No. MR. KOLLAS: Just for the vote? MR. HARKER: Yes. The record is closed today. (Hearing adjourned.) 46 I, Gwen A. Leary, the officer before whom the within deposition(s) was taken, do hereby certify that the witness whose testimony appears in the foregoing deposition, was duly sworn by me on said date and that the transcribed deposition of said witness is a true record of the testimony given by said witness; That the proceeding is herein recorded fully and accurately; That I am neither attorney nor counsel for, nor related to any of the parties to the action in which these depositions were taken, and further that I am not a relative of any attorney or counsel employed by the parties hereto, or financially interested in this action. Notary Public 1 2 3 4 ApPlication Narrative Waste Water Computation Letter 6 15 15 16 Photographs 36 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 MR. HARKER: Transcripts will be available from Gwen Leafy. She is from Mechanicsburg. What is your address, Gwen? THE REPORTER: 6313 Salem Park Circle, Mechanicsburg, PA, 17055. Telephone number: 691-8016. MR. HARKER: Ladies and gentlemen, this is the time and place set for the hearing on the application for Kollas and Costopoulos, trading as Regency South Mobile Home Park, requesting a special exception for the construction of a mobile home park as set forth in the notice which was duly advertised in the Sentinel for this hearing. The record at present consists of the application which was filed by the applicants, and a letter and review from the Township Planning Commission, which letter, reviewed by the Planning Commission, was obtained pursuant to the Township ordinances which require the submission of all requests for special exceptions to the Planning Commission. I believe the applicant has also received a copy of this report. Is that correct? MR. KOLLAS: Yes, it is. MR. HARKER: We will try and allow 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 everyone present to participate. We welcome and solicit your participating in this meeting; however, we would like to ask that all persons state their points or point, as the case may be, briefly and not repeat it over and over again, since one time really is good enough. Although we don't want to cut anyone off from speaking in any way, we would prefer that if one person has made a statement or a comment and you share that statement and the same comment and you wish to add your support, merely say, for example, that you do support that position, if that is the case, rather than restating the whole thing over again. The first portion of the hearing will be devoted to allowing the applicant, through their attorneys and their witnesses, to present their evidence. After their presentation, those who are interested in the matter may add their comments and give their own evidence. Are there any questions? FRANCIS FREET: Yes. Is this a separate hearing; or will the views expressed in a previous hearing when this was also a petition of this 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 group, will that be considered, or is this going to be a separate hearing? MR. HARKER: No ma'am. This will be a separate hearing. FRANCIS FREET: Anything that was said on this subject before is down the drain? MR. HARKER: I don't know if I would use your exact terminology, but strictly speaking, this is an entirely new apPlication by these people. I understand they have made some changes as a result of changes that have taken place since the last hearing. And so it is an entirely new situation. MR. KOLLAS: The only thing I would like to do before I start is, you made some points for the record. I, too, would also like to expound on that for the record. It has to do with the filing of the application. You mentioned that an application had been filed. It was filed by the owners William C. Kollas and William C. Costopoulos, and it was filed on September 23, 1986. It was delivered by me to the township secretary, Robert E. Preston, at that time. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 And on that same date, I delivered to the chairman of the Planning Commission, Mel Spahr, a copy of the application, together with the appropriate plans. So both the township secretary received an application and the chairman of the Planning Commission received an application. I have a copy of the application, together with the initials of Mr. Spahr and Mr. Preston, which I will submit into evidence here. I don't think there is any question with respect to that. I would also like to point out that the report from the Planning Commission, and it is in the form of a letter -- I guess that is a matter of record because you have it. It is dated November 3, 1986. It is a letter from Melvin Spahr, who is the chairman of the Middlesex Township Planning Commission, to the Zoning and Hearing Board, dated November 3 with an attachment from the township engineer. I want to make those dates a matter of the record. (Applicant's Exhibit 1, Application, marked for Identification.) 6 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 letter assume. to be Jim project. MR. HARKER: Fine. MR. KOLLAS: And incidentally, speaks for itself of November 3, that I would MR. HARKER: I believe so. MR. KOLLAS: Our first witness is Cieri, who is the engineer on the Will you state your name? J~-~=-~B~, called as a witness, testified as follows: EXAMINATION A Cieri? A A Q prepared BY MR. KOLLAS: State your name. James A. Cieri. Would you spell your last name, Mr. Hearing Board in exception sought A Yes, I C-i-e-r-i. And what is your occupation? Consulting engineer. As a consulting engineer, have you plans for submission to the Zoning and connection with the special by Mr. Costopoulos and myself? have. going 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 you? Q DO you have a copy of those plans with A Yes, I do. Q Would you briefly tell the members of the Board and the citizens in attendance how many pads are in this mobile home park? A One hundred units. Q And where does the entrance and exit to the park take place, on what road? A The point of ingress and egress is now to U.S. Route 11. Q And someone made reference in the audience to a previous hearing. How does this differ from the previous plans that were submitted to this