Residents and commissioners press developer on stormwater, safety and disclosures for 858 Elbow Lane subdivision

The Warrington Township Planning Commission on Monday reviewed a preliminary/final plan for a five‑lot subdivision at 858 Elbow Lane amid neighborhood concerns about stormwater, safety and long‑term maintenance.

Dan Lyons, representing the applicant, said the plans were revised after comments from Carroll Engineering and adjacent property owners and were resubmitted June 27 with written responses. Jason Korzak, the project engineer for Holmes Cunningham, described changes including a sidewalk on Elbow Lane, drainage easements and access to stormwater facilities, expanded buffering near the day camp, and a larger rain‑garden basin behind Lots 4 and 5. The applicant said it would offer Culzac Road for dedication to the township; if the township declines, a planned community association would hold easement rights and maintain the road and stormwater facilities.

Commissioners focused on the design and proximity of stormwater facilities. The engineer said the closest point between any house and a stormwater facility is 20 feet, which meets Warrington Township standards and the PADP best‑management practice recommendation of a minimum 10 feet; commissioners and residents described rear yards that would be partly occupied by detention features and said that can limit future use and create safety risks.

"Rain gardens sounds very pretty, but it's a euphemism in this case," the chair said, urging the commission and the applicant to avoid language that could understate the features' effect on backyards. The engineer said the 'managed release' concept and underdrains allow vegetation to grow and keep facilities dewatered, and that the planting soils and underdrains are designed to dewater within 72 hours for typical storms.

Multiple neighbors said the proposal risks worsening existing flooding. Todd Salkovitz of 2409 Fairway told the commission, "Every house on our street has flooded," and warned that construction vehicles and current speed humps on Elbow Lane are inadequate. Phil Lester of Anna Street described a dry stream that already floods Anna Street during heavy rainfall and cautioned that additional discharges could exacerbate downstream flooding.

Bob Lester, an adjoining property owner, urged the developer to consider grading or a swale to keep runoff from flowing onto his lot and to ensure the 15‑foot buffer functions as intended. Other residents urged the commission to reconsider the five‑lot layout and suggested fewer, larger lots to avoid basins adjacent to backyards.

Commissioners said they want two safeguards if the plan proceeds: a clear, conspicuous disclosure to prospective buyers describing the presence and function of the stormwater facilities and the maintenance responsibilities required of a homeowners association; and compliance with ordinance fencing or other safety measures. One commissioner asked whether the township could require a fence. The applicant said it would discuss both the fence and disclosure with the client.

Because the commission lacked a quorum for a formal vote, the applicant agreed to return next month for a formal recommendation. Commissioners asked staff to note in the minutes the planning commission members present viewed the application as approvable subject to the usual engineering conditions, required disclosures and any agreed‑upon fence or safety features.

The chair also urged residents to raise street drainage and traffic issues with the board of supervisors, which has primary authority over certain road improvements and traffic calming measures.

Next step: the applicant will address the remaining plan details and return to the planning commission for a formal recommendation when a quorum is present.