Prepared by the Northampton Township Planning Commission
Northampton Township, Bucks County, PA
December 1999 1 Northamptan Township Planning Commission I Theodore Hauptman, Chairman Antonio Albano, Vice Chairman Harvey E. Field I Scott D. King Charles C. Mateer Michael H. Marcus 1 Robert G. Solarz I Special appreciation is expressed to the fillowing individuals fir their work in assisting in the preparation of this documenk
D. Bruce Townsend, Township Manager I Kathleen R. Goldhahn, Assistant Township Manager Ralph L. McClellan, Jr., former Assistant to the Township Manager I Former Planning Commission Members Carl Cimino Patricia L. Cocca I Thomas Dougherty Elizabeth K. Harris Keith Hausknecht William R. Jones I James J. McCarron, Jr. Richard A. Sherman David R. Stratton I Daniel S. Winokur Dale R. Wittick I TownshiD Supervisors James E. Kinney, liaison to the Planning Commission William J. Benz, former liaison to the Planning Commission I Thomas A. Zeuner, former liaison to the Planning Commission I
Planning consultant I WALTER C. EVANS &. ASSOCIATES,INC. 716 Ridge Pike I Lafayette Hill, PA 19444 6101825-0337 I I 1 1999 Update December 1999 I
~ Table of Contents
Letter of Transmittal* Introduction*
Part I - Goals and Existing Conditions
Goals and Objectives* 1 Community Profile 5 Natural Features 9 Existing Land Use* 13 Population Characteristics* 21 Housing Characteristics* 31 Community Facilities* 37 Circulation* 45 Utilities, Solid Waste and Other Services* 49
Part II - Recommendations and Implementation
Future Land Use Plan* 53 Agriculture Plan 63 Historic and Environmental Resources Plan 67 Housing Plan* 75 Circulation Plan 85 Commercial and Industrial Areas Plan* 91 Utilities and Solid Waste Plan* 95 Community Facilities Plan 101 Fiscal Analysis* 109 Implementation Strategies* 115
Maps
Environmental Constraints Map after 12 Existing Land Use Map* after 20 Major Accident Locations and Traffic Counts Map* after 48 Existing Sewer and Water'Services Map* after 52 Future Land Use Map - Region* after 54 Future Land Use Map - Northampton Township* after 62 Proposed Circulation Map after 90 Proposed Sewer and Water Services Map* after 100 I 1999 Update December 1999 I Tables 1 1 Northampton Township Land Use - 1963 through 1990* 15 2 Retail Trade Establishments (1992)" 16 Service Business Establishments (1992)" 1 3 Population Characteristics - 1930 through 1990" 21 4 Population Growth Rates - 1980 through 1993" 22 I 5 Age Characteristics - 1990" 23 6 Age Distribution - 1980 and 1990* 24 7 Household Size - 1990" 24 1 8 Education Levels - 1990" 25 9 White Collar Workers By Occupation - 1990" 2x3 I 10 Population Density - 1990* 27 11 Bucks County Planning Commission Population Projections 28 for 2000,2010 and 2020* I l2 Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission Population 28 Forecasts for 2000,2010 and 2020" 13 Revised Population Forecasts for 2000 and 2010" 29 I 14 Dwelling Unit Characteristics - 1990* 31 15 Age of Housing in Northampton Township" 32 I 16 Bucks County Planning Commission Housing Projections for 2000,2010 and 2020" 34 17 Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission Occupied I Housing Unit Forecasts for 2000,2010 and 2020" 34 18 Revised Housing Forecasts for 2000 and 2010" 35 19 Estimated Development Potential By Zoning District (Full Build- 81 I Out Under Existing Zoning Classifications)* 20 Estimated Development Potential By Zoning District (Full 81 Build-Out After Recommended Zoning Classifications)* I 21 Solid Waste Generation* 98 22 Expenditure Trends in Northampton Township Municipal I Operating Budgets* 110 23 Revenue Trends in Northampton Township Municipal Operating Budgets* 112 I I I
* Updated in 1999 I I 1999 Update December 1999 I 1 I I I Part I I I I 1 EXESTENG CONDETEONS I COMMUNITY PROFILE NATURAL FEATURES
I EXISTING LAND USE I POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS I HOUSING CWCTERISTICS 'I COMRlUNITY FACILITIES CIRCULATION 1 UTILITIES, SOLID WASTE AND OTHER SERVICES I I I I I 1 I INTRODUCTION The Comprehensive Plan has been called a blueprint for community development. It is the master plan of the municipality which guides its development policies and serves as a long range planning I tool for the Township. The Comprehensive Plan should serve as the guide for the Township's Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision and Land Development Ordinance, and Official Map. I The Comprehensive Plan is provided for by law in the Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code. This law, as amended in 1988, states that a Comprehensive Plan must contain the following basic elements:
I a statement of community objectives, including the location, character and timing of future development;
a plan for land use;
a housing plan;
a circulation plan;
a community facilities plan;
a statement of the interrelationships among the various plan components;
a discussion of short- and long-range plan implementation strategies; and
a statement indicating the relationship of existing and proposed development to those in adjacent municipalities and the county, and to regional trends.
This Plan goes beyond these requirements by dealing with environmental resources, historic resources, agriculture, and the commercial and industrial areas.
This Comprehensive Plan has three parts: this volume, and companion volumes dealing specifically with the Park and Recreation Plan and a Natural Resource Inventory. Because of the scope of the Park and Recreation Plan and the Natural Resource Inventory, they are being presented as separate documents; but should be considered as part of the Township Comprehensive Plan.
Northampton has had a comprehensive planning program since the early 1960's. The first plan was prepared in 1963 and revised in 1976. A second comprehensive plan was initiated in the mid 1980's; with a first volume being adopted in 1989 and a second volume (Natural Resource Inventory) in 1991. This 1998 Comprehensive Plan represents an update of the 1989 Plan (Volume 1).
This Plan Update was prepared by the Northampton Township Planning Commission with assistance from the Township Planner. All workshops sessions were open to the public so that the concerns and desires of residents could be heard and incorporated into the planning process.
This document is being submitted to the Northampton Township Board of Supervisors for their consideration as a supplement to the 1989 Comprehensive Plan (Volume 1). Revisions may be made as the result of further discussion by Township residents and public officials. It is hoped that this Comprehensive Plan Update can be adopted by the Board of Supervisors and that, as the policy document guiding development, it will be an effective tool in shaping the future character of Northampton Township.
1999 Update December 1999 I 1 GoALsANDoBJEcTIvEs The Comprehensive Plan contains recommendations for specific programs and policies. which will be used to guide the development of Northampton Township. These recommendations reflect the ideas I and needs of the Township residents and elected officials as well as the obligations of townships in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. I It is the intent of the Township that the various components of the Comprehensive Plan relate to one another; and, in that regard, the goals and objectives stated hereinbelow and the various recommendations contained in Part I1 of the Comprehensive Plan should be viewed as being I interrelated. The following statement of goals and objectives was used to develop policies to guide future I development in the Township: 1 General Goal The goal of the Comprehensive Plan Update is to preserve the community's mix of: I residential areas public facilities
I private and commercial activities serving Township residents I visual amenities, and natural resources 1 while accommodating in a planned manner the pressures of suburban development. I Land Use Goals Discourage development in environmentally sensitive areas such as steep slopes, flood-prone 1 areas, wetlands and woodlands. Preserve the land along the Neshaminy and the Little Neshaminy Creeks as a green belt. I Provide for and protect large areas of open space in the areas north and west of Hatboro Road and encourage low density development, open space, agricultural and/or recreational uses.
Use site planning techniques that reduce environmental impacts and preserve and enhance 1 elements of the landscape, and require the proper administrative system to manage and maintain open lands. I Plan for future land uses which are compatible with the Township's existing land uses and with those in adjacent municipalities. I Coordinate the extension of public water and sewerage with the land use policies of the Comprehensive Plan. I Goals and Objectives 1 I 1999 Update December 1999 I
Housing I
Provide for a variety of housing types and densities, keeping in mind the housing needs of all income and age groups. I
Historic Preservation I Identify historically important structures and archeologic sites and investigate methods available to the Township to help preserve them. I Commerce I Provide for small commercial areas which are conveniently located and which serve the day-to- day shopping needs of nearby residents. Maintain the scale, boundaries, and locations of existing commercial areas. I Allow for a mix of retail, service, and office uses in commercial areas.
