HomeMy WebLinkAbout95-06729
~~};':.}S':
~':"'"
p~~+
m~F
~"__ .'~_-{:r.
""-.'.-~"'.' ;,,~,,". -,',
',' -.'.. .
Ln'
0-
_,,;1
.
~
"
,..
C_IAUN Of ,....IYLVANIA
COUaT Of C_ 'UA.
Of (jI,}, V.&\l1\\~l>O (,0,
IUDlCIAL DIIIIICT
NOTICE 0' A"EAL
fROM II- .U,q(
DIST.ICT JUSTICE JUDGMINT
q~. , 1.1 9 C!w.:J ru.---
COMMON 'LlAI No.
-~-----------
NOTICE OF APPEAL
Notic. I. gi_ that the appellant ha. filed In the above Court of Common Plea. on appeal from the judgment render.d by the Di.trict Ju.tke on the
datw and In the COle mentionod beIov<
~'T S~
.J ';}.9, 'N~ tJ SI.
"or WoNT
I I
.~~~
OCj -c.3 'CI J)tJIJIlLO DA1J.lL
C1fN<1'll1...Ml c# Dl
~J~lJtl'f~snl~I\Cl ~~ ~
i Cl \JJ tv ~Jll P--V.-fL~~t(B.1 ~Jj IJ tJ_~
j :a:.,j"
DO'lt\f'f IV 0 I
~i,~')" -OtlOO"? .__g~ Z!.~sL..~
This block win be signed ONLY when Ihl. notatian I. required under Po. R.cP.JP, No. If appellant was CLAIMANT (see Pa, R.C'p,JP, No.
10088.
ThI. Notic. of Appeal. when received by the Di.lrict Ju.lice, will op.rat. a. 0 '001 (6) in action befOlD District Justice, Iw MUST
SUPERSEDEAS 10 the judgment for po.....ian in thi. ca.e. FILE A COMPLAINT within twenty (20) days alter
_ liting his NOTICE of APPEAL.
ffl APi[U!noilinllliiNEY i5iAGlNT
SiQnnturu 01 Prothonotary or OqJUly
PRAECIPE TO-ENTER RULE-YO FILE COMPLAINT AND RULE TO FILE
(T/Jis section of fOllIl to be used ONLY wilen appel/aliI WJS DEFENDANT (sco Pol, HCPJP, No, roOl(7) in actiOll be/oro District Justice,
IF NOT USED, detach (rom copy 0/ no/lco 01 appeal/a be served upon appel/co),
'RAIC.,ll To Prothonotary
Enter rule upan SO '" 11'\ 1\.t!Jf'~~_t..Q..I.oJJV~R:Le . appelleel'}, to fil. 0 complaint in this appeal
N;rno Il/.VY>lJI/l.'t;5J
(Common Plea. No. '}t... QS. ~ 7 oJ 9 C4;.Jr eJ within lwenly (20) day. after ..rvic. of rule or .uffer .ntry of judgment of non prDL
~O-,j- .~ ~ ~
&f11.1h.tO 01 nwcblt Of hIS Oftomcy 01 DUO"f
IULII To ? C '^ T \-l A M f 1 0 IV l' () \,oJ NS IJII ,appell..l'),
N.Yno 01 awcl~t;51
(1) You ore notified lhat 0 rule i. hereby ent.red upon you 10 fiI. 0 cemplaint in thi. appeal within twenly (20) day. after the dote of
,",vic. of thI. rule upon you by pellonol ..,vic. or by c.,!ified or regi.lered moil
(2)" you do not file 0 complaint wllhin thi. time. 0 JUDGMENT OF NON PROS Will BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU.
(3) The date of ..,vic. of Ihi. ,ule if .ervic. woo by moil i. lhe dote of moiling.
~~.~~
SigWI.re 01 01 /llolUry
DoN:~' t.. :1Y19i.{.
COUIT 'ILl TO II flLlD WITH ,aOTHONOTAIY
~.
g";l
y....
;::,,,:Z:.,,
=>-.
<:>
~
'C'-I
(r,
OJ,
PROOF OF SERVICE OF NOTICE OF APPEAL AND RULE TO FILE COMPLAINT
(This proof ;,f sorvlce MUST DE FILED WIT/UN fiVE (5) DA YS AFTEn flflflU tile flat/co of appaal, Chock applicable boxes)
IILlIALTIl Of 'l_nVAHIA
COUHl'Y or _I "
AFFlDAVITI I hor.by .woar or affirm tho', .erved
o 0 copy of the Notice of Appeal. Common Plcn, No,
(dare or service) , 19_,
receipt attachod harulo, and upon Iho oppolloo,.(namo)
, 19__._0 br pcr,cHlol ,orylco
I upon the District Ju,Uce deslonated theroln on
o by person',lI 'orvico 0 by (certified) (reol'torod) moll, ""ndor's
. on
o by (curlifind) (rcgl'lcrod) moll, .ondor', recolpl olloch.d h.....ta.
o and furlhor thol I ~erYod tho Ruin 10 Fila n Complaint accompanyIng the obo\lo Nollcu of Appeal upon tho appellee(s) to
whom tho Rul. wus oddrc".d on __ .____ , 19_, 0 Ly p.rsanal..rvlc. 0 by (corlified) (raol'torod)
moll, lender', receipt allachcd harolo.
SWORN
tHIS
(AFFIRMED) AND SUBSCRIBED UEFORE ME
DAY OF , 19_
S/gnaIIn "'-
,19__
C'
c',' ...:
1J'"
wt 'In'" ~
VI 7';' ."
...
~ . -;~ r j
:b ... ~. ;: \'.::)
.."'I I,r
VI i,' :>- ~:. t- '" ' ., v
:.- .." " . ' "
.:to. " { ~~ ,.' , -..
1; , ..
.... " "
~ . .. . u:> .-
" ~~ ..." ..c
~ ""
" ,f V, c
b- .l ~ ... e I.J
" '"
~ ... ~j
~
~
~~ r
... .
,
-.l '::j 1:!
'v"
~ "\'
C? ...l
..
...
-J
~ -'I
"
"
'"
;1 It.
-lrNIMNor-.._
_,orc_MIAI
Of ""~&tlI\\f\"O ,"0.
_'IlIllYlIC'
HOYIeI Of APPlAL
I'tlOM 11..1r.9S-
DIITIICT .IUITlCI .IUDGMINT
C_NAt....
9..... '1~1 C;",;I"-~
NOTlCI 0' APPIAL
NIIIIc8 11'- that !he ""F LA has filed In !he ........ CoI.w' 01 Common ....... on oppeaI '"'"' !he ~ ,........:1 by ~ DIoIrict ..... an tIw
~-.S'~~K
'N, S1,
:.;
Ot) -()J~()' Do~lllD.~~.'...
