Planning commission recommends denying proposed Orchard mobile‑home overlay after residents raise water, traffic and tree‑preservation concerns

The East Allen Township Planning Commission voted to recommend denial of a zoning amendment and overlay that would allow an expanded, owner‑occupied manufactured‑home community at the Orchard site after months of public unease over water supply, traffic and tree preservation.

Counsel for the applicant, Ryan Durkin, told the commission the plan would produce roughly 24 additional double‑wide, one‑story manufactured homes and included covenants meant to limit future rental activity. "This is not a 61 home development," Durkin said at the meeting, adding the proposal was tailored to preserve tree buffers and to require owner occupancy. The applicant’s presentation also proposed shared recreational amenities and above‑ground water storage to manage site water supply.

But residents at the podium pressed the commission to withhold a favorable recommendation: Bart Wagner, who lives at 6057 Snider's Church Road, told commissioners the plan would greatly increase density and long‑term stresses on local wells and septic systems. "Doubling the number of homes in that area does not make any sense," Wagner said, citing neighbors whose wells have gone dry and properties that required sand‑mound drain fields. Another resident estimated "72 more cars" entering and exiting Airport Road from the proposed development, saying sight lines and speed on the road make additional traffic a safety concern.

A resident who identified herself only as Maya and who lives in the Orchard community described recurring low or no water and extended boil‑water advisory periods since the owner purchased the property in 2022. She said upgrades have not resolved intermittent outages and urged the township to require separation or repair of existing community water connections before permitting additional units. Planning staff said they would follow up with code‑enforcement and, if applicable, state public‑health officials about the community well.

Commission discussion repeatedly referenced prior conditional‑use approvals and a zoning‑hearing board denial for a related variance. Commissioners said the overlay as proposed would need stronger, enforceable language addressing existing well and septic capacity, final plans showing woodland preservation and clearer traffic and fire‑access assurances before they could endorse the change. One commissioner called the draft overlay "a tight fit" for the site and raised spot‑zoning concerns; others asked that provisions be written so they could be applied in more than one location if intended.

After public comment and lengthy discussion, the commission voted on a motion to recommend denial of the proposed zoning amendment and overlay. The motion passed on roll call (4‑0). The recommendation is advisory; the application will next go to the Board of Supervisors, which has final authority to accept, modify or reject the proposed zoning changes.

Commission staff said the applicant may return with revised language and a more detailed land‑development submission that addresses buffering, septic/well analyses, traffic study work and fire‑access plans. For now, the commission’s formal recommendation to the Board of Supervisors is to deny the overlay as drafted.

The planning commission meeting packet referenced a draft ordinance and multiple site plans; specifics of required state or county permits (e.g., NPDES, Northampton County Conservation District, PennDOT driveway permits) remain pending and will be considered during land‑development review if the Board of Supervisors allows the proposal to proceed.