Maintain design controls which will enhance the appearance of commercial areas. I
Communitv Facilities I Plan for the expansion of community facilities, including parks and recreation, to meet the needs of the future Township population. I Provide for storm water management through collection systems and management facilities (privately owned and maintained, where possible) that protect the Township road network, prevent flooding of streams and creeks throughout the community, and minimize erosion that I damages downstream properties and causes the loss of a natural resource. I Industry Continue to limit and maintain light industrial activities in the areas along Jacksonville Road I now devoted to industry, and, where feasible, provide necessary services to these areas. Encourage the upgrading of developed properties and the improvement of undeveloped properties. Provide adequate buffering between industrial and non-industrial areas. I Transportation I Maintain the residential character of the Township by maintaining road standards based on the travel needs of residents. I - Allow reduced cartway widths in low density residential areas.
- Implement intersection improvements as a means of improving traffic flow in congested areas, through signalization, enhancement of sight distance and additional turning lanes. I
Goals and Objectives 2 I 1999 Update December I999 1 - Improve local residential flow by connecting andlor extending stub streets from existing residential development through currently undeveloped residential properties at the time of I their development. - Encourage construction of new connector roads between major arterial and collector roads to provide alternate routes for local traffic.
I - Implement improvements to encourage pedestrian circulation in the Township's commercial I centers and villages. I I I I I I I I I I I I I Goals and Objectives 3 I 1999 Update December 1999 I
I COMMUNITY PROFILE I Historv Northampton Township's first settlers were immigrants from England who arrived with William Penn. It was the English who gave the Township its name, calling it after Northamptonshire, a town I outside of London. The municipality was officially organized in 1722 when a petition was filed with the court to form a township. Like neighboring Warwick Township, Northampton was formed from the land left over after the formation of Hilltown, New Britain, Plumstead, and Warrington Townships.
I The Dutch immigrants who followed the English in the years prior to the Revolution also left their mark on the Township. The area known later as Churchville was first settled by the Dutch and was I originally called Smoketown because of the Dutch pipe smokers who lived there. Both Dutch and English immigrants lived in Richboro, which was the name of the area at the intersection of Second Street Pike and Bustleton Pike. Richboro was one of five villages located in the I Township in the early days. Addisville, the crossroads community at Almshouse Road and Second Street Pike, was located not far from Richboro. Jacksonville, in the western part of the Township, was small and contained only four houses and a blacksmith shop. Rocksville, now known as Holland (another reflection of the Dutch influence) was the site of a flour mill. The fifth village, Churchville, I was so named when the North and Southampton Reformed Church was built there in 1816.
Richboro has had several names during its 250-year history. Originally known as Bennet's and I later as Leedomville (the Bennets and the Leedoms were both prominent Northampton families), the town was known more recently as Black Bear because of the Black Bear Tavern located there. The origin of the name Richboro is unclear. Nearby Addisville was the site of the White Bear Tavern, I which exists today as the Spread Eagle Inn. The population of Northampton in 1784 was 813 (722 whites and 91 blacks). The Township had 108 houses and 106 other buildings in that year. Northampton continued to grow by about 100 people per I decade until it reached more than 2,000 people in 1860, then declined to 1,500 in 1900. The Township's economy thrived because of its excellent farmland. Agriculture was supplemented by a thriving livestock industry which continued in the Township until the livestock industry moved to the western I part of the US. Second Street Pike, which is still one of the Township's major thoroughfares, was originally an extension of Second Street in Philadelphia. Stagecoaches traversed this route to New Hope where I travelers got the ferry to New York.
One of the Township's (and the county's) most notable citizens was Henry Wynkoop, the descendant I of the one the early Dutch settlers. Wynkoop was born in Northampton in 1737. A personal friend of many Revolutionary leaders, including George Washington, Wynkoop was active during the Revolutionary War and later was elected to several public offices. He became the first judge of the I Court of Bucks County in 1777. At that time, the district included not only Bucks County but also other counties in the Philadelphia area, so Wynkoop would travel from county to county to preside over the courts in each county. Bucks County's courthouse was located in Newtown during Wynkoop's term, so he did not have far to travel to the Bucks County bench. The Wynkoop family originally owned 544 I acres in the Township, and members of the family lived in Northampton for more than 200 years. I Wynkoop is buried in the cemetery on Second Street Pike in Richboro. I Community Profile 5 1 Historic Places
Northampton has thirteen structures listed on registers of historic places. All thirteen are listed on the Bucks County Conservancy's Register of Historic Places. Four are listed on the National Register of Historic Places, and the other nine are all eligible for national listing. They are:
Willow Bank Farm - 1740 farm house on 10 acres; part of a land grant from William Penn to Arthur Cook; Almshouse Road I Hip Roof House" - 1751 house with a distinctive gambrel roof; former home of John Thompson, an early Bucks County sheriff; Second Street Pike I Hampton Hill* - 1744 house on property purchased by Dutch settlers Shaw's Mill (Leedom Mill) - Corn mill built in 1740 located on Bustleton Pike I Herzods Corner - Three stone buildings, including the house of the owner of Shaw's Mill, dated . 1847; Bustleton Pike I Twin Trees Farm* - 1740 house which was the site of important meetings in the pre-Revolutionary days; probably the first store and post office in the Richboro area; Second Street Pike I SDring Brook - A colonial home representative of the residences of the less affluent settlers John VanArtsdalen Farm - Early Dutch farm house, built in 1760; off Pulinski Road 1 Twining Ford's Covered Bridye* - Tyler State Park
Dr. Huyh Tombs Grist Mill - 1773 grist mill on Chinquapin Road I Merrv Dell Farm - A 1748 farm house with a springhouse and old carriage shed I Shelmire Mill Tenement - a 1710 structure associated with the mill on Buck Road Hidden Trail Farm - 1780 farm house occupied by one of the founders of Northampton Township; I Almshouse Road * National Register of Historic Places I In 1976, volunteers surveyed all buildings in the Township which were 100 or more years old and compiled records on 257 such structures. Although not all of these are still standing and not all have particular historic value, the inventory provides a good start for the further designation of important I historic structures. The Bucks County Conservancy in Doylestown has records on all the buildings surveyed. I The Northampton Township Historical Commission published a pictorial history of the Township in 1985. Called Winds of Change, the book provides a good history of the Township, some of its notable citizens, and the development of the sections of the Township. I I I Community Profile 6 I I DeveloDment of the Township The forces which have turned agricultural communities into suburban areas across the country have affected Northampton Township. Railroads and other improvements in the transportation network, the development of jobs in areas outside center cities, and the post-World War I1 policies which encouraged suburban home ownership have all had their effect on the Township. Although agricultural activity is evident in almost every portion of the Township, the amount a land devoted to farming has declined as the Township has developed. Today, Northampton lies between areas of less intense development in Central Bucks County and those of more intense development in Lower Bucks County. Traveling through the Township from Lower Bucks to Central Bucks, the character of the I Township changes and becomes more dominated by agriculture. It is a transitional community in the Bucks County landscape.
The proximity of farmland to residential uses is one of the characteristics of the Township which I makes it especially attractive. Views of fields, attractive farm houses and barns enhance many of the residential ares of the Township. This visual access to agriculture is probably one of the reasons new I residents find the area so appealing. The historic structures remaining in the Township are also community assets. Northampton, like so many suburban communities, is changing quickly. Its long and significant history can quickly be I forgotten as new residences and streets are built and old family farms make way for new subdivisions. The identification and preservation of historic structures will add to the quality of community life in Northampton.