I--~fi-~D! ,
I. :
.
DP~~"'" 1010,
cv 10? S - 0 bOO I , ? ,
LT19 I J" 1
IIIDdl wi be t9wd ON.Y when thlt nolatlor1l1 required ... Pa. R.CP.JJ\ No.
1001&
1Ilk ..... 01 Appeal. when ....Md by !he lllstrlct .IuIIlce, wiU ......... .. a
SIll oIASIo!he jo ".... ""~lntli.CGI& ,
S/(11afl.nI DI_ltlIaIy or Deputy
/--:;',/ . ~--i ~ (,--"
"", slla1t IWIS CLAIMANT (see AI. RC.P.J.P. No.
1001 (6) In action befoIfI DIstrict .A.'ItJce. M.HJSr
FILE A COMPLAINT w11h1n '-1ty (20) .1IIttJr
filing his NOTICE of APPEAL.
" NAlC"1 TO INTIIIULI TO fiLl COMPLAINT AND IUU TO'ILI ' . '.. ".,it
;";_;.:~\;:;::':,; _' ,- ' . - - . , , - ,/'1;
~.ectIon 01 fonnlD be U58d ONLY when appellant was DEFENDANT (see Pa. R.C.P.J.P. No. 1001(7) In BCIIon befom.JJIII11ct'.~\:'i_ ~
IF NOT USfD, deMch from Cqly of notJce of sppeal /0 be served LflO/l appellee}, ,.. "" " '. """' ,
".~
'IIIAICRI To ProthonoforV'"
I"""':'
!nlIr"~ SO \A T 11 ~ fIMlT CI IV r ()\IJ N S H r P ,''''F.fn(.),101ilo a _ .. JII.......... ,M'
_01_.) . '.,'
" (c:a.-t..... No. /Ld q 'i. (." J" 0....11.1"00) within I_V (20) day. aItwr service 01,. or .uff. ..trv 01 JudlP-t 01.,.., ....'"
r ,:J '/ /~/~ ..../ .__~. /~ . ~
S9*ln 0/ ...- or /1/1-..0, or... .f)
lULl. To " () ~ T liA \It> fIT .:> IV
_01_.)
10trJN,lll.f, apfl.ln(.~
'.
(11 You en notifiecI that a Me II hnby...-.d ~ ~ to file a _''''',1 In thlt appeal witlin,~ (20) dayt aftor !he..... 01
....... 01 ~ Me ~ ~ by ........,..I service CO' by canifiod CO' I........,j moll
(2)lf ~ do no, file a <AlI'ipIaIo~ witIin thlt time, a JUDClMENT 01' NON PROS WU IE ENTEftD AGAINST 'IOU.
(3) The dale af ..me. "! ~ Me II ..Yice .... by mail II the ..... 01 mailing.
DaIle '11..",......(....... :J ~ ,,'I -< ,
('-l
"____ .,t.c-
,
C, III ~ll......, lP..t:7:.
__dA~,orDlllo'l'
,
"
laIC 31~.14
COUI' flU
, "","j',
.,;
"
, .(':
, tl..
it;
,;"
'-~ " " l'"'\
-.......;-. \ \"'~\..,) ,"... '\ - ;'-,
\";
.",\
"I' PIlOOF OF SERVICE OF NOlICE OF APP=AL AND flULE TO FILE COMPLAINT ,.1 " ",,'J
i\ (Thill proof of .,orvloo MUST nr: FlLEtJ 1'1111 fiN II>" (S) 1M YS AFlU/lillil!) nt.' 1101":0 01 appeal. Check ~ppl/c~lJiu lx>>ill:1) ....\
CO"~TH O' PENNSYLVANIA
co~;';'~~l~.P.
AFFIDAVITs I horoby .w.;~r or afflrlll 'hull ..rved
, 1'-\ a copy of tho NaileD ef Appo~ Co",man Phm NO"._~_~ :::,,,t1~9... . ..... upon tho CllIrlet Ju.llco do.lonolod thoroln on
(data of "orvlco)_tY.QV~ti" .s..g _, I'fJ.~,L . by """0"01 "o"lcu 0 by corllfled) (l.ol.lur~J mail, !lOndar',
rocolpt allachod horoto, and upon Iho appolloo. (nama) bQLI Tt\Al\\PTOl" TI/JP. .. ' on
",'. ,\',,~_~; 19j5~. by Ilor,"nul ,mvlcn 0 by (cerllflnd) (r,:ul,lclcd) mail. oondor'o rocolp' ollachod heroili." .
r..
\ .'\ '0'8' and further thrit hllfVod the Rule 10 Fllo a Complaint occomponylnJ tho ol1ovo Nollco of Appool opon thopppeU"(I) ,a'
" ", ' whornlhe....woIadd""'edon..N~IJIl7'oIOlll. ~'6 .19 ')5 _' . by~"onal"''''lce 0 by(corllfl~)(raglalered)
moil, ....... _Ipt attacJ.:t her.to.
lAffIRMED) NIlJ SUBSCRIBED IllfOAf W
;:)P DAYal ()r..u..Mher j 19.9S:
!'::.;
"I
~ '~!' ::,';, {'d';":
. r-"j." l.<' "
11"" l!.1Id1(",,' "
.14/,_...;--
.,...,,, J"
'''''';''(,ltlI9t,_~
~ l,;.!, 1;._ '
,
,'.,':
'-I "c',," , ':"":',_
':' " :'1 ,;,'(; "~J~'\;
,.oc
".,
\!;' ,I
.,
~l~
<: '.
'T!"!'-t
"I't: . ,
;'-1'1,11,::
;r.U "'l'~
Ulr.~1 t'"1
--<~,..,I ,
,..........0"
....':1 ,~:', N
t>o....;_!~ C"',
"'~~J":t""5 l ,
~.
-
=
<:> .
c: .
.....,
=
;-,
" ~f' n
~ .I;,'"
ii,
Ul
!:_:,' L~Vi;-. '\ i",j' ,l ':! ji'-' {:" "q'-
.:':1'1, ,,'.il
..it
cD
c.n
"r
\if
", " '-I
~ ~ ... I , '
::.~l\; -;U";
"
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
COUNTY OF: CUMBERLAND
NOTICE OF JUDGMENT/TRANSCRIPT
....0 Di,t HI),
09-3-01
l~l.AINTlFF; N^M[ and AoonES9
JSOUTHAMPTON TOWNSHIP
200 AIRPORT RD
SHIPPENSBURG, PA 172~7,
L
VS,
DEFENDANT: "^ME aod ADORE"
rsHUNlt, ROBERT
120 W, MAIN ST
WAYNESBORO" PA 17268
L
Docket No,: CV-0000167-95
Dato Flied: 10/06/95
. .