Board? A The plans that were presented previously had the point of ingress and egress to Appalachian Road. And due to the objections at that time, we moved the entrance to the Carlisle Pike, which is Route 11. Q pads? A And how have we decreased the amount of What was the amount originally? The original submission had 155 units. This has been decreased to 100 units. Q Do you know what occasioned this 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 decrease? A Yes. The area that we decided to develop into a mobile home park decreased in size. Q Because of the Appalachian Trail? A Due to the Appalachian Trail purchasing a parcel of ground. Q Now, in your preparation of the plans for submission to the Zoning and Hearing Board, did you review the requirements of the zoning ordinance, specifically Article 8, Section $.02D 3A-I? A Yes, I did. Q With respect to the first requirement under that zoning ordinance, does this tract of land have more than five acres and a 25-foot setback at the front, rear, and each side of the total tract so used? A The minimum requirement is five acres, and the parcel to be developed contains 18.1 acres. And the 25-foot setback requirement is also provided for. And that is shown by the buffer, the landscape buffer zone. Q The second requirement set forth in the statute is a requirement that each lot mobile home unit, as referred to in the ordinance, have a 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 10 minimum of 5,000 square feet. Does each one of the 100 units have a minimum of 5,000 square feet? A We provide a minimum of 5,000 square feet. The average lot size is nearly 5,100 square feet. Q The third requirement is that there not be more than seven mobile home unit stands per net acre of land used. What is the per-acre usage in this instance? A Our density factor is 5.5 units per acre. Q The fourth requirement is that side yard distances, measured from the outside of each mobile home, shall not be less than 30 feet in total and no one side yard distance less than 12 feet. Is this requirement met? A Yes. Q The fifth requirement is that the front and rear yards shall not be less than 15 feet. Is this requirement met in these plans? A Yes. Q The next requirement is that there will be a minimum of 30 feet between any two mobile 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ~2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 home units. Is that requirement met? A Yes. Q Now, skip G for the moment and go to H. In H the requirement is provisions must be made to connect each mobile home unit to a municipal-type water and sanitary sewer system as provided by the Pennsylvania Department of Health. Is that requirement met? A Yes. Q In this park, what are the provisions for sewer and water? A The sewer service will be provided by the Middlesex Sewer Authority by tying into the existing manhole located along the Carlisle Pike. And public water service will be Provided by tying into Middlesex Township Water and Sewer Authority,s water system. Q And do we have a letter addressed to the Board of Supervisors, Middlesex Township Board of Supervisors, from Lawrence Zimmerman, president of the Water and Sewer Authority, indicating that there is water available and sewer available to this tract? A The letter is from Larry Zimmerman, who is president of Glace Associates. And Glace 11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 12 Associates is the engineer for the township authority. Q sewer available? A Yes. they have capacity for both sewer and water to serve the project. Q And that letter was directed to the They indicate that there is water and Is that correct? Yes. Dated April 9, 19867 Yes. Do these parks conform to the applicable local and state regulations governing mobile home parks? A Yes, it does. If you go to G, which is the last requirement, it says, "All applications for a mobile home park or subdivision shall be accompanied by a plot plan showing the location of the site, topography, drainage, number of units, access, road layout, names and addresses of owner, and names of abutting owners. Would you open up the plans that you have with you? Township Board of Supervisors. A Q A Q They indicate by this letter that 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 A 13 Okay. Would you review the plans together with the members of the Board. I don't know if they want you to go around to that side. MR. SPAHR: We have seen them before. BY MR. KOLLAS: Q The requirements in G are provided in this portfolio of plans. Specifically to take them item by item, the location of the site is shown on the cover sheet. And is shown again on Sheet SS-l, which is the Utility Plan sheet. The topography is shown on Sheet No. GP-2, which is the Erosion/Sedimentation Control and Regrading Plan. Likewise, the drainage is also shown on that same sheet. The number of units is shown on Sheet GP-1, which is the General Plan. The access or road layout, names and addresses of the owners and abutting owners is also shown on Sheet GP-1, General Plan. So all those requirements of G are shown within this portfolio of plans. Q Would you tell the members of the Board what else is shown? Is a sewer system laid out on those plans? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A To go over these briefly, the cover sheet shows the general layout for the proposed park and the vicinity map or site location map. Sheet GP-1, which is the General Plan, shows the street configuration, the number of lots, the location of each unit on each lot, recreation facilities, detention pond, buffer yards, and adjoining property owners. Sheet GP-2, which is the Erosion/ Sedimentation Control Plan and Regrading Plan, shows basically the lots, the street configuration, and the erosion control facilities for the site. Sheet GP-3, which is the Storm Sewer Plan, shows the storm sewer layout for the park. And it is superimposed over the lots and the street configuration. Again, this shows the detention pond and the outlet structure for that pond. Sheet GP-4 is the Lot Detail sheet. It shows the typical lot layout and typical street section. Sheet SS-l, which is the Utility Plan, shows the planned layout for the sanitary sewers and the water distribution system. 