I The Township also benefits from the presence of Tyler State Park within its borders. This large area of wooded open space is not only visually appealing but also provides an outstanding recreational I resource for the community. The Neshaminy Creek and tributaries which form much of the border of the Township are also assets. The steep wooded stream banks provide a contrast to the rest of the gently rolling terrain and I open farm fields in the Township. I Township Government As the Township grew, not only did population and land use patterns change but the government had to grow and provide new services. Today Northampton is a Township of the Second Class with a five- I member elected Board of Supervisors. The Board of Supervisors is responsible for appointing boards and commissions which carry out studies and make recommendations to the Supervisors on Township I policies. These boards and commissions are: Park and Recreation Board Library Board I Historical Commission Municipal Authority I Planning Commission Zoning Hearing Board Cable Television (CATV) Advisory Board I Emergency Services Board I Community Profile 7 I I
Other committees appointed by the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors deal with aspects of the Township government. They are: I
Community Facilities and Services Internal Affairs I Public Works Public Safety I Community Development
The administration of the Township is handled by a municipal staff directed by the Township I Manager. The departments which make up the Township Administration are: Library I Parks and Recreation Administration and Finance Public Works I Police Fire and Emergency Management I Building and Zoning
The Township's municipal facilities are outstanding. A Municipal Complex, completed in 1977, I houses the administrative offices, the public works department, the police department, the fire station, and the municipal authority. Located on Township Road in Richboro, this Complex provides modern facilities from which to carry out Township business. I At the other end of Township Road is the new Township Cultural Center which houses the Township Library, the Senior Citizens' Center, and space for other functions. I Neighborhoods I Although Northampton's original crossroads communities developed more than 200 years ago, several of the village names are used to identify areas of the Township today. I Richboro and Addisville were originally two distinct but adjacent villages. Today, Richboro is the commercial center of the Township and it has absorbed what was once Addisville. Addisville is remembered because of the church and other features in the Township which still carry its name. I Churchville, located near the intersection of Bustleton Pike and the Newtown Railroad SEPTA line, was named years ago, but still maintains its identity as a specific section of the Township. Churchville Park and Reservoir help to reinforce this identity. I
The Holland area, originally centered around the intersection of Buck and Holland Roads, also maintains its identity as a community within the Township. There is a small commercial area at this I intersection. Holland Road extends all the way across the Township; and East Holland Road, Middle Holland Road, and Upper Holland Road extend far beyond what was once the Holland area. I I Community Profile 8 I I
I NATURALFEATURES
Identifying and understanding the natural features of the Township is important in the planning I process because certain physical features impose restrictions on how land can be used and because some natural elements may need to be protected for the enjoyment of the residents. Development without regard to natural limitations of the land is often costly to property owners as well as municipal I governments. The preservation and/or protection of natural features is crucial to retaining the current character of Northampton Township. Regulations andor policies have yet to be enacted which protect I these natural elements. Natural features in Northampton Township have been examined in terms of the following questions:
I What are the important natural features? I Why are they important? Where are they located? I How might they affect the Comprehensive Plan? I Subsurface Geology Determines Township's Terrain The major rock formations underlying Northampton are the Stockton formation, which accounts for most of the underlying geology, and the Lockatong formation which is concentrated along the I Neshaminy Creek area. The Stockton formation generally underlies low, rolling country, as is typical of the terrain in Northampton. It generally provides a good source of ground water. The Lockatong formation is characterized by ridges. The area along the Neshaminy contains several I ridges where the creeks have cut deep narrow valleys through the ridges. I Soils Affect Farming and Development Potential The soils in the Township have significance in the planning for future land uses because of their effect on the provision of sewerage and water as well as their ability to support development in a safe I and sensible manner. In addition, some soils are exceptionally good for farming and deserve special attention because of their value as a resource to the agricultural community. I The Township falls in a general soil group called the Lansdale-Lawrenceville Association, which is characterized by nearly level to gently sloping terrain with moderately well-drained soils. There are about twenty-three soil types in the Township. For planning purposes, the most significant soil characteristics are: the ability of the soil to handle on-site sewage disposal (septic systems); the slope of I the land; and the importance of the soil as an agricultural resource in the Township. Soils which are very wet, due to flooding or slow drainage, are not acceptable for septic systems. Other soils which have a shallow depth to the underlying bedrock are also inadequate for septic system because of limitations I on drainage.
The Lawrenceville soils have severe limitations to the use of on-site sewage disposal systems I because of slow permeability and seasonally high water tables. The limitations on the areas with Lansdale soils depends on the slope of the land. The areas with steep slopes are unsuitable for on-site I Natural Features 9 I I
sewage disposal because of stoniness, which is typical of the steep areas, and slope. The limitations decrease as the slope decreases. Along the Neshaminy and other creeks, Bowmansville silt loam, a I flood plain soil, prevails. I Prime Amicultural Soils Located in TownshiD Northampton Township's long history as an agricultural community may be due to its good I agricultural soils. Agricultural soils are graded by the Soil Conservation Service, with Class I being the best for cultivating crops. Class I and I1 soils are considered to be prime agricultural soils.
The Bucks County Planning Commission surveyed the county to identify areas which, because of the I concentration of good soils, have the potential for supporting superior farming activity. The largest such concentrations in Bucks County are located in the band of the county which extends from the southern border of Northampton Township across the county to the Delaware River. Northampton I Township and the municipalities to the north are included in this band.
The largest concentration of Class I soils in the Township is located between Newtown-Richboro Road and Upper and Middle Holland Roads. Another area of Class I soils is along Jordan Road, where I the land remains in agricultural use. Class I1 soils are located in Tyler State Park, south of Holland Road, south of Buck Road, and in the quadrant of the Township above Bustleton Pike. I Soil classification alone is not sufficient to indicate the importance of certain soil types for farming. Some areas which lack prime soils may be successfully used for agricultural purposes, such as livestock, etc. In this case, the soils have agricultural significance at the local level. The converse is I also true: properties which have prime agricultural soils may not be farmed, due to market or other factors. Soil classification can be used as one indicator of the agricultural significance of soils, but it should be viewed in the context of the actual use of the lands and the likelihood of their being used for farming. I
Although there is still a substantial amount of farming activity in the Township, much of the good agricultural land has already been used for development. Because the flat or gently rolling farm I terrain is also good for development, the pressures on remaining farm properties will be a significant factor in future land use planning. I The farms add a significant amount of open space to the Township and greatly contribute to the visual quality of the community. The potential for continued farming exists because of the presence of prime agricultural soils, but the future of farming will depend on the actions of landowners and farmers in the Township. I
Flood Plains and Flood Plain Soils I
Flood plains are areas which are subject to periodic flooding and which usually adjoin streams, lakes or ponds. Flood plain soils are those soils which have been identified by the Soil Conservation I Service as being prone to flooding or periodic high water.
Northampton Township has mapped its flood plains and flood hazard areas and officially adopted the Floodplain and Flood Hazard Map in 1980. The areas delineated on the map are those which are I vulnerable to flooding in a 100-year flood and those with flood plain soils.
The 100-year flood areas are located along the streams in the Township: the Neshaminy Creek, the I I Natural Features 10 I 1
I Little Neshaminy, Ironworks Creek (both above and blow the Churchville Reservoir), Mill Creek, and Pine Run.
Flood plain soils (Bowmansville silt loam, Rowland silt loam, Hatboro silt loam, and alluvial I soils) are found along streams and stream tributaries, with a higher concentration in the northern half of the Township. I Northampton Township has recognized the importance of controlling development around flood plains as a means of reducing flooding, preserving the aesthetic qualities of the stream valleys, and protecting the water quality. The Comprehensive Plan should adhere to the policies and direction I already established. I Wetlands Wetlands or marsh areas exist where the soils are wet. These areas are not good for development because of the swampy nature of the soil and because they play an important part in the environment as I "sponges" for flood waters and as homes for certain animal species. The Township has several areas of wetlands which are of significant size (greater than 10 acres), located in the area of the Ironworks Creek and the Churchville Reservoir. Some areas along the Little Neshaminy tributary above Hatboro I Road are also wetland area. I Few Steep Slopes in the Township Slopes of more than eight percent (8%), i. e., an eight foot rise over a hundred foot distance, are considered steep enough to merit special consideration in land use planning because of the resulting I stormwater runoff and soil erosion.
Excessive stormwater runoff, with resulting flooding, can occur where the vegetative cover is I decreased or the impervious surface is increased. Erosion results on steep slopes during construction as well as after construction if the site is not properly stabilized. When soil is carried into lakes and streams, it can result in pollution, the loss of I stream capacity, and flooding.