OJ N.me Hon
DONALD W. DAIHL
...,,", 81 WALNUT BOTTOM
P,O. BOX 361
SHIPPENSBURG, PA
To~"",'17171 532-7676
17257-0361
ROBERT SHUNX
120 W, MAIti ST
WAYNESBORO" PA 17268
THIS IS TO NOTIFY YOU THAT:
DEFAULT JUDGMENT PLTF
[!] Judgment was entered lor: (Name) SOUTHAMPTON TOWNSHIP
[!] Judgment was entered against: (Name) SHUNIt. ROBERT
In the amount 01 $
674.50
(Date) 11/01/95
on:
D Damagas will be assessed on:
(Date & Time)
D This case dismissed wlthoul prejudice.
D Possession granled.
D possession granted If money judgment Is not
satlslied within thirty days.
D Possession not granted,
D Levy is stayed lor _ days or 0 generally stayed,
D Objection to levy has been flied and hearing will be held:
Date: Place:
Amount 01 Judgment
Judgment Costs
Interest on Judgment
Allorney Fees
$625.00
$49.50
$.00
$.00 .
$674.50
TOTAL
Time:
ANY PARTY HAS THE RIG,,!T TO APPEAL WITHIN 30 DAVS OF THE DA1:E OF JUDGMENT BV FlUNG A NOTICE
OF APPEAL WITH THEe1~TARV 1,9L,~RK OtTH!! ~~RT~F / MMON ~LEAS, CIVIL DIVISION,
/ /- /-{)5 Dale /. ,~ .' ~ 1/ (/ .., District Justice
. ~... ___ ,. i . ,
I certify that this is a true and correct copy 01 the recor10f lhe proceedings cODtatlng the Judgment.
Date \' ' : , District Justice
~ '
, '
, '
, .
. .
'.'t ..'
My commission expires lirst Monday of January, 2000.
SEAL
.'
AOPC 315.94
IN Tllli COURT OF COMMON I'LI-:AS
OF CUMllIilll.ANII COUNTY. I'ENNS\'I.VANIA
ROIH:RT SIIUNK. :CJVII, ACTION LAW
Appellnnl (llel',mdllnl lIelow I
v. : NO. tlf. li'12U CIVil, 'l'EIlM
SOUTIIAMI'TON TOW:'ISIIIP,
Appellee (Plnllllil'f lIelow) : IlISTRICT ,llISTICE AI'I'I':AI,
TO: SOUTIIAMPTON TOWNSIIIP
Appellee (1'lIl1l1l1fl' lIelow)
C IlATE OF NOTICE: 12/2tl/1i?i)
IMPORTANT NUT I CI':
YOU ARE IN IlEFAlIl,T 1I1';CAUSE Y'OU IIAVI-: FAIl.EII '1'0 FlI,li A COMI'l.AIN'I'
IN TillS CASli, UNl.ESS YOU ACT WITIIIN TI';N IlAYS FIlOM Tllb IlATE OF TillS
NOTICE. A .IUIlClMI-;NT MAY liE ENTEIWIl AI;,\I:'1ST YOII 1'11'1'11011'1' A IIEARINli ANIl
)'OU MAY !.USE nllm RllillT '1'0 SUE '1'11I: IlEFENIlANT ANIJ TIIEREIlY !.OS Ii
I'IWI'ER'n OR OTlllm IMPolt'I'M\'1' IWillTS. Hill SIIOllLIl TAKI': TillS NO'I'ICI': '1'0
YOUll l.AIHEll AT ONn:. IF YOII 110 NOT IIAVE A I.AWYEIl Oil CAN NOT At'FOllll
ONI-; GO '1'0 OR 'ml.El'1I0Nli TilE FOl.I,OWIl';(; OFFICE TO FINIl 011'1' WIIEllIi YOU CAN
FINIl l.EGAI. IIEI.I':
OFFICI-: OF COUIlT AIIMINISTIlA'I'OR
COURTIIOUSE, FOUIlTII FLOOIl
CAlll.ISl.E, I'A 17tll:J
(7171 241l 62tltl
~==~J~=~==
11ICIIAI1Il M. MOlllllS Jll.
A'I"I'ORNEY' FOR APPEI.LANT
:IIH E, KIN!; ST.
SlIll'l'ENSIIIIllli, I'A 17257
(717) 5:111 H57\l
III # 'IH54
CC: Miehnel R. Rundle
i
I
.~ - ~r I
I
CO) Zl. I
r .. 8~
- ..
- :;:
'~ ::I: ~
cc ()::-
-...5=
'" :~(J')
'" f~~
~ (J
w eo.
c ::5
15 If)
0'1 (.)
..
.
I
TOWNSHIP OF SUUTHAMPTON
ClIMIlERLANIl COllN'I"'. PENNSYJ,V/\NIA
Plointil'J'
IN TilE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY
PENNSYLVANIA
V.
CIVil, ACTION LAW
IlOUERT II. SHUNK,
Ucfendllnt
: No. 05 6720 CIVil. TERM
NOTICE TO HEAU
TO: MICIIAEI, Il. RUNllLI';. ESq.:
YOII are hereby lIotified to file 0 w I'illen responsc to the enclosed New
Mattei' within twent,v (211) days from scrvicc hcr'cof or a judl{lIIcnt may be cntered
agoinst you.
_~_li,-S/i.. 2_
-------------------------------
Robert II, Shunk, llefellltant
'l'OWNSlIlI' 01' SOUTIIAMPTON
CU MIIElU.i\N1l COll N'I'Y. PENNSYl.V ANIA
Platnlil'l'
: IN TilE COUIlT 01' COMMON PLEAS
: CUMIIEIU,,\NIl COUN'I'\', P~;NNS\I.\'ANIA
CIVIL ACTION LAW
ys.
No. U5 1i72!l CIVil, 'I'EIlM
1l0llEIlT II, SIIIJ NK.
lIel'mlllant
1l~;EJ:;Nl!M!T..'..S_ At/.S.\\' 1m 'I~C)..\'I.!\ I NTII':V'S..I:QMI'I.AIN'l' Arm..N l~lV.MATTJm
Mi:lWlm
1. A1't'iI'med
2. Aft'irmml
:1. Venied III Port, The property is actllllll~' owned by Marc V. Shunk the
defendant's son. The del'endllnt hilS 0 powel' 01' attorney from his son to eondlle!
business in this mutter.
4. At'l'irmel1
5. Affirmed
6. At'firmed
7. Afl'irmed
8. AfCiI'l\let!
U. AI'l'irmell
Ill, Ilenied III Purt. Thl1 Ill~fendllnt did IIppelll 10 IlEIl, lIowever. the Ilefendllnt
hus no knowlerl~l) liS to the conll",ts 01' un~' eOl'l'es(londenee het ween the Plaintiff
and 1l~;1l or as to the dalt) 01' sail1 corl'elllHlndellce.