14 It al so shows 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 the connection point for the water line and the sewer service connection to the public system. Sheet SS-2, and SS-3 are both Sanitary Sewer Profile sheets, which show the profiles for the sanitary sewers for the entire park. Sheets ST-1 through ST-3 are the Street Plan and profiles for all of the streets within the development. It shows the grade of the streets, the length of the streets, cut, fills, and vertical curve information. And that represents the plan document. Q I hand you now a narrative which I am going to mark Exhibit 2, Applicant's Exhibit 2, and ask you if you prepared this narrative in connection with these plans? A Yes, I did. (Applicant's Exhibit 2, marked for Identification.) MR. KOLLAS: You already have the plans in evidence. I think you have this as well, but I will submit it here for the record. I will submit that into evidence together with the plans. (Applicant's Exhibit 3, Waste Water Computation, marked for Identification.) BY MR. KOLLAS: 15 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 16 Q And Exhibit 3, Applicant's Exhibit 3, I believe is your waste -- would it be correct to describe this as your waste water computation? A It is the storm sewer drainage facilities. Q And these are your computations of the storm water? A Yes, the sizing for the piping and for the channels. Q Now, is it your opinion, based on these computations and your design, that the conditions that exist in the land today will not at all be deteriorated by the putting in of this mobile home park with respect to waste water? A That is correct. Q As a matter of fact, you have a detention pond in this plan, do you not? A Yes. We have located a detention pond on this site, the purpose of which is to insure that the storm water runoff in a postdeveloped condition will not exceed storm water runoff that is generated in its existing condition. (Applicant's Exhibit 4, Letter, marked for Identification.) BY MR. KOLLAS: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 17 Q And I also am handing you as Applicant's Exhibit 4 the letter that we referred to from Larry Zimmerman. A Okay. Q I have a checklist. It is a checklist from PennDOT that says, in effect, what you must do to get an occupancy permit from the Pennsylvania Department of Highways. Is it your opinion that we must receive the special exception before we have standing to ask for an occupancy permit with the Department of Transportation? A Before we can file for a permit application from PennDOT, we must have acknowledgement from the municipality, the Zoning Board, or the Planning Commission, that they have received these plans and either are reviewing these plans or are favorable to the plans. Q I am going to direct your attention to a different part of the ordinance, specifically Article 15, Section 1504D5C one through six. I think it is on page 55. The Zoning Board is to be guided by the following criteria, and then there are six criteria set forth. The first criteria is the 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 18 purpose. You have reviewed the ordinance. Is it not true that the only way you can get a mobile home park in Middlesex Township is through a special exception process? A That is true. Q And that was the purpose -- this ground was zoned RS with that specific purpose in mind with a special exception. Is that correct? A Yes. Q Now, if you want to, you can go over to the land use map that you brought with you and explain to the Board how compatibility, suitability, accessibility, serviceability and applicability relate to this particular piece of ground. A What we have done with this land use plan is to prepare a drawing showing the Carlisle Pike or Route 11. What we have done is included the stretch of highway from Interstate 81 down to Kost Road. What we have done is taken the properties that are located along 11 and 15, and just plotted these on this line schematic, and specifically named the different firms that are along that 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 19 stretch, which you can see, including those that are on either side of our property. This property, or our property where we are proposing to put this mobile home park, is located just to the west of Appalachian Road. To the east of this tract we have an existing mobile home park. The parcel behind that is an undeveloped piece of ground zoned industrial. Further east there is an existing truck terminal, a truck stop, and there is a truck and trailer repair shop behind that. There is a gas station on the corner here, and also a mobile home sales across from Leiby's Mobile Home Park. And they also have a sales lot, mobile home sales lot. Coming to the west of our tract, there are too well-drilling operations. There are several trucking firms, including Smith Trucking, Keen, ABF, and Carolina. Those are all on the north side of Route 11. On the south side of Route 11 there are a couple of commercial establishments; Crossroads Corporate Center, Unclaimed Freight is a retail sales establish, and Carter Lumber. There are several motels in the area; Pleasant Inn, Quality Court Motel, Econo Lodge, and Holiday Inn. 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 20 There is also Carlisle Poultry, which is a terminal, and a couple more service stations and a fast food restaurant. So as you can see, there is one small residential area which encompasses four properties immediately east of our property. So the area is, with the exception of a few residential properties, either all commercial or industrial usage at the present time, or zoned for commercial or industrial. Q Do you anticipate that the mobile home park would cause any pollution or problems with respect to that type of problem? A No. It is your opinion that the special exception should be granted. Is that correct? A Yes. 0 witness. have no further questions of this MR. SPAHR: What is the total amount of acreage that you have after the change? THE WITNESS: The total number of acres is 18.1 acres. MR. SPAHR: And prior to that, what was the acreage prior to that? THE WITNESS: I believe it was 26 1/2 or 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 21 27. Wait. If my memory serves me correctly, it was 25 1/2 acres before. MR. KOLLAS: That is all the testimony that we have. MR. ADAMS: Where does the runoff go? THE WITNESS: It goes under Route 11. The runoff that comes from our tract will go into a detention pond where the surge runoff is stored in that pond. This pond then releases the water to the existing culverts that go underneath Route 11. MR. ADAMS: Are you going to go under the pike? Will they give you permission to go under the pike? MR. KOLLAS: That is where it goes now. MR. ADAMS: Does it go under there? THE WITNESS: Yes, there are two existing culverts. MR. ADAMS: You would have a hard time to put it in now. You would have to break up the road and all. MR. KOLLAS: There are two in there now. THE WITNESS: That is the purpose of the detention pond, so that the water we are releasing to those culverts is not any greater after we are 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 $ 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 22 finished developing the property than what it is now. MR. ADAMS: Is the Township putting storm sewers down in around there? Are they putting storm sewers around the trucking places? THE WITNESS: I don't know of any storm drainage systems down there. The only ones I know of are the two culverts that go under Route 11 that are a State drainage system. MR. ADAMS: That is one thing, because a lot of water comes off that damn hill, a lot. THE WITNESS: That is, like I said, that is the purpose of the detention pond so that we don't overload those drainage pipes. EXAMINATION BY MR. HARKER: Q Are any of the adjoining uses that you mentioned in your narrative of a residential character? A The four properties immediately east of ours I mentioned were residential, yes. Q How did you determine, Mr. Cieri, that this property is, in fact, zoned RS? A From the zoning map. Q What zoning map in particular do you 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 refer to? A Q 23 The Middlesex zoning map. Do you have a copy of that? Is this the map here you are talking about? MR. KOLLAS: No, to your right. And there is one in the ordinance here. MR. HARKER: Well, I can't quite see on there where it is. asking. dispute. here. MR. KOLLAS: That is the reason I am I didn't know this was in THE WITNESS: This is Appalachian Drive This is Appalachian Drive here and this is Route 11. out front. This is the 300-foot commercial strip The area we are talking about, the mobile home park, is in this area right here. the zoning line is shown on the map. MR. HARKER: Thank you. THE WITNESS: Yes, sir. MR. HARKER: Do any other persons present have any questions of the engineer, Mr. Cieri? FRED HUGANIR: MR. HARK ER: Yes. State your name, please. And 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 24 FRANK HUGANIR: Frank Huganir, 221 Stonehouse Road, Hogestown. My property abuts properties along Appalachian Drive. I am referring to the second page of the document that was used to testify called the Land Use Plan, Regency South, with a map of U.S. Route 11 and a description of all of the properties along Route 11. My question is, which is similar to what Mr. Harper's question is: What is the present use of properties, not along Route 11, but south of the planned development? MR. KOLLAS: They are zoned industrial. MR. HUGANIR: I am not asking what the zoning is. being put to? what is the present use that it is MR. KOLLAS: I will answer that question. The present use it is being put to is the Appalachian Trail is going to go right through here, but now it is farmland. MR. HUGANIR: So it is agricultural? MR. KOLLAS: No. It is industrial, but it is being used as farmland. MR. HUGANIR: Along Appalachian Drive, isn't that being used as residence? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 MR. KOLLAS: Yes. MR. HUGANIR: What is the current zoning -- I am not talking about the zone plan, but the comprehensive plan that has been adopted by the Township? What is that designated use for? MR. KOLLAS: I don't know which plan you are talking about. MR. HUGANIR: The comprehensive plan that was adopted by the Township. shown MR. KOLLAS: MR. HUGANIR: MR. KOLLAS .' MR. HUGANIR: MR. KOLLAS: MR. HUGANIR: MR. CIERI -. on that drawing. MR. HUGANIR: use pursuant adopted by the MR. The zoning for MR. use under the by the 25 When? Earlier I don't this know. year. The engineer doesn't know? The engineer isn't here. Mr. Cieri? Well, the zoning line is But what is the intended to the comprehensive county for this area CIERI: I don't think the tract is RS. HUGANIR: But what comprehensive plan Township or the Township plan that was here? I understand. is the intended that was adopted Board or 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 Commissioners? MR. CIERI: I think the RS designation means residential/suburban, so suburban residential use. MR. HUGANIR: plan? make? Under the comprehensive MR. KOLLAS: What difference does it I don't understand the question. MR. SPAHR: I don't either. MR. HUGANIR: The Township adopted a comprehensive plan earlier this year. I am just asking the engineer if he knows what this use of property is. MR. KOLLAS: Do you know? MR. HUGANIR: Yes. MR. KOLLAS: Well, what is it? MR. HUGANIR: It is zoned low-density residential surrounded by agricultural. It is the multicolored map behind you. My next question is, there is a piece of property here. And I am looking at the site plan. Let's see if it has a page number. No. But it has the layout of all the mobile homes with the property lines. What is the intended use of the piece of 26 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 21 22 23 24 25 27 property on the Silver Spring Township side? MR. KOLLAS: That is in Silver Spring Township and that is zoned residential. MR. HUGANIR: What is the intended use that you plan to make of it? MR. KOLLAS: We can't do anything except residences. MR. HUGANIR: that? MR. KOLLAS: MR. HUGANIR: So you intend to develop We intend to obey the law. Do you plan to develop it with mobile home sites? MR. KOLLAS: No, no. We can't. would have to have a variance to get that. We MR. HUGANIR: MR. KOLLAS: MR. HUGANIR: Do you intend to? No. Do you at all intend to develop an access road on Appalachian? MR. KOLLAS: No. As a result of the last hearing, we decided against it because there was an uproar. MR. HUGANIR: You wouldn't be seeking that in, say, the Silver Springs Township