There are very few steep slopes in Northampton. Only about four percent (4%) of the Township has I slopes exceeding eight percent (8%), most of these along the Neshaminy Creek on the eastern boundary of the Township. Some of the steepest slopes occur within Tyler State Park and are therefore protected II from development. There are other areas with slopes of fifteen percent (15%) or more along the Neshaminy, and these ~Iareas should be subject to special controls to minimize erosion and stormwater runoff. I Woodlands Limited Due to Farming; and Development I Forests and woodlands are areas, groves, or stands or mature or largely mature trees. Woodlands serve several functions in the environment, including returning water to the atmosphere, holding soil in place, and providing a cooling effect on surrounding areas. Woodlands provide an important I visual element in the Township -- they are nice to look at. I Natural Features 11 I I
Before major development occurred in Northampton, much of the area was used for farming and woodlands had been cleared for the cultivation of crops. Because of this progression from woodlands to I clearing for farms and then to development for other land uses, less than five percent (5%) of the Township is now wooded. I Most of the wooded areas are located along the Neshaminy Creek and in Tyler State Park. There are scattered woodlands in the Churchville area around the reservoir and the Bucks County Park as well as along Stony Ford Road. I As plans for future land use patterns are made, it will be important to take into account the few remaining woodlands and to consider ways by which some of the trees may be preserved. I Visual Features I The Township has a variety of scenic qualities which should be considered in planning for future development. Although less objectively defined than other natural features, they create a visual character for the Township and include: I Farm houses, farm structures, and fields visible from many Township roads.
Woodlands adjacent to or between farm properties. I
The woods and fields of Tyler State Park, visible from many Township roads and neighborhoods. I The wooded stream corridor of the Neshaminy Creek. I Protection Policies
Protecting natural resources requires more than identifying the resources. The areas which have I significant natural resources in the Township have been indicated on the attached Environmental Constraints Map. Policies on what should be preserved must be established and must be reflected in the land use regulations (zoning and subdivision) of the Township. Protection policies are part of the land I use recommendations of this Plan. I I I I I I Natural Features 12 I
I B EXISTING LAND USE One of the Largest Municipalities in Bucks County
B Northampton is 26.11 square miles (16,710 acres) in size, making it the tenth-largest municipality in Bucks County. The Township borders are formed by the Little Neshaminy Creek and the Neshaminy Creek to the west and north. It adjoins nine other municipalities: Warwick Township, 1 Ivyland Borough, Wrightstown Township, Newtown Township, Middletown Township, Warminster Township, Langhorne Borough, Lower Southampton Township, and Upper Southampton Township. B Agriculture Still an Important Use But Declining
The amount of land devoted to farming is rapidly declining. By the mid 1980s Northampton had B more land used for residences than for farming. The primary areas in farm use are west of Hatboro Road and in the middle of the Township at Holland and Middle Holland Roads; although there are several farms scattered through the municipality, so that farm fields and structures are a significant B part of the landscape.
Northampton is a transitional township, lying between the Doylestown and Buckingham areas of I the Central Bucks region which has a higher percentage (30.7%) of its area devoted to farming, and the Bensalem and Middletown areas of the Lower Bucks region which has a much lower percentage (4.1%) B of land in agriculture. Residential Uses Predominate
B The Existing Land Use Map shows the uses of land in Northampton and how the land use pattern has changed during the past twenty-seven (27) years. The major trend is the change from agricultural land to residential land uses. In 1963, when the first Comprehensive Plan was prepared, more than B three-fourths (3/4) of the Township was devoted to farming (see Table 1). It has declined steadily since then, so that now less than one-fifth (1/5) of the land is used for farming. Conversions from agricultural usage increased during the decade of the '80s. In 1970, agriculture was still the largest user of land, with more than 50 percent (50%) of the land area. Between 1980 and 1990, the amount of I land devoted to agriculture declined from 35.9% to 18.7%. I The major areas of growth for residential uses over the past ten years are: 1. The St. Leonard's Road, Middle Holland Road, and Village Shires areas - Several developments I in these areas were expanded during the 1980s and are now virtually complete. 2. The Hills of Northampton - The area bounded by Buck Road, East Holland Road, Stony Ford Road and the SEPTA R1 High Speed Line is being developed as a cluster-designed subdivision with over 270 single-family detached homes; and several other residential developments have B taken place in the immediate vicinity.
3. Tanner Farms - The area on the south side of Hatboro Road, west of Almshouse Road, is being B developed as a cluster-designed subdivision with over 220 single-family detached homes. A portion of the Tanner Farm on the north side of Hatboro Road will be preserved as agricultural B open space. 4. Developments in the vicinity of Pulinski Road and Spring Mill Country Club - There are several B Existing Land Use 13 B 1999 Update December 1999 I
properties which have developed in the past fifteen years, including: Brookwood Estates, Fairway Estates, Hampton Woods, Wedgewood Greens, and Pines at Northampton. I 5. Large Lot Development North of PA Route 332 - There are several areas, formerly used for farming and north of Almshouse Road and Newtown-Richboro Road, which have developed as large lot residential areas, including: Deer Run, Breckenridge Estates, Chimney's Farm, I Hidden Meadow and Sunny Meadows. Areas along Almshouse Road, Spencer Road, Old Jacksonville Road and Sackettsford Road have also been converted from farmland to 10-acre lots. 1
6. Richboro - The Village at Northampton, a development of multi-family dwellings restricted to senior citizens. I 7. Holland - A cluster-designed subdivision, Villa Estates, with 91 single-family detached homes.
8. Filling in or completing existing subdivisions - There has been some filling in around existing I subdivisions. This has occurred along Bustleton Pike, Bristol Road and New Road in the Churchville area; Buck Road; Upper Holland Road; and in the residential areas off of Second Street Pike. I The primary housing type is the single-family detached dwelling. The exceptions to this are the areas along the portion of Bridgetown Pike and Bristol Road south of the Trenton Cutoff (Bellwood) and in Richboro (Village at Northampton). In these areas, townhouses and attached units have been I constructed at densities higher than those in other portions of the Township, I Commercial DeveloDment Concentrated in Richboro Area The Township's commercial core is Richboro, where retail and service activities have been I concentrated throughout much of the Township's history. The commercial area extends along Second Street Pike (from the Tanyard Road intersection to the Manor Drive intersection), Bustleton Pike, and Almshouse RoadRichboro Road. Since 1980, many of the properties in the commercial core have been converted from residential to commercial uses; and the Crossroads Plaza shopping center was I expanded. The commercial area extended westward along Almshouse Road with the construction of two new office complexes. The Richboro area includes some services as well as retail outlets. The area has developed primarily as a series of shopping centers rather than as an integrated downtown area I oriented towards the main streets. The Holland area, along Buck Road, is a smaller commercial area which was expanded in the I early 1980s. The area extends a small distance up Holland Road. The Churchville area has a few commercial uses, and Village Shires has a commercial center as part of this Buck Road development.
Although Table 1 shows that the .amount of commercial land has decreased since 1980, this is the I result of a change in the method of calculation. The only loss of commercial property during this period was the removal of a small nonconforming commercial use on Second Street Pike. I The U.S. Census Bureau surveys of retail trade establishments and service businesses for Northampton indicates that there were 115 retail establishments and 221 service businesses in the Township in 1992. Together, these businesses had 2,223 paid employees and a total annual payroll of I $39,032,000. As indicated in Table 2 below, eating and drinking places lead the list of retail establishments; and health services is the dominant service business in the Township.
Northampton has a slightly lower percentage of its land devoted to commercial uses (1.5%)than I I Existing Land Use 14 1999 Update December 1999 I 1
other contiguous municipalities in the Central Bucks area, which average 2.6%. Compared with the I Lower Bucks municipalities which border it on the east and south (9.0%), Northampton has much less commercially used land. I Table 1 NORTHAMPTON TOWNSHIP LAND USE I 1963thrOugh1990
-1963 1970 -1980 1990 I Land Use Acres -% Acres -% Acres o/. Acres 1 '0 Residential 1,115.2 6.6 4,212.2 24.9 5,621.8 33.1 7,272 44.0 I Agriculture 13,178.9 78.0 8,666.4 50.9 6,096.5 35.9 3,089 18.7 Industry 10.8 0.1 247.9 1.5 181 1.1 . I Commerce/Services 50.7 0.3 817.3 4.8 405.62 2.4 245 1.5 Government/Education 388.6 2.3 326.9 1.9 482.4 2.8 636 3.8 ParkdRecreation 642.1 3.8 1,384.6 8.1 1,612.9 9.5 1,978 12.0 I TransportatiodUtilitiesl 1,481 9.0 Vacant 1,308.8 7.7 1,540.9 9.0 1,649 10.0 I TOTALS 16,991.83 100.0 16,99 1.8 100.0 16,991.8 100.0 16,531 100.0
1 The 1990 figures are from: Bucks Countv Continuum, Bucks County Planning Commission I (January 1994). Acreage excludes water area (0.28 square miles); and transportationlutilities is a new category. 2 The amount of commercial land appears to have declined, but this is due to a change in the method of I calculation. Parking lots were counted as commercial land in 1970 but not in 1980. 3 The remainder of the land was vacant, or in federal institutions.