II. A1'l'lI'l\lcd
12. Dented. 'l'ht'! Defendant haH no (hl'l'(~t knn\\'h~d(.{e aN 10 tlU' (~n:;t:i ill(~t1I'1'l'd h,\'
the P1aintift', lIowevcr, Ilel'l'ndanl l'c"I'nti~' l'I'CI'IVI'lt thl' IIhoVI' Iinled hill!! when
makinll' hi:; III:;t atlempt al approval from till' I'lainlll'l',
1:1. Afl'il'mc(I, Howcvel', liS JllIled III Ihe new millieI'. it ill 0111' helieI' Ihlll ''''I'triill
relevllnl 1'1Irlll or Ihe ol'<linnnce 1I1'e invnlid ulllhn' till! alllhol'izlIlg slalllle.
14. \lenie;d in 1'111'1, The; \lcfendnnl did re;ceive; Ihe;se hills when hI' sOllghl
nppl'ovnl I'.'om Ihl' Plaintiff ill 01' aholll Odoher or l1l1l5. \lel'(!IHlanl Ilpe<1ifienllY
dlmles Ihnl nny hilling wns re;ceived 11I'iol' 10 Ihal da\e!.
15. AfI'irmcd
~ml'..MA~r.nm
^n1J~MAT!Y ~;_m;.n;~.t;:i
I, _1~YA!,!I!rD'. !lLTJILtHWW..ANCl\
16, 'I'he nve;.'menllJ 111 1'llI'al:'l'aph" 1 Ihl'oUI;h 15 arc incorporaled herein as ii' sel
forlh helow.
17. Townships arc nllthorized 10 adopl ordinances regulating "Subdivision and
Land Ordinances" h~' Ihe "Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code" of 1968. Acl
No. 247, Al'tide; V. Sm:tions 501 Ihl'ollg'h Section 515. as amended by Acl 170 of
11180. and as consolidaled al 5:1 1'.5. Sec, 10501 Ihrough 10515.
18. 5:1 I',S. Sec. \050:1 (I) and \ll51tl (g) I'cglllalc the fee" which Ihl? Township
IIln~' chnrge for services.
Ill, The nl'orementionell """tions bolh r"'1"ir" Ihe Township 10 eslablish n sel
:..u:heduln 01' ('cvicw t'pps.
20. 'I'hl' SOlllhampton Towl\Ilhip "SIII>divi"joll alld Land \lllVl>lopllllml Ol'llinances"
do nol ::el I'DI'll> a ::1'1 s"I>elluh' or "hal'ge:: 1'01' tile dillpllled fee::.
21, TIll' TOII'n::hir dill'S not have Ihe ::Iallllol')' alllhol'il)' 10 seek l'eimhul'"e;II11'nl
)'01' nn.\' l~xppn~ie~ Hnt :H~t fOl'th In lIlI~ :wlll :;r.hmlult'n.
~ - E
I; -
.. -.
:J~
..,.. C:l:;f:
- U"
- ,<
Cl.. ,-,0
E? ot"-.. '_
('? ::-'~(l I ,
N ..:1 ,_ (':t
IJ ~ ;-......
t!J "".. Itlu)
r.:: --:: U]Q.
-'J
~ ":l ::5
0' u
. .
\ .
_,' tIIIf
.
TOWNSHIP OF SOUTHAMPTON
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
plaintiff
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
NO. 95 - 6729 CIVIL TERM
vs.
ROBERT H. SHUNK,
Defendant
COMPLAINT
1. The plaintiff is the Township of Southampton, Cumberland
county, Pennsylvania, a township of the second class organized
and existing under the laws of the commonwealth of pennsylvania,
with its municipal office situate at 200 Airport Road,
Shippensburg, cumberland county, Pennsylvania.
2. The Defendant is Robert H. Shunk, an adult individual
residing at 120 West Main street, Waynesboro, Franklin county,
pennsylvania,
3. The Defendant is the owner of a lot of ground situate at
1220 Means Hollow Road, also known as Lot 44, San Jo Acres,
Southampton Township, Cumberland county, Pennsylvania.
4. On April 11, 1994, the Defendant submitted to the
plaintiff a sewage facilities planning module, hereinafter
referred to as the "sewage module", for a low flow sewage system
to be installed on his lot.
5. On April 12, 1994, at the request of the Defendant, a
special meeting of the Board of supervisors of the plaintiff was
held to review said sewage module,
~ .
.' ...;
6. At its regularly scheduled meeting on May 23, 1994, the
plaintiff rejected the sewage module as submitted by the
Defendant.
7. By letter dated June 14, 1994, the Defendant requested
that the plaintiff revise its Official plan (Act 537 Plan) to
allow for the sewage system proposed by the Defendant on his lot.
e. At its regularly scheduled meeting held on August e,
1994, the Plaintiff rejected the request of the Defendant to
revise the Official Plan,
9. On August 15, 1994, the plaintiff, through its Township
Engineer, statler-Brehm Associates, Inc., notified the Defendant
of its decision to reject the Defendant's request for revision of
the Official Plan.
10. On or about september 22, 1994, the Plaintiff was
notified by the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental
Resources, hereinafter referred to as "DER", that the Defendant
had made a private request to DER to order the plaintiff to
revise its Official Plan to allow the sewage system the Defendant
proposed for his lot and requesting written comments be submitted
to DER by the Plaintiff,
11. At its regularly scheduled meeting held on November 14,
1994, the Plaintiff adopted the report of its Township Engineer
as its reply to DER. A copy of said report is attached hereto as
Exhibit "A",
12, As a result of the Defendant's submission of the sewage
module and his request to revise the plaintiff's Official Plan,
the Plaintiff has incurred costs for profesaional services
provided by its Township Engineer totaling $625, as is set forth
on Exhibits B-1, B-2, and B-3 attached hereto.
13. The plaintiff's subdivision and Land Development
ordinance provides for the reimbursement to the Plaintiff by
landowners or developers of costs and expenses for profsssional
.ervices, to include engineering services, with respect to the
submission of Land Development applications.
14. The plaintiff has sent bills totaling $625 to the
Defendant for reimbursement of said costs; said bills are
attached hereto as Exhibits C-1, c-2 and C-3.
15. The Defendant has refused to pay and continues to
refuse to pay said bills,
WHEREFORE, the plaintiff requests judgment be entered in its
favor and against the Defendant in the sum of $625 plus costs.
Respectfully submitted,
FOWLER, ADDAMS, SHUGHART & RUNDLE
By' ~<\cjQ\L~<
M chael R, Rundle
supreme court 1.0. 27768
28 South pitt street
carlisle, PA 17013
(717) 249-8300
J!
_. to
~.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, Michael R. Rundle, Esquire, of Fowler, Addams, Shughart'
Rundle, hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the
foregoing complaint was served upon the Defendant by first cla..
mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows:
Richard M. Morris, Jr" Esq.
