Category: Development
Report by BCPC to Jointure on 2020 Census Population & Housing Data
At the October 7, 2021, Newtown Area Joint Zoning Council (JZC) meeting, Lisa Wolff, Senior Planner, Bucks County Planning Commission (BCPC), presented an analysis of the recently released 2020 U.S. Census Redistricting Data Summary Files related to the "Jointure" townships (Newtown, Wrightstown, and Upper Makefield).
Her analysis, which will be incorporated into the updated Newtown Area Comprehensive Plan, covers population trends from 1950 through 2020, population change from 2000 to 2020, population by race, and housing data.
Jointure Population Trend
Ms. Wolff first reviewed the growth in population of the Jointure townships from 1950 through 2020. See the table below and listen to the audio snippet where Ms. Wolff highlights the important trends.
In the following audio snippet from the JZC meeting, Ms. Wolff talks about the trend in Jointure population from 1950 though 2020:
Population Change
It is clear that population growth is declining, especially between 2010 and 2020. Newtown, for example, saw a growth of only 3.1% during this period (see Table 2 below).
In the following audio snippet from the JZC meeting, Ms. Wolff reviews more details of Jointure population changes from 2000 to 2020:
Population By Race
The racial/ethnicity profile of all three Jointure townships show a shift to a more diverse population from 2000 to 2020. Newtown, for example, was 94% white in 2000 and 82% in 2020. The biggest change was in the “Asian Alone” category – an increase from 734 residents in 2000 to 2,201 in 2020. This category includes “Asian Indian,” which I am sure constitutes the majority of “Asian Only” residents in Newtown.
In the following audio snippet from the JZC meeting, Ms. Wolff reviews more details population by race:
Housing Data
The last piece of data in the report is “Housing Occupancy Status,” which is summarized in Table 3 of the report.
In the following audio snippet from the JZC meeting, Ms. Wolff summarizes the housing data:
Newtown saw a 28% increase in “vacant housing units” from 2010 to 2020 (389 vs 304). At the JZC meeting, it was not clear what was included in this category. The U.S. Census Bureau website provides the following definition:
“A housing unit is vacant if no one is living in it at the time of the interview, unless its occupants are only temporarily absent. In addition, a vacant unit may be one which is entirely occupied by persons who have a usual residence elsewhere. New units not yet occupied are classified as vacant housing units if construction has reached a point where all exterior windows and doors are installed and final usable floors are in place. Vacant units are excluded if they are exposed to the elements, that is, if the roof, walls, windows, or doors no longer protect the interior from the elements, or if there is positive evidence (such as a sign on the house or block) that the unit is to be demolished or is condemned. Also excluded are quarters being used entirely for nonresidential purposes, such as a store or an office, or quarters used for the storage of business supplies or inventory, machinery, or agricultural products. Vacant sleeping rooms in lodging houses, transient accommodations, barracks, and other quarters not defined as housing units are not included in the statistics in this report.”
Future Development
Ms. Wolff also reported the estimated number of acres of land suitable for future potential development in each municipality. For Newtown that number was just under 40 acres, for Upper Makefield it is a little more than 250 acres, and for Wrightstown it is a little more than 425 acres. These are just early estimates, but it is evident that Newtown may be reaching its limit for future development.
Additional Information
- The complete BCPC 2020 Census Data Report
- Newtown Township Land Use Trends 2005-2020
- Comprehensive Plan Resident Survey Results (Newtown)
Posted on 11 Oct 2021, 11:37 - Category: Development
Economic Development Committee Discusses Proposal for a LI/OLI Overlay District
I attended the in-person September 21, 2021, Newtown Economic Development Committee (EDC) meeting because I wanted to learn more about “Economic Development projects for 2022 budget” – which was an item on the agenda.
This was the first mention I have seen of the 2022 budget in ANY official agenda for a public meeting. Not even us supervisors know what projects will be in the proposed preliminary 2022 budget, which will not be presented to the Board of Supervisors (BOS) until October 18, 2021.
However, the EDC discussion actually focused on the Bucks County Planning Commission (BCPC) REVISED proposal for Planning Services to Develop an Overlay District to the LI and OLI Zoning Districts. For background, view the video: "Township Planner Presentation on Rezoning the OLI & LI Districts." Members did not have the revised proposal to review at this meeting.
The discussion focused on the process for approval of the proposal and how members of the EDC would be involved in the BCPC process if the proposal is approved by the BOS, which will vote to approve it or not on at the September 22, 2021, BOS meeting. They also discussed what an Overlay entails.
Overlay District Permits New Uses
Overlay Zoning is a regulatory tool that creates a special zoning district, placed over an existing base zone(s), which identifies special provisions in addition to those in the underlying base zone. The overlay district can share common boundaries with the base zone or cut across base zone boundaries. Regulations or incentives are attached to the overlay district to protect a specific resource or guide development within a special area.