Planning Board? MR. KOLLAS: No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 28 MR. HUGANIR: HOW far away is the detention pond from the closest mobile home, if it is full? MR. KOLLAS: It is the same whether it is full or empty. I don't understand your question. MR. HUGANIR: What is the distance of the high water mark when the detention pond is full? MR. KOLLAS: think it is 18 inches. MR. CIERI: of the coaches. That is regulated, and I It is 25 feet from the rear MR. KOLLAS.. MR. HUGANIR: CINDY HINKLE: It is 25 feet. No further questions. My name is Cindy Hinkle. What happens to this water that is held in this pond and then put through the pipes that go under Route 117 Where does it go from there? MR. KOLLAS: The same place it goes now. MS. HINKLE: I don't know where it goes nOW. MR. KOLLAS: I don't either. MR. CIERI: It crosses to the north side of Route 11, and ultimately winds up in the 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 29 Conodoguinet Creek. to. MR. HARKER: That is where the water goes Mr. Cieri, do I understand from what you stated and from your plans that the water flow will be almost exclusively through these culverts that you mention? There will be no runoff to other directions? MR. CIERI: It would be exclusively through those culverts. It is the only way that water can get out of there unless we pump it. MS. HINKLE: Is that pond large enough to hold that runoff? There is an awful lot of water on that property now. MR. CIERI: Yes. The pond has been sized specifically to handle that runoff. In fact, it is oversized. MS. HINKLE: What happens if we have a tremendous storm and the water reaches the banks of the pond? Then that entire area is flooded? MR. KOLLAS: Well, I don't know what you mean by "a tremendous storm." I will let the engineer answer that, if he can. MR. CIERI: Well, let's say, for instance, we had a 100-year storm like Agnes. We could conceivably have as much as 1 foot of water 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 in there until the surge ended. take that runoff. 30 Those pipes would Now, keep in mind, the advantage of having a mobile home park on this site is that the average mobile home sits, I would say, probably 3 feet above the ground elevation. So there is absolutely no danger of flooding whatsoever to the unit. MR. KOLLAS: The other thing is, too, you have to remember this pond will very seldom have water in it. It is only in those situations where the storm drainage, the swales can't handle the overflow that it will have some water in it. MR. HARKER: Anyone else? CLARENCE GUTSHALL: My name is Clarence Gutshall. Here are pictures taken in the spring with water. I am showing the two color photos marked on the back as March 1986 after two days of rain and two of sunshine. Those were taken this morning. It looks like a lake back there. MR. HARKER: MR. KOLLAS: MR. GUTSHALL: Four Polaroid photos. Did you take these? I took those this 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 morning, yes, sir. And those were Brian Sunday. MR. HUGANIR: photographs? BRIAN SUNDAY: MR. HARKER: additional on these? question? color photos. MR. SUNDAY: MR. HARKER: taken this morning by Did you take those This morning. And you are showing What property is 7107 Carlisle Pike. Is that the area in me five shown MR. with respect there. This show here is trailers. between the trailers MR. KOLLAS: MR. GUTSHALL: back there this morning. MR. KOLLAS: specifically this area MR. GUTSHALL: You are talking about here, are you not? Look at the one I snapped there. Where is that? Right this way behind the KOLLAS: To answer your questions to those, we have had construction in specific piece of equipment that you in a detention pond, a detention pond 31 MR. GUTSHALL: Yes. It was like a lake 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 32 for the sales outlet. That is meant to catch the water there. The other thing is this. We have our sales outlet right here. And in the course of knocking this down here, we have moved a lot of landfill over here and scraped all of this landfill here. None of this has been graded. That is the reason for that. There is supposed to be a swale, and the swale is being put in to come out into another detention pond here. But the ground you are showing with these photographs is not part of this tract at all. It lies in here. And you also have the sales lot, which is here. Where the mobile homes are is the sales lot. And that is where our construction is going on. MR. GUTSHALL: Another thing. Being a good neighbor, I went over when the thistles were in blossom. I asked them to mow them down because it looked like a snowstorm going across our property. After they were done blooming, then they come and mowed them down. I stopped at the trailer park and told them about mowing the thistles when they were in 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 bloom, and nobody ever come over until after they were done blooming. It looked like a snowstorm going across the road down there one day. What is my land going to be like next summer with all the thistles blowing into the front lawn? MR. KOLLAS: If there is a mobile home park there, there wouldn't be any thistles. MR. GUTSHALL: That's a bunch of stuff, too. When we had the Agnes flood, there was 5 feet of water back there in that lot back there. Are you going to fill it up that much that you are going to get rid of all that water? MR. KOLLAS: What we are telling you is that the condition of the ground will be no worse after the development than it was prior to the development. MR. GUTSHALL: You are going to have all that blacktop around those trailers. Ail that water has to run off there, and it is not going to go in the ground. MR. KOLLAS: the ground. MR. GUTSHALL: it's not. Yes, it is going to go into Not around the trailers 33 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 the pond. MR. KOLLAS: That is what is going into MR. HARKER: Do these photos -- MR. KOLLAS: We object to those photos because they aren't of the tract of land we are talking about. We object to their introduction based on That is not the ground where the mobile that. home park is going. MR. HARKER: Is this the ground adjacent to the mobile home park? MR. KOLLAS: It is right behind the sales lot, which the sales lot