318 East King street
Shippensburg, PA 17257
\~\'l~~LQ Q ~,,~~
Michael R. Rundle
January 3 , 1996
EXHIBIT"A"
..
a
~
STATLER. BREHM ASSOCIATES, INC.
.0:
ENGINEERS . PLANNERS . SURVEYORS
November 14, 191M
Southampton Townlhip, Cumberland County
200 Airport Road
'BbipJ*llbU!'l, PA 172157
Be: . ,8hUDk OfIlclal Plan Bevidon
.Gentlemen:
Reference is made to the followiDi correlpondence:
1:. Statler-Brehm Aa.oeiatel, Inc. letter dated AlJIUlIt 15,' 1994 to
Mr~ Robert H. Shunk, (Copy attached)
2, PA D.E.R.letter dated September 22, 1994 to Southampton TOWDIhip.
. (Copyat~)
On behalf of the Towiuhip we have reviewed the documenta provided by PA D.E,R.
and .""chad to their SeptamMr 22, 1994 letter. We would note the followiDi
Ct'm...."ta.m addition to thOl8 we made in our referenced AlJIUlIt 15, 191M letter:
A. The 'application ram.;... foi' the mOlt part the lame .. the application
~e to the Townlhip. Several additional attachmenta are included
'that ware.requelted by PA D.E.R. We believe the. commenta made in
.our refef8nceclletter .tillapply.
B. The application doelnot dilcusl propoeecl altemativel .. eet forth in
Section D of Form 3.S.
, .
C.. Mean. Run bu been oblerved to be dry for lipUficant periodS of time
(weeD) on an annual blllil. We believe that Section E. of Form 3.S. il
improperly completed,
D, The Project Narrative il incomplete in accordance with the outlined
information required in Section C. of Form 3.8.
26 STA11l A VIlNUE, SU1TB 102
CAJlI ~U!. P A 17013
717.2~114
31 N. S1!OOND STREBT
CHAMBBRSBURG, PA 17201
717.267.1401
FAX: 717.243-3301
"
STATUiR-DREIIIl
....; BA\l! 5Inl'l!IIft\
JI od!
, .
.
CD
STATLER .. BREHM ASSOCIATES, INC.
. ENGINBBRS . PLANNERS . SURVBYORS
.', 1
, "
Aqult 15, 199'
"
, "
..
Mr. Robert H. Shunk '
, 120 Wilt Main 8trilet
WayDllboro, PA 17288
.t't
"
I'" J ~
Re: Ofllolal PlaD Revlalo~
Dear Mr. Shunk:
The Board ofSupemlOn of Southampton Townahip, Cumberland County conlidered
your reqUelt to revile the Official Plan at their AUi\llt 8, 1994 meeting. The Board
voted to deny tbia requelt for the fonowing realona: .
1. The Townabip'. Official Plan providel for the implementation of
individual or CQ"'munity sewage diapoll81 lyateml meetina the
requinmenta of Chapter '13 or the requiremente of Tbe Clean Btreama
Law ,nthin the Townabip,
.
Chapter 78.'11.(d) requirelappUcationl for "esperimentalIYltema" to
provide I: replacement area where a syatem meetiJli the requirementa
of Chapter 73. may be inltalled in the event the experimentallyatem
fan.. I'
.
The Townahip hat chosen in ita Omcial Plan to limply implement the
provilionl of Chapter 78 excluding experimentalsyatems which must be
"backecl up" by a replacement system complying with Chapter 73
anyway.
2, Chapter 73,71,(e) and Chapter 73,71.(g)(2) require that experimental
.y.tema be monitored, telted, observed and maiiitained to veritY ,the
Iuccellful nature of the experiment, Further, Chapter 73.71,(g)(3)
require I the identity of the relponsible individual or entity for the
observation, maintenance, repair and replacement in the event of a
fanure of the experimentallYltem,
26 51 A. 'It! A VENUII, SUT1'Ill02
CARUSLB, PA 17013
....-...'" .....
31 N, SBOOND S11U!IlT
CHAMBBRSBURG, PA 17201
Jf1" .,.:" ,'nt
-,
Mr, Robert H. Shunk
AUguit. 15, 1994
PSie 2
. Mr.' Paw' Cun'Y,'waier Q~aUt.y BpeciaUlt. for' PA.D.E,R. hai ~Ua'!~t.ed .
, .. '. that. 'the. TowDahip'.maybG 'rellui,i'l!d ,toUlIUDlll.,the oblervatioil;
.: ' midntenance, repair 8:Ild replacement.responsi~lities: ' .
. \ . ....' ." ," " ..' '.' .
:A. 'rioted in' .the Townlhip'. rejection of the expeliniental, system
. application, the To~hip does not. employ the expertile and does not.
have the monetary reloUrces to acoomplilh t.his task if directed by PA
D.E,R. to,'do 10. .
, 3. Chapter 71.6hnd Cbapter ~.1~65 require sman flow t.reatment. facUities
and individuallewerage IYltems to eltablish specific responlibUitiel for
operation and maintenBhce of t.he proposed system in accordance with
Subchapter E, of Chapter 11, Chapter 71,71 requirel "municipalitiel"
to ....lure the 'proper operation and midntenance of lewage facUitiee
within their borders,'" '
, "
Chapter 71.72 providel for the lecurit.y ofpropoaed facilit.y,conlt.ruction cOlte
a. well al fut.ure operation and maintenance coste, Mr. Curry has sugelted
that. coste upward of.0.5 to 1.0 ~1lion dollars may be advisable due to the
experimental nat.ur8ofths system and the acljacent. st.ream pollution potential.
.AB stated above, the Township is not. in a position to 'provide IUch expertise nor
securit.y amounte, . The TOW11llhip Official Plan therefore adequately provides
formanagemllnt..of the normal needs of the Township by allowing properly
installed sYltems al per Chapter 73 excluding experimental systems.
. '
4. Chapter 71,72 and Chapter 71.73 advises that some type of mUnicipal
ownership or manBlement entity, n DE will be
required to allure "proper installation, maintenance, and operation" of the
proposed facility. This takes the decision out oUhe Municipality's hands. The
Townahip'l Official. Plan keeps theae decilione at the Municipal level by
excluding experimental systems. .
5. Chapter 73,71,(aX1) provides the use of experimental systems for t.he
abatement. of existing pollution or public healt.h problems, Neither of these
sit.uationl exilt. on the Shunk site, The Townahip's June 6, 1994
correlpondence properly advises that within acceptable guidelinee and upon
recommendation of the Township's S.E,Q" Solicitor and Engineer an
experimental system would be considered, This. exception is normal and
reasonable, considering the unknown nature of existing syetems' functional
capacity, .
..................................................~...........................................