Sources: Backaround for Planning, Township of Northampton, 1963; I Land Use ReDort. 1980, Bucks County Planning Commission; Bucks Countv Continuum, Bucks County Planning Commission (January 1994); and Consultant's Survey I Industrial Uses Concentrated on Jacksonville Road I The Township's industrial activities are concentrated in the industrial parks along Jacksonville Road in the western part of the Township. There are four industrial parks with about 80 occupied sites and about 20 vacant industrial lots. This pattern of industrial use has been established for several years. The increase in industrial usage is minor and results from the occupation of previously vacant I industrial lots in these industrial parks.
In 1992, the Township had 61 wholesale trade establishments, which contribute to its commercial and I industrial areas. These businesses had annual sales of $126,661,000; and 179 paid employees with an annual payroll of $6,142,000. I Compared with other Central Bucks municipalities to the north and west (2.3%), Northampton has a smaller percentage of its land in industrial use. The Lower Bucks municipalities on the other side of I the Township also have a higher percentage of land in industrial use (an average of 2.9%). Existing Land Use 15 I 1999 Update December 1999 Table 2 RETAIL TRADE ESTABLISHMENTS IN NORT"T0N TOWNSHIP (1992)
Number of Sales Tvpe of Establishment Establishments fl.000)
Building materials, hardware, garden supply, mobile home dealer 4 $ 1,464 General merchandise 1 D Food stores l5 36,681 Automotive dealers 2 D Service stations 8 11,264 Apparel and accessory stores 6 1,137 Furniture, home furnishings, and equipment store 7 6,221 Eating and drinking places 33 12,131 Drug and proprietary stores 8 11,159 Miscellaneous retail stores -31 D
TOTAL 115 $108,901
SERVICE BUSINESSES IN NORTHAMPTON TOWNSHlP (1992)
Number of Receipts Type of Establishment Establishments (1,000)
Hotels, rooming houses, camps and other lodging places 1 D Personal services 30 $ 4,371 Business services 45 15,644 Automotive repair, services, and parking 11 3,213 Miscellaneous repair services 6 604 Amusement and recreation services, incl. motion pictures & museums l5 9,131 Health services 61 27,206 Legal services 10 3,366 Selected educational services 2 D Social services 1 D Engineering, accounting, research, management and related services 37 10,837
TOTAL 221 $75340
D = Withheld to avoid disclosing data for individual companies; data are included in broader kind-of-business totals.
Source: US.Census of Retail Trade, 1992
Existing Land Use 16 1999 Update December 1999 I I Utilities and Transportation I The Churchville Reservoir, owned by the Philadelphia Suburban Water Company, contributes significantly to the 1,481 acres of land used for utilities and transportation in the Township; even though much of this area is open. Other areas in the utility category include the three (3) railroad lines in the Township. The Ivyland Railroad right-of-way, along the western border, belongs to PECO I Energy which purchased the land for possible future utility rights-of-way.
I Government and Education I The major governmental uses in the Township are: - the Township Complex on Township Road I - the Free Library and Senior Center on Upper Holland Road - Township-owned open space and recreational areas, including parks and open space areas dedicated to the Township by developers. There are several parcels owned by Bucks County in the I area of the Churchville Reservoir.
The educational uses are primarily those owned by the Council Rock School District (see I Community Facilities). The amount of land in this category has increased somewhat during the past fifteen years because the Township has acquired additional acreage for public facilities. The major additions are the Free I Library and Senior Center parcel and the parcel on Newtown-Richboro Road adjacent to Tyler State I Park, used for the Township's recreation program. Parks, Recreation and Open Space I The inventory of parks and recreational facilities describes in detail the location and amount of recreational land. The amount of land in parks is relatively high in Northampton because of the presence of Tyler State Park, a state facility, and Churchville Nature Center, a county facility, within its borders. Certain tracts of open space, owned by the Township, have been utilized for agricultural I purposes, i.e., leased to farmers and/or a horse farm. This policy of utilizing open space helps to preserve the rural tradition of Northampton Township while minimizing the financial burden of I ongoing maintenance. In addition to publicly owned park land, there are several parcels of land which are being preserved as open space by the Bucks County Conservancy. Four of the seven parcels belonging to the I Conservancy are located along streams (two along the Neshaminy Creek, one near Mill Creek, and one along a wooded tributary of the Little Neshaminy).
The Parks and Recreation component of the Comprehensive Plan, presented in a separate volume, I provides a detailed inventory and analysis of this land use category. I I Existing Land Use 17 I 1999 Update December 1999 I Vacant Land
The total acreage of vacant parcels adds up to a sizable portion of the Township; but the vacant areas I are generally small and lie between parcels already developed. Some vacant tracts lack the access necessary to develop them. Some vacant parcels were formerly farmed and are now for sale. Much of this area can be expected to develop through "in-filling" as the Township grows. I
The Existing Land Use Map shows the pattern of land uses as of May 1997, when a survey of the Township was undertaken. I
Existing Land Use Patterns in Surrounding MuniciDalities. County and Region I Northampton Township can be generally described as being situated between the northern edge of Lower Bucks County, an area which has experienced significant suburbanization since the 1960s, and the southern portion of Central Bucks County, a semi-suburban mixture of residential and agricultural I uses. From its southwestern boundary and proceeding in a clockwise direction, the Township borders seven (7) other townships and two (2) boroughs. Existing land uses which occur in the vicinity of the Township boundary are described as follows: I Lower SouthamDton TownshiD - Low density single-family detached residential and agricultural uses occur along Bridgetown Pike; medium density single-family detached residential uses between Bristol Road and Buck Road; and low density single-family detached I residential uses along Bristol Road, northwest of Buck Road.
UDper Southampton Township - Low density single-family detached residential uses are present I along Bristol Road, with the exception of a restaurant at Bustleton Pike and medium density single-family detached residential uses northwest of Second Street Pike to Davisville Road. I Warminster Township and Ivvland Borouyh - The area along Bristol Road, between Davisville Road and Jacksonville Road, includes the U. S. Naval Air Warfare Center surrounded by medium density single-family detached residential uses. Medium density single-family detached residential development occurs in Ivyland between Jacksonville Road and the New I Hope and Ivyland Railroad. Limited commercial and recently developed campus-type industrial uses are present between the railroad and Mearns Road. I Warwick Township - The Mearns Road corridor, between Bristol Road and Creek Road has been, and continues to be, transformed from vacant land and agricultural and low density single-family residential uses to campus-type industrial uses. Low density single-family I residential uses and vacant land predominates between Creek and Almshouse Roads. In the vicinity of Almshouse Road, the wooded open spaces of the Little Neshaminy Creek Valley continues to the confluence of the Neshaminy Creek, just beyond the Wrightstown Township border. I
Wrightstown Township - The Neshaminy Creek Valley, between Rushland and Second Street Pike, contains four (4) active quarries, interspersed with agricultural and open space uses. With I the exception of a medium density single-family detached residential neighborhood, a former cottage colony just north of the Worthington Mill Road bridge, the remainder of the Neshaminy Creek Valley is in low density single-family detached residential and agricultural uses. I Newtown TownshiD - From the Wrightstown Township boundary to Newtown-Richboro Road the Neshaminy Creek Valley is predominated by two institutional uses of regional importance, Tyler State Park, and the campus of the Bucks County Community College on Swamp Road. The I I Existing Land Use 18 1999 Update December 1999 I I
development of major medium density mixed residential uses between the Newtown Bypass and I the Neshaminy Creek has occurred during the 1980s. These developments have incorporated flood plain areas as preserved open space. I Middletown TownshiD and Langhorne Borough - Open space areas along the Neshaminy Creek are parts of the George School (private secondary boarding school) and Pennswood Village (life care community) campuses. Additional flood plain areas have been protected along the Neshaminy Creek, to Bridgetown Pike, as medium density single-family detached residential I uses have been developed. Additional flood plain areas lie between the Conrail tracks and the remainder of the Neshaminy Creek, to the County's Playwicki Park at the Lower Southampton I Township border. I I I I I I I I I I I I I Existing Land Use 19 I 1999 Update December 1999
I I POPULATION CHARAC'L'ERISTICS Understanding the population characteristics of the Township is important in the development of the Comprehensive Plan because the Plan must serve the needs of the residents and future residents. I Planning for a community with a large number of elderly people will have results different from planning for a population of young families.