Mary Donaldson - an EDC member - explained how an overlay to the LI and OLI zoning districts would allow for additional uses that are currently not permitted:
The EDC spent considerable time talking about possible new uses for the districts that the Overlay would allow. Restaurants, for example, were mentioned. You can find all the possible uses in a May 4, 2021 presentation before the Newtown Planning Commission by Township Planner Michele Fountain. You can also listen to that presentation.
Read More...Posted on 22 Sep 2021, 11:45 - Category: Development
Another Proposed Project on Newtown Bypass
Keeping the rural look of the Newtown Bypass has been a tradition in Newtown. It is a common belief among long-time Newtown area residents that the Newtown Bypass is supposed to remain an "undeveloped" greenway. For the most part, the Bypass is still somewhat preserved with trees and greenery along the route as can be seen in left side of the above photo. There are a couple of exceptions, such as Summit Square (located on the Middletown side of the road) and the NAC, to name just two of the most visible eyesores.
Preserving the “greenway” nature of the Bypass was threatened back in April 2017, when Supervisor Phil Calabro proposed that the township lease or sell two acres of Silver Lake Park, which is located on the Bypass, to Wawa (see Patch article). Although that idea never saw the light of day, a Super Wawa on the Bypass is still possible (read “Wawa is Back!”).
Will The Bypass Look Like Street Road or Route 1?
Many people fear that if Wawa is allowed to build on the Bypass with 16 fueling stations and multiple huge signs – including an electronic sign on the Bypass - it would open a “Pandora's box” for development on the Bypass and turn it into a Route 1 (right side of photo above). Fully 86% (n=288) of residents I surveyed who were against the Wawa agreed, and 78% (n=262) said it was not compatible with the historic, rural nature of Newtown. [Read “Residents Present Their Case For and Against a Super Wawa on the Bypass”]
Fast Forward to 2021: The Box Opens!
At the March 15, 2021, Newtown Board of Supervisors Work Session representatives of Lotus Park Senior Living LLC, presented a "sketch plan" for a Senior Living facility to be located adjacent to the site of the proposed Wawa. The lot size of this parcel of land is only 4.83 acres! [See the map below.]
Guess what? The owners of this property - Innovative Hospitality Management – also own the property where the Super Wawa is likely to be built. When they saw an opportunity presented by the Wawa precedent, they proceeded to find a use for a plot of land that many experts consider unfit for development.
Like the convenience store/gas station use before the “curative amendment” was passed (see here), this use is not permitted in the OR (Office Research) district. To proceed with this project, the developer would need to get at least 11 zoning variances from the Zoning Hearing Board. [See CKS letter]
No decision was made at the BOS Work Session, but Supervisors had many questions and concerns. One question put forward by a supervisor had to do with the anticipated income by the township from such a facility. Recall that about 60% of Newtown’s tax revenue has consistently come from Earned Income Tax (EIT). The developer could not answer that question, but will do so if and when the application is officially submitted.
It should be noted that employment centers envisioned by the OR district could generate significant EIT revenue for the Township. Retail stores, such as Wawa, that pay a wage of $10 per hour to a minimal number of employees, do not provide any significant EIT income for the Township.
The Slippery Slope to “A Route 1” Bypass
Whether or not this proposed assisted living use application moves forward and is approved, there will be further pressure to rezone the OR district to allow other uses. The Newtown Economic Development Committee (EDC) already suggested changes to the zoning of the LI (Light Industrial) and Office Light Industrial (OLI) districts to “revitalize” the Business Commons area.
The EDC memo/plan was discussed at the February 16, 2021, BOS Work Session. Although the EDC also wanted to include the OR district in its plan, “the Supervisors agreed to discuss the memo only as it would apply to the LI and OLI zoning districts, focusing on the Business Commons only, at this time.” [Download the EDC Memo to BOS Re Zoning for Businesses.]
Local Area Residents Speak Out
“I am 60 years old,” said one Newtown neighbor on Nextdoor. “I grew up in Churchville and went to school in Newtown...Council Rock then George School. What has happened to Newtown is a travesty. I avoid it because my heart breaks every time I drive through it. It used to be a beautiful town surrounded by farms and trees. Now it is one big congested, ostentatious commercial center. Even the original Goodnoe’s and dairy farm are gone. You could not pay me to live there.”
See Nextdoor discussion “Another proposed project on Newtown Bypass” for more comments from local area residents/
Read More...Posted on 19 Mar 2021, 12:07 - Category: Development
Wawa is Back!