....iiii.iu lioN 17:57 FAI 717 243 3301 STATLER-BREIIN ~H DALE SIIUGIIART ~008
..
.
SOUTHAKPTON TOWNSHIP PLANNING COMMISSION
200 Al~po~t Road
, Shlppenebu~a, PA 17257
Southampton Townehlp Supervleore
200 Al~port Road
Shlppen.burl, PA 17257
.
RIll Robert H. Shunk, owner
Lot 44, San Jo Ac~e., Southampton Town.hip, Cumberian4 County
.
GenthJlln.
Tha Plannlnl Commle.lon r.commend. denial of the requ..t to put
e prlvata .awale Wf't.. on thl. .1Iht, Th. r.a.on. a~' .. followl.
* Str... Pollutlon.
* St~... dOli not have runnlna wat.r .11 the tl,....
* Could b. future m.lnt.nance for taxpayer. of Southampton
Townlhlp.
Th. 'lanninl Comml..lon .uppo~t. the r.alons outllned ln the
Enaln..r" l.tt.r of comm.ntl.
Th. Plennlnl COlllllhalon wants lt known that this rea pons. 11 '.'"
appUcabl. to the above m.ntloned e1tu.Uon only. , "
. .. .
"
~tCtNEU ~
oel 1 0 \Q94
SOUiHMlPiON iOWNSHIP
CUl-ABEH\J.NO COum~
Sincerely,
~AI't1(~~ a ~
Eunlce A. t:einer
Secretary'
~.
.
,.
" . .'
SoV~.lI\ptoll ~oWllebip, Franklin County
. November 14, 1994
1'aie' 2
, ..
"
, ,
" '.
ShOuld you bave any' further quellionl on thil matter you may co~tact, the
.. SupemlOrI directly at the TownabipOQlce or you may call our office,
Sincerely,
, "
. ,I.
WESlal
cc: Southampton Township, Cumberbmd County
Dale F. Shqhart, Jr" Esquire
Robert H. Shunk
i".
"
.......aT
c,
COpy
D ~@~-DW~-
r ..\.11"1 I 004 [
1_ 6/06/94
, .
"
!'
"
".'
SUBJECTl Low flow on 101 sewen&C dIsposall)'Slems
TO: Wlyne StaUer, Soutlwnplon Twp,1 CUmberland Co. Engineer
FROM: Edwanl VymazaI, SocrclIry SoutlwnplOn TI\lI.1 CUmberland Co.
REFERENCEl A, Leiter plC$Cntod & plans of Low flow on 101l)'ilem, by 10hn Mcrca.
B. Dllcusslon on Low flow on 101l)'Slems w1!h PluI Cuny, D,B,R,
C. DiIcusalon on Low flow on 101l)'mms w1!h Mr, Mcrca and al Supervisor
mcetIng
'123/94,
I. II was !he interpretation of !he Enginccr and the Sollcllor as well as !he Board of
SupervlsolllIId all pruenlln (Reference C ) that the Low flow on 101 I)'mm plan as prCICnted was and Is
an experimental_rage I)'iIcm as stated by D,E,R., And as an experlmentall)'Stem must be monltored
by D,B.R, as lilted In 11'1 own regulations.
2. It was slso learned in ItonvcruUon'wI!h PluI Cuny of D.E,R,( RcCerence Bo )
thatlllhll time \My had no plans or rClOW'tClto carty OUl such monitoring, But thaI the Twp, could take
thaI rcspollliblllty It II w1thed. and added thallI would be Idvlsable thaI I large bond be received 10 cover
III)' CIIv1rollRlCRlll troUble thaI may occur, plUltovcr the COIl of the vlSIlcsIIng thalls required with In
cxperlmenllllYll=. II was hiI recollUllClldatlon thai none of the IIquld be discharged direct1y Inlo a
I\rCIIll but pumped In 10 Isprlnlr1lna I)'I\em and discharged on to the Bround, In case of a malfunction of
tho I)'I\clII the I\rCIIll would not have d1rcc1l1w ICWCl'IJe being Introduced into II.
3, AI an open meetlna or the Board of Supervisor (Reference C ) !he Low flow on
101 I)'I\clII was dilC\lllcd and w1!h the Idvilc ofbo!h !he Engineer Ind Solicitor, The Board of
SUporvlSOIl unanllllOUlly rejeclcd 10 use of Low flow on 101l)'ltems for use in tho Township of
Southampton, Cumberland Co. A few of !he reasons were IS follows:
I, 1111 an experlmentall)'stem Ind the Twp. dose nOl have the means and the
expertise allhll time 10 Idminlster such I system,
b. The environmental damage bond would have 10 be velY high ( approx. $
'00,000 10 $ 1,000,000 ).
c, The Irea for leralion would have 10 be large ( pos.sibly lhal and Ihe I)'Slem
would not iii on one 101 ),
d, Maintenance of lhe system, Ihould lhe property be sold, could fall on !he
Township,
e. If I property that had I dwelling on It and lho conventional sewerage
1)'I\cm ma1!unct1oned and no olber system would work. then thlll)'Ilem would be considered, upon lhe
Idvlsc of the Townships Sewerage enforcemenl omcer, Englnccr and Solicitor, with the favorable Input
from D,ER. However thll is not a I)'stem !he Twp, would consider IS a sewerage I)'stem for a property
thaI no dwelling Is now on and in lieu or a convcnlionallCWClIge I)'Ilem for I new dwelling,
BOARD OF SUPERVISOR'):
KENNETIt GOSHORN. Chairman
10HN ORNDORFF
EDWARD VYMAZAL
. .
'. ,0
FOWL~R, ADDAloIS, SHtlGRAPoT " RUNDLE
ATTORNEVS AT V.W
',0. SOX 10'
U SOUTH PITT BTlIEET
C"IILII~E. peNNSVLVANIA 170U
-
POWLlR. ADDA'" , '"U.MART
, , 11"',"111
Of cOuHlIL
"OMoAA'U CALI f. '"UG"ART
~O". I. ,OM'''. tII
WI\LI." ,.. AOU'"
'A~' f. '"UI"AIT. ,R.
MIGMAIL R. RUNDLI
TelEPHONe 17171 I..'UOO
FAX I" 71 24'.1\14
June 20, 1994
Rob.rt H. Shunk
120 We.t Main street
wayneaboro, PA 17268
!tEl t.ot No. 44 of San Jo Acres
Dear Hr. Shunk:
I a4 vritin; to you in my capacity as Solioitor for. the
southa=pton,Township, cumberland count!, Boa~ o(,supervisora.
On Jun. 18, 1994, the supervisora reoe ved your, letter of JUnia 14
and forwarded it to me and to the Townahip EnlJinear ,for review
and reapon... At the Board of supervieon llle'tin9.on April 11,
1994, the law otfice of Sally Winder filed your~.pplication for
an experimental sewage facility on your above referencod lot at
the san Jo Acre development.