I The study of Northampton's population is based on the 1990 US. Census, with some comparisons to Census figures from previous decades. In order to understand the population characteristics better, Northampton will be compared with other municipalities in the central part of Bucks County and with I Bucks County as a whole. The size of the population, rate of growth, composition, and income characteristics have been analyzed.
I Population Growth, 1930 to 1990
Since 1930, the Township has grown from 1,375 persons to 35,406 persons in 1990. The Township has I continually increased its share of the total population of Bucks County; so that now it is the fourth largest in the County and accounts for 6.5%of the county's population (see Table 3). I Table 3
POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS I NORTHAMPTON TOWNSHIP AND BUCKS COUNTY 1930 - 1990
I Northampton Township Bucks County
Share of I PoDulation % increase Bucks Countv Population % increase 1930 1,375 1.4 96,727 I 1940 1,734 26.1 1.6 107,715 11.4 1950 2,248 29.6 1.6 144,620 34.3 1960 6706 167.2 1.9 308,567 113.4 I 1970 15,807 163.2 3.8 415,056 34.5 1980 27,392 73.3 5.7 479,180 14.9 I 1990 35,406 29.3 6.5 541)224 12.9
Source: U.S. Census, 1990
I When compared with other municipalities in Bucks County and in the Central Bucks County area, Northampton shows outstanding growth. With an increase of 29.3%)it had a higher growth rate than all but ten of the 62 Bucks County townships and boroughs. The only municipalities growing faster than I Northampton in the 1980s were Newtown Township (202.3%),Wanvick Township (156.4%),Silverdale Borough (76.6%),Telford Borough (69.5%),Perkasie Borough (50.3%))Lower Makefield Township (44.6%))Sellersville Borough (42.5%), Richland Township (36.2%),Durham Township (32.l%), and I Upper Makefield Township (30.0%). The rate of growth for the 19 Central Bucks County municipalities was 17.7% (down from 29.2%in the period 1970-1980); and for Bucks County, it was only 12.9% (down I Population Characteristics 21 I 1999 Update December 1999 I from 14.9% during 1970-1980).
In the eight years following the 1990 Census, it was estimated by the Bucks County Planning I Commission that Northampton had grown an additional 10.0%; less than the 19.5% population growth experienced in the Central Bucks area. The estimated 1998 population of Northampton was 38,972 (see Table 4). I
Table 4 I POPULATION GROWTH RATES NORTHAMPTON TOWNSHIP, CENTRAL BUCKS COUNTY, AND BUCKS COUNTY 1980 - 1996 I
% increase % increase 1980-1990 1980-1998 1
Northampton Township 29.3 42.3 Central Bucks municipalities* 17.7 40.7 I Bucks County 12.9 24.5 . * Buckingham Township, Chalfont Borough, Doylestown Borough, Doylestown Township, Ivyland Borough, I New Britain Borough, New Britain Township, New Hope Borough, Newtown Borough, Newtown Township, Northampton Township, Plumstead Township, Solebury Township, Upper Makefield Township, Upper Southampton Township, Warminster Township, Warrington Township, Warwick Township and Wrightstown I Township. Source: Bucks County Planning Commission, 1998 W!36 population estimates I Population Growth Due Mainly to In-Migration I The two factors which cause the population to change are natural increase (births and deaths) and migration (people moving into or out of the area). During the decades of the 1960s and the 1970s, the bulk of Northampton's growth was due to migration into the Township, which accounted for 87% of the I population increase. For the Central Bucks area as a whole, migration accounted for about 75% of growth. These percentages declined slightly in the 1980s (79% for the Township and 73% for the Central Bucks area). I Most of the people moving into Northampton come from other areas in Bucks County. Almost one- half (49.7%) of the people settling in the Township during the five year period from 1985 to 1990 came from other municipalities in the county. The balance of new residents are from: other states (23.4%), 1 Philadelphia (15.9%), and other areas in Pennsylvania except Philadelphia and Bucks County (10.9%).
Except for a slightly larger percentage of in-migration from Philadelphia, the origin of the I Township's new residents is similar to the County's profile. The average for other Central Bucks municipalities is 9.2% of the new population coming from Philadelphia. I I I Population Characteristics 1999 Update December 1999 I I I Township's Population Younger Than Average for Bucks County Northampton Township has a younger population than the municipalities nearby and the County as I a whole. There is a higher percentage of children, and there are fewer elderly people (see Table 5). I Table 5 AGE CHARACTERISTICS NORTHAMPTON TOWNSHIP, CENTRAL BUCKS COUNTY, AND BUCKS COUNTY I 1990 % under 18 % over 65
I Northampton Township 28.6 7.3 Central Bucks municipalities 25.1 10.4 I ' Bucks County 25.7 10.9 Source: Census, 1990 I U.S. When the age profile of Northampton is compared with that of Bucks County (see Table 6), it is clear that the Township is one of more established families. The percentage of children under ten years is the same for the Township and the County, but the Township has a much higher percentage of school-aged 1 children (10-19 years of age) than does the County, and it also has significantly more young adults in the 20-24 year range. The 1990 information also shows a reversal from 1980, when the percentage of the I Township's 30-44 year old population was well above the County's. I Household Size Largest in Bucks County The fact that Northampton is a township of families is also reflected in the average size of households in the Township. The average household size is 3.17 people, the highest in Bucks County (with I Trumbauersville Borough); but down from 3.77 persons per household in 1980. Many other municipalities have a larger percentage of young single people, elderly people living alone, or young couples; as reflected the smaller average household sizes in those municipalities. Almost 78% of the households in Northampton consist of married couples with children. In Bucks County as a whole, I approximately 65%, and in the Central Bucks municipalities approximately 69% of the households are married couples with children (see Table 7). In addition, the Township has among the lowest percentages of single-parent households in the County -- 4.3%. In Central Bucks municipalities, the I percentage of households headed by one parent was 4.7%; and for Bucks County, it was 6.1%. I I I I Population Characteristics 23 I 1999 Update December 1999 I
Table 6 I AGE DISTRIBUTION NORTHAMPTON TOWNSHIP AND BUCKS COUNTY 1980 and 1990 I (% of Total Population) Northampton Bucks County I I Under 5 years 7.0 6.4 7.0 7.3 5-9 9.8 7.7 7.6 7.3 10-14 12.4 8.8 9.0 6.9 I 15-19 11.4 8.7 9.6 6.7 20-24 5.4 6.5 8.7 6.6 I 25-29 4.4 6.2 8.2 8.3 30-34 8.9 7.3 8.2 9.3 35-44 18.1 18.9 12.5 16.7 I 4554 11.3 14.2 11.4 11.1 55-64 6.3 7.8 9.6 9.0 I 65-74 2.5 4.2 4.9 6.7 75+ 2.4 3.1 3.1 4.2
Source: U.S. Census, 1980 and 1990 I
Table 7 I
HOUSEHOLD Sm NORTHAMPTON TOWNSHIP, CENTRAL BUCKS COUNTY, AND BUCKS COUNTY I 1990
Average % of Families Which Household Are Married Coudes I size With Children
Northampton Township 3.17 77.8 I Central Bucks municipalities 2.84 68.7 Bucks County 2.80 65.1 I Source: U.S. Census, 1990 I I I Population Characteristics 1999 Update December 1999 I 1 B Education. Income and Occupation Characteristics The population in Northampton is better educated, has higher income, and is more likely to be employed in white collar occupations than the population in other parts of Bucks County. There are very I few instances of poverty in the Township.
