Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Springettsbury supervisors table Druck Valley subdivision after debate over single access and 'Knox Box'
Summary
Board postponed consideration of the Druck Valley Road preliminary subdivision after the applicant and supervisors disputed whether PennDOT’s limit of a single state‑road access, supplemented by an emergency Knox Box, meets the township’s two‑ingress requirement; the applicant said PennDOT refused a second access and offered alternatives.
Stacy McNeil, speaking for applicant Beacon of Druck Valley Road LLC, presented a revised preliminary subdivision plan for Druck Valley Road and asked supervisors to either modify the township’s definition of a “through street” or grant two waivers: one for the requirement of two means of ingress and egress and another for cul‑de‑sac length. McNeil said the revised plan adds a full internal connector road and that PennDOT has repeatedly refused a second access onto the state highway, leaving only an emergency access with a Knox Box and other PennDOT‑suggested alternatives.
McNeil said, “There is no feasible way to have a second means of ingress and egress to this development. PennDOT controls and has sole jurisdiction of this roadway, and they have said no twice,” and noted the township’s fire chief and police chief had previously signed off on the Knox Box and emergency access.
Supervisors pushed back, saying a Knox Box intended for emergency access should not be treated as a permanent second access for residents. One supervisor said changing the definition of a through street to count the emergency access would be “playing a shell game” that does not serve people who will live in the development. Another supervisor referenced past board decisions where similar proposals were denied because they offered no practical secondary exit.
Board and applicant representatives discussed alternatives McNeil said PennDOT had proposed — including geotechnical subsurface support that appears like grass but can carry emergency vehicles — and other measures such as chains or alternative gate designs. McNeil said the applicant had asked township staff for other feasible alternatives and had not received additional input; she reiterated that, without PennDOT approval, the only realistic options were either the requested ordinance modification or the waivers.
After a motion to hold an executive session for legal discussion and a brief recess, a supervisor moved to table the subdivision item to the next meeting so the board could review a voluminous submission provided to supervisors dated January 22. The motion to table was seconded and carried unanimously.
The tabling leaves unresolved whether the township will grant the requested modification or waivers; the board did not take a final vote on the subdivision at this meeting. The next meeting will revisit the item once supervisors have had time to review the additional materials.