The matt.r was reviewed with the Town.hip Engi.n~er and at the
public mseting on May 23, 1994, tbe supervisors voted to
'di.approve the request. Therefore, the TOWRShip'acted in
accordance w1.th 71 Pa. Code 571..53 (b). The Township'. written
comaentl were sublequently mailed to yoU and the module and the
Clomaent8 were forwarded to DBa. There are no,ftserious '
constitutional questions" for me to analyze. T~e Townlhip acted
~ithin the time requirements imposed upon it by state law.
You have now riled a request for revis1.on of the TownShip's
Official Plan. 1 have requested the supervisors to FlaeG this
"
...--.......................--.............. .
~.
, \
.~:.~
,
EXHIBIT "B-1"
'0
STATLER · BREHM ASSOCIATES, INC.
26 STAT! AVINUI, sum 102, CAILlSLI, PA 17011
1I7.2....n.
FAX: 717.2.,.3301
DO......
.
'LANNIlS
.
luaVBYOl1
- - - - - - - - - - - -
Taak: 00024 BHUNK SEPTIC, 8~N JO
PROFESSIONAL PERSONNEL
L.ETTERS/MEMOS
ROBBINS, ROBERT L,
STATL.ER, WAYNE E.
subtotal
, PHONE CALL.B!CONF
, ITAlLER, WAYNE E.
BITE OBSRVE!MTG
BREHM, DOUQL~S, S,
Total.
.
Hours
Rate
Amount
0.5
1.6
2,0
60.00
70.00
30,00
106,00
135.00
0.6
70.00
36.00
1.0
70.00
70.00
2.0,00
3.5
-------------
Subtot.al
240.00
-
Tuk Total
2.0.00
-------------
.------ .--
.
EXHIBIT "B-2"
rt .... .
STATLER. BREHM ASSOCIATES, INC. m.m.t"t'
26ITATI AVINUI, SUITlI02, CARLISLE, PA l7GIS FAlel ",.20.1301
INQINUU
PLANNII.
.URVIYOI.
.
.
INVOICI.
-
. - - -.- - - ~ - - - - - ' . . .
. ,f": ';., .. ..: .
T..ktOOOI4 IIIHUNK'IEPTlC, IAN JO
PROF.IIIONAL PERSONNEL
LnTERI/MEMOI
ITATLER, WAYNE E.
DER APPL/MTG
,.ITATLER. WAYNE E.
, Tota'.
Hour. Rate AlIIOunt
2.0 70.00 '40.00
2.0 70.00 '40,00
4.0 '10.00
.......---.......-...
8ubtotal .10.00
Talk Total 110 .00
..-......-...----
.
,.---" ..
- -'- _...:. ,_.....;... '"
.
. ~.. .'
.
.
, .
I~
SOUTHAMPTON TOWNSHIP SUPERVISORS
CUMIERLANDCOUNTY
200 AIIU'OI\T JlON)
SHIPl'!NS8lJRG, PA 17257
July 12, 1994
Mr. Robert Shunk
120 W. Main Street
Waynesboro, PA 17268
Mr. Shunk:
According to Section 902 of the Southampton To~n.hip, Cumberland
county lubdlvl.ion and Land Development Ordlnanca tha following
..ount S240fOO i. due to Southampton Townlhip for the Engineer
and/or Lagl review of your Subdivision and/or Land Developement
Plan.
Haka chack payable to Southampton Twp., cumberland Co. and
..11 to tha above address.
Thank you in advance for your cooperation.
Sincarely,
~~""..,,'
Boutha.pton Townlhip
cumberland County
t
.
1"
i
~
~
~
t
1
~
~.
,
&
.
EXHIBIT "C-2"
. ..... .....,
~;~;~~:jo.A!.'~:l.IlC'i:''''';'
_I,....;,
"',
,',..
, .
.
.
.
.
"
"
EXHIBIT "C-3"
-'
~.
..'
-j
.0
c....
?;
.'
:j
n~
o?:;:
r....:;--:
..,: ~;J.
:~LI1
(i::~
ltliij
[;1 a..
a
~
.,-
W~
Db.
ltr.=
22
~c..
et~
\5
~
\D
N
N
-
c;:
CO')
,
.
.
.
v..
I IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
I CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
:
I CIVIL ACTION - LAW
NO. 95 - 6729 CIVIL TERM
TOWNSHIP OF SO~N
ctJII8lRLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
Plaintift
ROBERT H. SIIUNJ(,
Det.ndant
REPLY
16. No answ.r requir.d.
17. Adaitted.
18. Adaitted.
19. The avera.nt is a conclu.ion ot law to which no r.ply
i. r.quired. Alt.rnativ.ly, it a reply is d....d required, the
avera.nt i. denisd. said .tatut. requir.. only that .aid t... be
"be..d upon a schedule .stablished by ordinance or r..olution."
20. D.ni.d. said Ordinanc. in S.ction 902, tog.ther with
R..olution 1993-3, a copy ot which is attach.d a. Exhibit "A",
e.tabli.h said t....
21. The avera.nt i. a conclusion ot law to which no r.ply
i. r.quired.
22. No r.ply r.quired.
23. Adaitted.
24. D.ni.d. The .ngineering bill dated S.pt.mber 14, 1994,
i. tor te.s r.lated to the d.tendant'. reque.t to the Town.hip
to revi.e it. official plan. The .ngineering bill dat.d
VERI PI CATION
J.... W. Gruver, baing duly .worn according to law, depo.e.
and .ay. th.t he i. Chairaan of the Board of supervi.or. of the
Town.hip of Southa.pton, cuabarland County, Penn.ylvania,
Pl.intiff in the foregoing action; a. .aid Chairaan he i.
authorilad to and doe. execute thi. Affidavit for and on bah.lf
of the ..id Township of southa.pton; and that the fact. .et forth
th.rein .re true and correct upon hi. own knowledge, infora.tion
and balief.
'"
. Gruver
Sworn to .nd subacribad bafore .e,
I~T
this day of February, 1996.
\"^^~ ~ lli~
.
NOTARIAL SEAL
IIICH~EL R RUI'iOlE, IIOTAr.V PUBLIC
BORO Vf ~.\nU5LE, o:lIt.IBEilLANO COUNl'I
MY COt.lMI,~ION EXPliIC:; DECEMBER .0, 199B
'........
SOUTHAMPTON TOWNSHIP
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
RESOLUTION 1993-~
REGULATIONS AND FEE SCHEDULE FOR
SUBSURFACE SEWAGE SYSTEMS
WHEREAS, the Board of supervisors of southampton Township,
CUmberland county, pursuant to the authority of the Pennsylvania
sewage Facilities Act, Act No. 537, as amended, desire to
establish a collection procedure and fee schedule for on site
..wage disposal systems.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AND IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED BY
the Board of supervisors of southampton Township, Cumberland
county as follows:
I. Application Fee - New systems.
$250.00'
A. The Applicant shall pay a $250 application fee to
the municipality or its designated agent before preparation of
any paperwork or performing of any tests, review or inspections.