The Township has a higher percentage of high school and college graduates than the Central Bucks I County area or Bucks County as a whole (see Table 8).
I Table 8 EDUCATION LEVELS ' NORTHAMPTON TOWNSHIP, CENTRAL BUCKS COUNTY, AND BUCKS COUNTY lB 1990 'I % of adult popuiation (25 years and over) which has completed: High School College 1 Northampton Township 91.3 37.2 Central Bucks municipalities 86.9 32.8 I Bucks County 82.9 24.8 Source: US. Census, 1980
1 Income of Township Residents Amon? Highest in Bucks Countv
Because of inflation and other economic forces, the actual median income figures which were I compiled as part of the 1990 Census are no longer accurate, but the relative standings of municipalities in terms of their income levels can be used to gain an understanding of the population characteristics. In 1989, with a median family income of $63,019, Northampton was the fifth wealthiest township in the B Central Bucks area and the sixth wealthiest in all of Bucks County (Upper Makefield Township had the highest median family income -- $84,406). The median family income for all Bucks County municipalities in 1989 was $48,851.
B Northampton had among the lowest poverty rates in Bucks County in 1990. Poverty levels are determined by the US. Census and depend upon income levels and the number of people in the household. Only 1.5% of persons and 1.0% of families had incomes below the poverty level, giving I Northampton the fifth lowest poverty rates in Bucks County (Newtown Township at 0.8% and 0.6% respectively, had the lowest percentages). The poverty rate for Bucks County is 5.6% of all persons and I 4.7% of families. More Than Two-Thirds of Employees are White Collar Workers
B In 1990 there were 18,801 employed persons living in Northampton Township, and 71.9% were employed in white collar jobs (wholesale trade; retail trade; finance, insurance and real estate; services; and government). The percentage in white collar jobs in Central Bucks municipalities was I 68.1%; and in Bucks County, 64.7%. Table 9 shows the breakdown of white collar workers by occupation: I Population Characteristics 25 I 1999 Update December 1999 I
Table 9 I WHITE COLLAR WORKERS BY OCCUPATION NORTHAMPTON TOWNSHIP, CENTRAL BUCKS COUNTY, AND BUCKS COUNTY 1990 I
-% % % Finance I Total Wholesale Retail Insuranck, % -% Emploved Trade Trade Real Estate Services Government
Northampton Township 18,801 8.0 17.2 10.6 33.9 2.2 I Central Bucks municipalities 100,145 6.4 16.8 9.6 32.3 3.0 Bucks County 283,836 5.8 17.2 7.6 30.7 3.4 I Source: US.Census, 1990 1 Most Northampton Residents Work in the Countv
51.8% of Northampton's working population is employed within Bucks County. According to the 1990 I Census, more than 3,500 people residing in Northampton work in Philadelphia, one of the higher proportions of any municipality in the County. Northampton's total labor force was 19,336 in 1990, with 2.8% unemployment at the time the Census was taken. I
Population Densitv I The density of the population in Northampton (number of people per square mile of land area) is higher than either the Central Bucks area or Bucks County as a whole, but is somewhat lower than that of many of the neighboring townships (see Table 10). With a population density of 1,372 persons per square I mile, Northampton is more dense than the Central Bucks area (846 persons per square mile) but considerably less dense than the Lower Bucks area (2,427 persons per square mile). I Population Projections and Forecasts I According to the 1993 Bucks County Comprehensive Plan, transportation access, available infrastructure, and employment opportunities in the surrounding area will support significant additional development. The Plan indicated that population growth is anticipated to continue over the next thirty years; but at a slightly lesser rate due to increased development saturation. I
Population projections for all Bucks County municipalities were prepared by the Bucks County Planning Commission for the years 2000, 2010, and 2020. The projections involved an age cohort I survival model; which analyzed birth rates, death rates, and rates of migration into and out of the County as a whole. The County figures served as a control total for municipal projections; which were calculated separately "based upon potential growth scenarios and stages of development of each I municipality. 'I 1
I Bucks County Planning Commission. January 1994. Bucks County Continuum. p. 183. I I Population Characteristics 1999 Update December 1999 1 1
I Table 10
POPULATION DENSITY I NORTHAMPTON TOWNSHIP AND SURROUNDING MUNICIPALITIES 1990 1 Density (Persons per square mile) NORTHAMPTON TOWNSHIP 1,372 I Ivyland Borough 1,225 Lower Southampton Township 2,964 Middletown Township 2,220 1 Newtown Township 1,140 Upper Southampton Township 2,436 I Warminster Township 3,219 Warwick Township 533 I Wrightstown Township 245 Source: US.Census, 1990; and Bucks County Planning Commission
The Bucks County Planning Commission anticipated that Northampton and the areas around it I would grow faster than the County as a whole. Its projections suggested that the Township could anticipate growth rates ranging from 24.5 to 30.6% in the 1990s and 11.5 to 17.0% in the first decade of the next century. Between the years 2010 and 2020, the lower projection anticipated a possible loss of I population (1.6%) and the high projection a 12.2% increase.
On May 27, 1993, the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission (DVRPC) adopted I municipal population "forecasts," which modified the County figures. The DVRPC forecasts are intended to be differentiated from:
"'projections' or 'targets' which are sometimes used as expressions of future growth. I Projections are generally mathematical extrapolations of past trends based on past experience and extended into the future. Targets are goals or policy-directed expressions of desirable or optimal future conditions... [Florecasts may be seen as an objective I assessment of future conditions, based not only on past trends but on current market demand, expected market trends, and an analysis of the available land and I infrastructure to accommodate growth."2 Table 11 shows the anticipated population growth for Northampton Township, as projected by the Bucks County Planning Commission; and Table 12 shows the population for Northampton Township, I as forecast by the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission. I
2 Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission. June 1993. Year 2020 County and Municipal 1 Interim Population and Employment Forecasts, Direction 2020 Report #8. pp, 1-2. I Population Characteristics 27 I 1999 Update December 1999 I
Table 11 I BUCKS COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION POPULATION PROJECTIONS FOR 2000,2010 and 2020 NORTHAMPTON TOWNSHIP I aDl0 -m 1996 lproiections) lproiections) (proiections) I (actual) (estimate) LowIMiddlelHi yh LowlMiddleIHiFrh LowIMiddlelHieh 35,406 38,320 44,070145,500146,250 49,150/51,540/54,130 48,340153,520160,720 I Projected Increases: 1990-2000 (24.5 to 30.6%) 2000-2010 (11.5 to 17.0%) 2010-2020 (-1.6 to 12.2%) I
Sources: 1996 Population Estimate - Bucks County Planning Commission Population Projections - Bucks County Planning Commission (1 993) I Table 12 D DELAWARE VALLEY REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION POPULATIONFORECASTS FOR 2000,2010 and 2020 NORTHAMPTON TOWNSHIP D 1990 m solo (actual) [forecast) forecast) Lforecast) 1 35,406 45,591 48,424 49,174
Forecast Increases: 1990-2000 (28.8%) I 2000-2010 (6.2%) 2010-2020 (1.5%) I Source: Year 2020 County and Municipal Interim Population and Employment Forecasts, Direction 2020 Report #8 - Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission (June 1993) 1 A review of the County Planning Commission's Year 2000, 2010 and 2020 population projections for Northampton Township found that there were certain assumptions made regarding land use and the provision of public water and sanitary sewer service. As recommended by the County Planning I Commission, "extreme caution is recommended when assessing the use of the 2010 and 2020 projections ...since many significant changes can occur to the assumptions used to develop these figures."3 The projections assumed a higher rate of growth in the 1990s than experienced in the 1980s. I The projections were premised on increased residential densities throughout the Township and the continued expansion of public water and sanitary sewer services. These assumptions are contrary to the 1989 Comprehensive Plan. I
3 Bucks County Planning Commission. op. cit., p. 184 I I Population Characteristics 28 1999 Update December 1999 I 1
The Township has worked with the Bucks County Planning Commission to revise the population 1 projections to be more in accordance with the goals and objectives of the Future Land Use Plan and the Future Water and Sewer Plan. Table 13 shows the anticipated population growth for Northampton 1 Township to the Year 2010, as forecast by the Northampton Township Planning Commission. I Table 13 mEDPOPULATION FORECASTS FOR 2000 and 2010 NORTHAMPTON TOWNSHIP I aooo -1990 1998 [forecast) (forecast) I (actual) (estimate) Low-High Low-High 35,406 38,972 37,951 - 40,021 41,240 - 46,508 I Projected Increases: 1990-2000 (7.2 to 13.0%) 2000-2010 (8.7 to 22.5%)
Sources: 1998 Population Estimate - Bucks County Planning Commission I Population Projections - Walter C. Evans & Associates (October 1995) I Emplovment Projections 1 The Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission has forecast future employment in each municipality.4 The DVRPC utilized the Census Transportation Planning Package (CTPP), which is based on journey-to-work data from the 1990 Census, to provide the best quantification of municipal I level employment. In the introduction to the section on employment forecasts, the DVRPC states that: "Forecasting future employment is more difficult than population due to the many factors which influence employment at the national, regional and local levels. While population I changes generally tend to be gradual and relatively predictable, employment may vary widely due to such broader forces as foreign trade, world economics, political or military conflicts, national monetary policies, demographic trends and social forces. Local 1 factors such as labor force availability, land prices, transportation networks and local political climate will also play an important role in determining employment levels."5
According to the CTPP data, there were 9,013 jobs in Northampton Township in 1990. The DVRPC I has forecast that approximately 3,875 new jobs will be created within Northampton Township between 1990 and 2020, an increase of almost 43%. The growth rate in jobs for Northampton is expected to exceed I the rate for the other municipalities in the Central Bucks County area (30.4%). This projected increase in jobs will certainly be affected by the land use policies of the Township and I the proportion of its vacant land it chooses to devote to future commercial and industrial uses.