is here. And this is this ground here. It is under construction, and there is water lying there. But it is caused by the fact that there is construction. We stripped off all the top soil all over here while we are constructing it. MR. HARKER: It is certainly part of the ground depicted on your plans, because you are telling me by reference to these plans where these photos show. MR. KOLLAS: I am telling you there is still water lying there because of construction 34 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 35 activities that are going on, whatever water is there. MR. GUTSHALL: I bet if you drive down there tonight, there is still water there. MR. KOLLAS: I am sure there is. MR. GUTSHALL: There has been water down there for a couple of weeks. MR. HARKER: Sir, I assume you are offering these into evidence? MR. GUTSHALL: MR. HARKER: Yes. For the members of the Board, these photos are offered into evidence. MR. CIERI: In looking at those photographs, if I may just point out on that photograph that you have right there where they show the water with the tractor in it, that is a detention pond. That detention pond is for the mobile home sale site. And its intent is to catch the water, and then have the water slowly run out. The reason there is still a little water in that is because the construction of the outlet structure was not completed, so there is no way for that water to get out without having the outlet structure completed. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. HARKER: Mr. Chairman, I would recommend that the photos be marked as exhibits; although there has been objection made to them, I think that objection goes to the weight of these photos as evidence and not really to their admissibility in this matter. So I recommend that you do admit them. MR. SPAHR: I suggest that we accept these because they are on the property of the applicant. And I think we should put them in evidence. (Photographs admitted into evidence.) MR. CIERI: And the other thing is the other areas that show water. The drainage swales that have been designed to go around the back of the sales lot have not been completed yet. Once they are completed, those areas will drain behind there. That site is under construction, and a drainage swale has not been completed yet. You can go out and look at that and see the swale is not finished yet out towards 11. And there is about 200 feet that still has to be fine graded yet so the water can come out to its designated point at that detention pond. 36 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. SPAHR: Is there any other comment? MS. HINKLE: I have a question. Since that land is zoned residential/suburban, does the residential/suburban include mobile homes? MR. KOLLAS: The residential/suburban includes mobile homes if you get a special exception. And that is why we are here, to get the special exception. MS. HINKLE: Middlesex Township already has a mobile home area in it. MR. KOLLAS: They were all with special exceptions. MS. HINKLE: to have another mobile home area in the same township? MR. KOLLAS: Well, there is more than one in the township, and there is a shortage of mobile home parks, believe it or not. People just don't have any place to put them. MS. HINKLE: I find that hard to believe. MR. KOLLAS: We can fill it up immediately. MR. HUGANIR: I have some comments. I only asked questions before. 37 Do you feel it is necessary 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 38 MR. HARKER: Are there any further questions to be put to either the applicants here, Mr. Kollas or Mr. Costopoulos, or their witness, Mr. Cieri? JOHN FREET: My name is John Freet. As a matter of civil responsibility, the people that own these lots, are they going to pay taxes for their kids going to the school? MR. KOLLAS: Yes. MR. FREET: Your organization has nothing to do with that aspect of it, does it? MR. KOLLAS: MR. FREET: MR. KOLLAS: Yes, we do. You do? We are required -- and if you want to get into it, we are required to report people who move in and out of the parks to the Township. And we do that with the mobile home park that we now have in the township. And they are billed for the taxes while their homes are there. MR. FREET: In other words, that tax bill to them is the same as the tax bill to anyone else? It is based on the value? MR. KOLLAS: Right. MR. FREET: Now, initially you indicated 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 39 so many units. And I think your intention was to have us believe, and maybe truly that is your intention, that you are not going to expand beyond 100 I think you said? Once you are in, are you going to file another exception and say now we want another 1007 MR. KOLLAS: We won't. But I will be honest with you. The reason we won't is it would be impossible to get it. MR. FREET: MR. KOLLAS: MR. FREET .' beyond the 1007 MR. KOLLAS: Physically impossible? Yes, it would. So you will not expand Right. And the reason we are going with 100 and not the 155 is because the Appalachian Trail is going to take the upper portion for the Appalachian Trail. MR. FREET: Your engineer was very careful to explain that the highway was commercial in character and that this would be compatible. My contention is, this area, it is going to develop further. You are going to have more irritants and more pollution, traffic pollution. It may not be the water pollution. My contention is, having this unit here, 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 40 which is a little superfluous in that it is adjacent to the other trailer park, you are going to create a traffic pollution ultimately -- or you are going to help to create a traffic pollution that is going to be unbearable. The pollution mess we have down at the other end, that is the worse there is. Yours won't likely be quite that bad, but you are going to approach that. Are you aware of that possibility? MR. KOLLAS: I am not sure what you mean. MR. FREET: I am saying by putting the unit in there, there will be an ingress and egress from the highway. You are adding to a traffic pollution that is going to be made worse as the area develops further. MR. KOLLAS: You mean a traffic problem? MR. FREET: Yes. I call it a pollution. MR. KOLLAS: I was confused with respect to exhaust from cars is what I thought