On March 17, 2021, attorneys for Provco Pineville Acquisitions, LLC, submitted a Zoning Hearing Board application for a hearing to grant a “special exception” E-30 use to build a Super Wawa combination convenience store and gas station on the SW corner of Newtown Bypass and Lower Silver Lake Road in the Office Research (OR) district. This is the same location as in it’s original application that was presented to the Newtown Board of Supervisors (BOS) back in In May 2018 [Read “Developer and Attorney Present Their Case for a WaWa Superstore on the Newtown Bypass”].
See the Update below.
Some History
Excerpted from the application:
In October of 2019, Provco submitted a "substantive challenge" to the Joint Municipal Zoning Ordinance (JMZO) to the Zoning Hearing Board (ZHB). Provco's challenge asserts that the JMZO is de jure exclusionary with respect to a "retail store with fuel dispensing facilities" use. Alternatively, the zoning application requested a use variance to allow a retail store with fuel dispensing facilities at the Property.
Prior to an evidentiary hearing being held on the Application, the Newtown Township Board of Supervisors ("BOS"), together with boards of supervisors of Wrightstown Township and Upper Makefield Township, amended the JMZO by adopting JMZO Ordinance #2020-02 ("Ordinance Amendment".) The Ordinance Amendment, in addition to other provisions, amended section 501.A.3 of the JMZO (OR District) to permit a Use E-30 Motor Vehicle Fueling and Convenience Store by special exception and listing criteria therefor. Applicant granted the ZHB an extension of the time within which the ZHB must hold a hearing on the 2019 Zoning Application through December 31, 2021.
The amendment passed by the JMZO allows the E-30 use in the OR zone of Newtown as well as other locations in Wrightstown and Upper Makefield. [Read “Discussions of E-30 Zoning Amendment” for more details about the curative amendment.]
Wawa Still Pushing for Variances
The new Provco application still requires several variances, including:
- To permit a Use E-30 Motor Vehicle Fueling and Convenience Store with eight (8) fuel dispensers on the 4.95 acre Property where six (6) fuel dispensers are permitted by right;
- Various signage variances such as locating a wall sign to be located within 1,000 feet of and facing the limited access portion of the Newtown Bypass;
- Applicant also proposes two (2) electronic message center monument signs - one (1) of 49.9 square feet in area and 10' in height located along the Newtown Bypass, and one (1) of 35 square feet in area and 8' in height located along Lower Silver Lake Road. Electronic signs are prohibited throughout Newtown Township and especially not on the Bypass – not even within 1,000 feet of the Bypass. Electronic signage has been denied to other gas station owners such as Rick Steele’s.
NOTE: JMZO Ordinances do not allow signs along the Bypass and prohibit electronic signs. See JMZO General Signage Ordinance: “Properties Located Along Non-Limited Access Portion of the Route 332 and Route 413 Bypass. No sign located within 1,000 feet of the Route 332 or the Route 413 Bypass legal rights-of-way shall face onto the Bypass so that the message or symbol on the sign may be visible from any location within the Bypass legal rights-of-way…” and “Electronic message centers are prohibited within the Jointure.”
One variance NOT requested concerns an electric vehicle charging station such as a Tesla SuperCharging station. There are quite a quite a number of Tesla owners in the Newtown area. This is something specifically requested by Newtown request and the new zoning ordinance requires a minimum of one electric vehicle charging station for Use E-30 when located in the OR District.
There are several steps and public meetings/hearings before this application reaches the ZHB for its decision. Meanwhile...
Update
In November 2021, the Newtown Township Zoning Hearing Board (ZHB) issued its official written decision regarding the Application of Provco Pineville Acquisitions, LLC to build a Wawa super store at the intersection of the Newtown Bypass and Lower Silver Lake Road in Newtown.
The decision grants the applicant’s request for a special exception to operate a Motor Vehicle Fueling and Convenience Store, but denies the applicant’s requests for all variances (number of fueling stations and sign relief). The ZHB voted 3-2 on September 20, 2021, to deny the variances (read “Breaking News: Wawa's Request for Zoning Variances Denied!”).
All parties have 30 days from November 4, 2021 to file an appeal to the Court of Common Pleas from the Decision. I fully expect Provco to do so.
More details, including "Findings of Fact", witness testimony synopsis, and the decision on each variance request...
See this collection of Wawa article summaries to get a complete history of this project.
Read More...Posted on 18 Mar 2021, 11:11 - Category: Development
Residents Lash Out Against Arcadia Settlement
Dozens of angry residents of Newtown Crossing, Eagle Ridge, and other Newtown communities attended the February 24, 2021, Newtown Board of Supervisors (BOS) Meeting to oppose a settlement agreement with the Arcadia developer to build 60 homes at Buck Road and the Bypass.