The fee shall be allocated as set forth in Section II below. If
any of the steps set forth below in subsections B, C and Dare
not performed, the Applicant shall, upon request, be refunded
such unearned portions of the fee.
B. All work done by the sewage Enforcement Officer in
enforcing Act No. 537 and the Township's sewage program, which is
not epecificallY itemized in these regulations, shall be
reimbursed by the Applicant at the rate of $19 per hour to the
municipality or its designated agent prior to Permit issuance.
Such additional hourly rate work shall be charged by the Township
to the Applicant exactly as invoiced to the Township by the
Sewage Enforcement Officer.
II. steps in the Approval Process - New system.
A. Preparation of documents by Township -
$ 35.00
The $35 fee shall cover all costs of the Township
prepaying the paperwork associated with the
Application, No portion of this fee shall be
refundable.
Exhibit "A"
B. Soils Investigation -
$150,00
1. The $150 fee associated with this portion of
the Application covers the costs of performing and/or
witnessing the performance of the deep pit evaluations
which shall be limited to four (4) deep pits and the
performance and/or witnessing the performance of the
percolation test which shall be limited to one complete
test on six (6) holes. If additional deep pits or
percolation tests shall be required such tests shall be
performed at the hourly rate of $19 per hour as set
forth in Section I-B above.
2. The, $150 fee shall also include the cost of
completing the appropriate test report forms stipulated
by DER and review of Planning Module for land
development and subdivision plans.
3. The costs associated with the excavation of
the percolation test holes and the providing of water
for presoaking and performance of the test shall be
paid by the Applicant. The Applicant shall also provide
sufficient gravel for covering the bottom of the
percolation test holes.
4. All costs and liabilities associated with the
excavation and back fill of the deep pits shall be the
responsibility of the Applicant,
c. system Design (by Applicant)
No fee
1. Regulations and liability prevent Municipal
Sewage Enforcement Officer from designing a subsurface
sewage system to fulfill the requirements of an
Application.
The design must be by a person other than the Municipal
Sewage Enforcement Officer and meet the requirements of
the Regulations. The Applicant must make arrangements
with such an individual to design a system complying
with the Regulations utilizing the data obtained in
Subsections A and B above, two (2) copies of which will
be supplied by the Sewage Enforcement Officer at no
additional fee,
-2-
2. All costs of system design are the
responsibility of the Applicant and are in no manner
included in any fee charged by the municipality. Any design
contractual responsibility shall be between the Applicant
and the designer he elects to utilize for that function.
D. system Design Review and Permit Issuance
$ 25.00
This $25 fee for design review shall be
charged for the review of the initial design submission. If the
review of the design sUbmission results in the rejection of the
design because of non-compliance with Regulations, this review
fee shall be charged for each design resubmission and must be
paid in advance of the review.
E. Final Inspection -
$ 40.00
This $40 fee shall cover the cost of final
inspection of the system by the Sewage Enforcement Officer .
after its installation, In the event a permit is issued but
construction is not started within three (3) years as
allowed by the Regulations, the services provided by this
fee shall be automatically carried over upon application
issuance of a new permit. This portion of the application
fee shall not be refunded unless the permit is returned to
the Township and voided.
III. Evaluations and Repairs
A. If an Applicant requires an evaluation or repair of
an existing system he shall pay an $85 fee to the municipality or
its designated agent in advance. The payment of the fee shall be
allocated as set forth below in Subsections B, C, and D.
B. The sum of $35 shall cover all costs associated
with the preparation of paperwork by the Township. No portion of
this fee shall be refundable.
C. Any Applicant having an existing subsurface
system that has been determined to be malfunctioning shall pay a
fee of $50 in order to obtain the Municipal sewage Enforcement
Officer's initial investigation of the malfunction, and if in the
opinion of the Sewage Enforcement Officer, the correction of the
malfunction involves modification of the existing subsurface
.ystem to a degree involving the application of new testing
procedures, design, etc., then the fee schedule for new systems,
Sections I and II above, shall be applicable and paid in advance,
with the exception that the $35 fee for preparation of paperwork
-3-
shall not be paid twice, Therefore the Applicant shall pay the
additional sum of $215 to the Township,
D. Whenever an Applicant requires evaluation of an
existing system as a part of subdivision/land develop~ent plan
approval a $50 fee shall be charged to provide for the SEO's
investigation, report and review of the planning Module. If
modification of the existing system is required to the degree of
involving the application of new testing procedures, then the fee
schedule for new systems, sections I and II above, shall be
applicable and paid in advance, with the exception that the $35
fee for preparation of paperwork shall not be paid twice.
Therefore the Applicant shall pay the additional sum of $215 to
the Township.
IV. Holding Tank Applications
$100.00
Whenever an Applicant makes an initial request for the
issuance of a Permit utilizing a holding tank if such Application
does not involve any of the investigative and design review
expenses associated with a conventional or soundmound sewage
disposal system, the Applicant shall be charged a fee of $100
payable to the municipality or its designated agent, The fee
shall be allocated $35 for the Township preparation of paperwork,
$25 for the Sewage Enforcement Officer's design review, and $40
for the final inspection. The $35 fee to the Township is
nonrefundable, If the Holding Tank Application is not approved
and therefore no final inspection is held, this $40 portion of
the fee shall be refunded upon request,
v. permit Renewals
$100,00
These regulations provide that any Permit issued shall
have the life of three (3) years in which to either install the
permitted system, or begin construction of the facilities to be
served by the system. If neither of these actions have been
sufficiently completed at the end of the three (3) year period, a
new permit must be issued, It must comply with the requirements,
rules and regulations in effect at the time of renewal. The
Applicant shall pay an initial deposit of $100 to the
municipality or its designated agent. The actual charge to the
Applicant shall be based upon the hourly rate of $19 for time
spent by the Sewage Enforcement Officer. If the time spent by the
Sewage Enforcement Officer is less than five (5) hours, the
Applicant will be refunded the unspent portion of the deposit
upon receipt by the Township of the invoice from the Sewage
Enforcement Officer. If any of the original testing, examination
and design requirements are found not to be in compliance with
the c~rrent Regulations, Applicants shall comply with the
-4-
~ to t:
." III
I.! .'
~1Jn i:J :'~l.~
).' c..' . .~
~r~ t:i: l,~ ~ ~
~-[~ ; f.'. ~ I
)' ' '..') ',.'
II;. I
ft'! (. ,
I, ' I
[' L,. ]--
I ,_~ \ , ,,;
...J \, . lJ