you meant. MR. FREET: No, a mess, traffic mess. Does that present any concern to you? Are you going to say, We are here first? MR. KOLLAS: No. I am not concerned 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 41 about it at all because of the highway that our park empties onto, which is Route 11, which is a four-lane highway with a medial strip. It can handle this park without any question at all. We have satisfied ourselves there with the Department of Transportation. MR. FREET: The highway is optimal, but, nonetheless, there is still going to be traffic pollution. MR. KOLLAS: There is going to be additional traffic is what you are saying, and I am not sure of that. MR. FREET: Not only there but down through into the other area. You can't expect them to confine their activity in and out of Route 11. They are going to go back Appalachian Drive. MR. KOLLAS: Appalachian Drive. MR. CIERI: That's why we moved it from I might add that we would be required to obtain a highway occupancy permit from PennDOT to put that street entrance onto Route 11. And one of the things they look at is the traffic count for the road. And they also look at the number of vehicles we will be putting in and out of there. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 42 They would not give us a permit if we were going to overload the road. MR. FREET: Do you have a permit? MR. CIERI: We can't get a permit until we get through here. FRANCIS FREET: In regards to the runoff, the character of the runoff is going to be considerably changed. It will no longer be from the field, it will be from a paved area with vehicles. I find that detrimental going into the Conodoguinet. MR. HUGANIR: First of all, I would like the notes of testimony from the former hearing to be incorporated by reference. MR. KOLLAS: MR. HUG AN IR: You can't do that. I am asking that be done. Secondly, I would like this map to be introduced as an exhibit. This is the comprehensive plan that was adopted. I would like the Board to take judicial notice that the township supervisors did adopt this the comprehensive plan for the township. MR. SPAHR: We are aware of that. MR. HUGANIR: This exhibit here, and I 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 43 am referring to the multicolored map that is kept against the wall of the Township building. The piece of property in question is in this yellow area, bounded on all sides by green. Yellow is low-density residential and green is agricultural. For this reason, we would ask the Board to deny this special exception because it is not in conformance with the Township's adoption of the comprehensive plan. MR. HARKER: comments? Are there any other CLARENCE GUTSHALL: I come off Appalachian Drive. Sometimes I sit down there as much as five minutes to get out of that drive. Now, what is the trailer park going to be like at the top, ahead of me? MR. HARKER: That is in the nature of a question. Can you answer that Mr. Cieri? Can you describe what the traffic flow might be there and what you would anticipate? MR. GUTSHALL: One hundred yards from where the road comes out from the trailer park is that ridge that comes along the Pike. You can't see those cars coming from there until they are WILLIAM C. KOLLAS and WILLIA/Vl : C. COSTOPOULOS t/a REGENCY SOUTH MOBILE HOME PARK, Appellants vs. ZONING HEARING BOARD OF MIDDLESEX TOWNSHIP, Appellee IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW No. CIVIL APPEAL FRO~ DECISION OF ZONiNC HEARING BOARD NOTICE OF APPEAL William C. Kollas and William C. Costopoulos t/a Regency South Mobile Home Park by their attorneys, Kollas, Costopoulos & Foster, appeal the decision of the Zoning Hearing Board of Middlesex Township, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, rendered at a meeting held December 17, 1986, a copy of said decision received by Appellants on December 19, 1986, and in support thereof state the following: 1. Appellants, William C. Kollas and William C. Costopoul0s are the landowners of the land directly involved in the decision appealed from situate in Middlesex Township, and do business from their principal place of business at 831 Market Street, Lemoyne, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17043. 2. The Appellee is the Zoning Hearing Board of Middlesex Township, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 3. The Appellants are the owners of approximately thirty-five (35) acres of unimproved land situate in Middlesex Township and Silver Spring Township, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, which premises are situate on the southern side of United States Route 11 approximately midway between New Kingstown and the intersection of U.S. Route 11 and U.S. Route 81. 4. On September 23, 1986, Appellants filed a request for a special exception for that portion of the unimproved land lying in Middlesex Township comprising 18.1 acres zoned Residential Suburban district with the Zoning Hearing Board and the Planning Commission of Middlesex Township to construct a mobile home park which would have a maximum capacity of 100 mobile homes pursuant to the Middlesex Township Zoning Ordinance Article VIII, Section 8.02(D) (3) which allows mobile home parks in residential suburban districts by special exception. 5. A hearing was held before the Middlesex Township Zoning Hearing Board on November 12, 1986, and on December 17, 1986, the Zoning Hearing Board held a meeting for the purpose of rendering a decision. The Board denied the request for special exception and on December 19, 1986, issued the written decision to Appellants, a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A". 