Despite the opposition of residents who attended the meeting, the supervisors approved the final settlement agreement 4-1 with Mr. Kyle Davis casting the lone "nay" vote. Afterward, several residents expressed their displeasure with the vote. Eric Scott Gold, a resident of Eagle Ridge, for example, lashed out against me for voting in favor of the settlement. Township Solicitor Dave Sander objected to his language and Chairman Phil Calabro had to calm everyone down.
Other residents were not as abusive as Mr. Gold, but strongly suggested that Mr. Sander be fired and that I resign. Of course, there were threats that - come election time - the supervisors who voted in favor of the settlement would be voted out of office.
Listen to comments from Mr. Gold and other residents in the following audio clips from the meeting. You can also view the entire Zoom meeting here.
Even the Residents' Lawyer Recommended Settling
"Although Dave Sander was a convenient whipping boy," said Mr. Steve Harris, lawyer for Eagle Ridge HOA, in an email to supervisors, "I would have recommended the settlement, even if the plan had not been deemed approved. Given the uncertainty that would result from the land use appeal that would certainly have been filed by Arcadia from a denial of the tentative plan, I would have also encouraged the parties to explore a settlement.
"You were able to negotiate a settlement that resulted in a more than 20% reduction in the number of homes that were proposed and an agreement to have all of the homes be single family dwellings, both of which are very significant," said Mr. Harris. "Furthermore, PennDOT indicated that it would approve the U-turn at the Buck Road/Mill Pond Road/Diamond Drive intersection once the tentative plan was approved, so there was no way of eliminating that possibility. You were able to negotiate a multi-tiered approach to the U-turn alternative which begins with the developer's agreement to pursue a right in/right out entrance to the Bypass which would eliminate the necessity of the U-turn movement. That was a huge accomplishment. I do not know whether Arcadia will be able to secure a permit for that entrance, but just simply getting the agreement was very important," concluded Mr. Harris.
A "Crap Shoot"
It seems that many residents thought I would oppose the settlement and that I let them down and that I and other supervisors voted without listening to their comments.
"I don't recall you ever representing anything else to people other than you wanted to know what people are thinking and to encourage involvement," said a sympathetic resident in a personal email after the meeting. "I guess some folks read more into it than that."
Regarding listening to comments - prior to this meeting, supervisors spent many weeks listening to all parties - including residents of neighboring communities and their representatives - at public and private meetings. From October, 2020, through February, 2021, I spent a minimum of 20 hours in discussions about this case with residents via personal phone and email communications, Facebook posts, and in Zoom meetings, including the following:
- On October 12, 2020, I hosted a 1 hour Meet Mack Monday "Town Hall" Zoom meeting with residents to discuss Arcadia Litigation.
- On December 29, 2020, I participated in a 1.5 hour Zoom meeting hosted by Eagle Ridge residents.
- On January 19, 2021, I participated in a 2 hour Zoom meeting hosted by Newtown Crossing residents.
- On February 8, 2021, I hosted another Meet Mack Monday "Town Hall" Zoom meeting at which I discussed the details of the Arcadia III settlement agreement with residents.
I was sympathetic to continuing the fight - voting at least 2X with Kyle Davis to discuss how Newtown Township can help Eagle Ridge in its case against Arcadia - until Mr. Harris said at a Feb 5, 2021, BOS EXECUTIVE MEETING (which was NOT a public meeting but at which many residents and resident representatives attended) that he believed Newtown's Mandamus case was unwinnable - that no judge would overturn the decision of a colleague in this case. He also said the Eagle Ridge case was a "crap shoot." A crap shoot is not a 50-50 chance as some residents led us supervisors to believe was his opinion. After that I lost all hope that we could fight the good fight and win.
So although several residents accused the supervisors of coming into the February 24 meeting with their minds already made up, the truth is I did not hear any new convincing arguments against approving the settlement.
Looking Ahead Despite "Cancel Culture"
In the end I listened to the residents who helped craft the settlement because I believe whatever decisions we make, residents with cooler heads should be involved. It is too bad that some residents now believe getting involved does not accomplish anything. They are greatly mistaken in my view. Residents helped create a better if imperfect settlement and they raised some issues that I will pursue going forward such as arranging for residents to participate in the Access Evaluation Process with PennDOT and to make sure that promises made in the settlement agreement are kept.
But some residents were not interested in keeping the lines of communication open going forward. Immediately after the vote, moderators of the Newtown Crossing and Eagle Ridge Facebook invitation-only group pages decided to block me from seeing or making posts to their pages, which is their prerogative. "Cancel culture" at work is how one resident put it.
Read More...Posted on 01 Mar 2021, 14:32 - Category: Development
Connect With Us