6. The action of the Zoning Hearing Board in denying the Applicant's request for a special exception was arbitrary, 'capricious, an abuse of discretion, unsupported by the evidence and/or contrary to law in that: (a) The Board erred in Finding of Fact No. 3 in finding that '~the property in question is subject to surface water flooding." This finding is unsupported by the evidence. (b) The Board erred in Finding of Fact No. 4 in finding "that the drainage swales and grade shown on the plans were inadequate." This finding was unsupported by the evidence. (c) The Board erred in Finding of Fact No. 5 in finding that "the proposed development did not meet the requirements of the Township's comprehensive plan." This finding is unsupported by the evidence. (d) The Board erred in Finding of Fact No. 6 in finding that "the proposed development will increase traffic congestion on Route 11." This finding is unsupported by the evidence. (e) The Board erred in failing to find as fact and/or to conclude as law that the application, development plan, supplemental narrative, Exhibits and/or testimony offered by the Applicants established as a matter of fact and/or law that the Applicants" proposal meets the requirements of Section 8.02(D) (3) and Section 15.04(D) (5) of the Middlesex Township Zoning Ordinance. (f) The Board erred in failing to find as fact and/or to conclude as law that the evidence offered in opposition to the Applicants' request failed to meet the burden of proof necessary to support a denial of the special exception request on any lawful basis. (g) The Board erred in Conclusion of Law No. 1 in concluding that the "proposed development plan will cause excessive water problems and traffic congestion resulting in safety problems." There is insufficient evidence upon which to support such a conclusion. The conclusion is also contrary to the applicable law. Moreover, design of the surface water management system is not a specific requirement of the special exception approval process. The requirements of surface water management stated in the township's land development and/or subdivision ordinance must be complied with in a separate approval process. (h) The Board erred in Conclusion of Law No. 2 in concluding that "mobile home park will reduce the tax base of the municipality." There is insufficient evidence to support such a conclusion nor is there a finding of fact to support it. Moreover, such a consideration is totally irrelevant and impertinent to the issues for consideration in a special exception request. The conclusion is therefore contrary to the applicable law. (i) The Board erred in Conclusion of Law No. 3 in concluding that "the requirements of compatability, suitability and assessability set forth in the ordinance have not been met." The requirements of Section 15.04 (D) (5)c. 2, 3, 4, are general requirements which the Applicant has no burden to prove. Those opposing an application for a special exception have a heavy burden to prove that the proposed special exception will cause an adverse effect upon the public greater than would be expected in normal circumstances. There is insufficient evidence to support such a conclusion. (j) The Board erred in placing a greater burden of proof upon the Applicant than may by law be imposed; and/or in making findings of fact and/or conclusions of law unsupported by the sufficient evidence in accordance with the applicable burden of proof placed upon those who oppose a special exception request. WHEREFORE, Appellants request your Honorable Court to reverse the decision of the Zoning Hearing Board of Middlesex Township and to direct that Appellants be granted a special exception for the mobile home park development as requested in this Application. Respectfully submitted, KOLLAS, COSTOPOULOS & FOSTER William C. Kollas, Esquire 831 Market Street P. O. Box 222 Lemoyne, Pennsylvania 17043 Telephone: (717) 761-2121 Attorney for Appellants CTIV~BE~ COUNTY, pENNSYLVANIA FROM DECISION OF ZONING HEARING BOARD WrT.LIAM C. KOLLAS and WILLIAM C. ODSTOPOULOS t/a REGENCY SOIIfH MDBILE HOM~ PARK, Appellants VS. ZONING HEARING BOARD OF MIDDLESEX TOWNSHIP, Appellee NOTICE OF APPEAL KOLLAS, COSTOPOULOS & FOSTER ATTORNEYS AT LAW 831 MARKET STREET LEMOYNE, PENNSYLVANIA 17043 MIDDLESEX TOWNSHIP ZONING HEAR~.~.,G BOARD IN RE: Application of Kollas and Costopoulos t/a Regency South Mobile Home Park DECISION After notice and hearing on the above Application, the Boa~ denies the request for a spec~[ai except.io~;· i:ii~ ',?~i i~:~G','; Or7 ~: i~'.~ .... ~. 'rho~ ..... ar, plicant, seeks a specia] exception for ti,,=,, p,~rpose of c,'~nst~.'ucting a mobile home pa~:k ~ipon land zoned RS. ~'iobile home parks are not permitted uses but Article VIII section 8.02(D)(3) does make such a use available by special exception. From testimony and photographs offered by residents and others opposing the request it is evident that the property in question as well as surrounding pr?perties are subject to surface water flooding during periods of precipitation. The Township engineer received the applicant's plans and advised in writing that drainage swales and grade shown on the plans were inadequate. The Township engineer was'not present at the hearing, but his report was a part of the planning commissions recommendation. The Planning Commission advised that the proposed develop- ment did not meet the requirements of the Township's compre- hensive plan. The proposed development will increase traffic congestion on Route 11. CONCLUSIO:~o The Board concludes that the proposed development will cause excessive water problems and traffic congestion resulting in safety problems. The Board believes that mobile home park ~J. ll reduce the tax base of the municipality. Thc !rements of compatib!lityL , i~il[ '~:e~ forth in the 0rd£na~'~.e i~ave not beea :~ . ZOi[iNG ORDINANCE, section 15.04(D)(5)C-2,5,6. MIDDLESEX ZONING HEARING BOARD elvin E. Spah~man WILLIAM C. KOLLAS and WILLIAM C. COSTOPOULQ.S t/a REGENCY SOUTH MOBILE HOME PARK, Appellants VS. ZONING HEARING BOARD OF MIDDLESEX TOWNSHIP Appellee IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. 26 CIVIL TERM, 19 87 WRIT OF CERTIORARI COMMONWEALTH COUNTY OF OF PENNSYLVANIA) : SS. CUMBERLAND) TO: Zoning Hearing Board of Middlesex Township: We, being willingforcertain reasons, to have certified a certain action between William C. Kollas and William C. Costopoulos t/a Regency South Mobile Home Park pending before you, do command you that the record of the action aforesaid with all things concern- ing said action, shall be certified and sent to our judges of our Court of Common Pleas at Carlisle, within 20 days of the date hereof, together with this writ; so that we may further cause to be done that which ought to be done according to the laws and Constitution of this Commonwealth. WITNESS, the Honorable our said Court, at Carlisle, Pa., the 7th day of January ,19 87 Lawrence E. Welker BY: Prothonotary DEPUTY