4 Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission. June 1993. op. cit. pp. 41-78. I 5 Ibid. pp. 41. I Population Characteristics I 1999 Update December 1999 1 I HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS
The characteristics of housing in Northampton are a reflection of the population characteristics: the i houses are, on the average, relatively large single-family homes which are appropriate for the 1 population of established families in the Township.
According to the U.S. Census, there were 11,486 dwelling units in the Township in 1990, an increase I of about 56.6% since 1980. The Township's housing units were almost all owner-occupied in 1990. More than 91% were occupied by the owners (as opposed to rented), the third-highest rate of owner-occupancy in Bucks County (see Table 14). This rate has decreased since 1980 when the owner-occupancy rate was I 96.2%.
Table 14
I DWELLING UNIT CHARACTERISTICS NORTHAMPTON TOWNSHIP, CEN'IRAL BUCKS COUNTY, AND BUCKS COUNTY I 1990 No. of dwell- % owner- % renter- 1 in? units occupied . occupied Northampton Township 11,486 91.3 8.7 1 Central Bucks 67,863 80.3 19.7 Bucks County 199,959 75.7 24.3
I Source: U.S. Census, 1990
I Housing: Values High in Township The relative cost of housing in Northampton, as compared with other municipalities, is useful. The median value of owner-occupied housing in 1990 was $195,500, the sixth-highest in Bucks County I and almost 1.4 times the average housing value ($140,000) for the County as a whole. Only five other municipalities -- Upper Makefield, Solebury, Buckingham, Doylestown, and Lower Makefield 1 Townships -- had higher median values. I Housing Stock Relativelv New Given the dramatic increase in population in Northampton during recent years, it is not surprising that the housing is relatively new. More than one-third (1/3) of the 1990 housing stock was built during the 1980s. Only 3.1% of the houses were constructed before 1939; giving Northampton one 1 of the youngest housing stocks in Bucks County (see Table 15). Only Newtown Township has a greater percentage of housing units built over the past twenty years (89.9%). Because the housing stock is new, the Township is not likely to experience the problems with a deteriorating housing stock 1 that are common in older municipalities. I I Housing Characteristics 31 i 1999 Update December 1999 I Table 15 AGE OF HOUSING IN NORTHAMPTON TOWNSHIP I Year Built Number % of total units U 1970-1990 7,822 68.1 1940-1969 3,308 28.8 I Before 1939 356 3.1
Source: U.S. Census, 1990 I
Most Houses are Sinkle-Familv Detached Dwellings I
Most of the Township's houses in 1990 were single-family units; on their own lots and unattached to other houses. There was a small proportion of attached housing, such as townhouses, and some I multi-family housing, with several units in one building. Recent construction of attached and multi-family housing has increased the proportion of housing devoted to these types, but single- family detached houses still predominate. I
Total Dwelling Units (1990) 11,486 Single-Family Detached Units 8,566 74.6% U Single-Family Attached Units 1,741 15.2% Two-Family Units 40 0.3% I Three or more-Family Units 1,005 8.7% Mobile Home/Trailer 4 less than 0.1% Other 130 1.1% I
More Bedrooms than Average Bucks Countv House I
The Census count of the number of bedrooms per house reveals that 84.0% of the Township's houses have three or more bedrooms, the sixth-highest percentage of three-or-more bedroom houses in Bucks County. Warwick Township, with 89.6%, has the highest percentage; and 67.7% of the County's I housing has three-or-more bedrooms. The older boroughs and townships in the lower part of the County have housing with fewer bedrooms. Like the other townships which have grown rapidly during the past twenty years, Northampton's housing stock has been increased mainly by the I addition of large, single-family houses. I Northampton Reflects National Patterns During the 1980s certain population and housing characteristics unique to Northampton Township 1 were reversed. During the 1970s Northampton was not reflective of the national trends towards smaller family sizes and decreased housing unit sizes; it was not until the 1980s that the Township experienced such declines. The national tendencies towards late family formation and further increases in single-parent families were also prevalent in Northampton. The national fertility rate I 1 Housing Characteristics s2 1999 Update December 1999 1 has been cut in half in the past thirty (30) years, and many suburban areas are experiencing demands for smaller houses which smaller families and single people can afford. Northampton is continuing to grow with the addition of families that have school-age children and need large houses.
Housing Estimates as of November 1999
Building permit data from Northampton Township has been used to update the number of housing units reported in the 1990 Census. Building permits for April 1990 through November 1999 were tabulated and adjustments made to account for units not completed. Based on these figures, the following housing- totals for Northampton were obtained:
Total Dwelling Units (1999) 13,309 Single-Family Detached Units 10,229 76.9% Single-Family Attached Units 1,901 14.3% Two-Family Units 40 0.3% Three or more- Family Units 1,005 7.6% Mobile Home/Trailer 4 ess than 0.1% Other 130 1.0%
The rapid increase in single-family attached and multi-family units during the 1980s has somewhat lessened, and during the last nine and one-half years the construction of single-family detached units has been prevalent (91.2% of all units).
Housing: Proiections and Forecasts
The townships of Lower Makefield, Newtown, Middletown and Northampton accounted for nearly half (44.9%) of all new housing constructed in the County between 1980 and 1988 and for over forty- five percent (45%) of all the proposed new dwelling units in the County in 1988.
During the 198Os, the combined phenomena of the trend towards smaller family size and the introduction of over 2,200 single-family attached and multi-family dwelling units in the Township reduced the average household size from 3.74 persons to 3.08 persons (a 17.6% decrease).
The Bucks County Planning Commission has forecast that average household sizes will continue to decrease over the next two or three decades; to as low as 2.52 persons per new dwelling unit in Northampton. Accordingly, the County Planning Commission determined that a net increase of 7,664 to 10,154 new housing units between 1990 and 2020 would be required to house the population which they had projected for the Township.
Table 16 shows the anticipated housing growth for Northampton Township, as projected by the Bucks County Planning Commission.
Housing Characteristics 33 1999 Update December 1999 I
Table 16 1
BUCKS COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION HOUSING PROJECTIONS FOR 2O00,2010 and 2020 I NORTHAMPTON TOWNSHIP
aooo -2010 a020 I -1990 1999 {Droiections) (proiections) [proiections) (actual) lestimate) LowIMidd1elHig.h LowlMiddleIHigh LowIMiddlelHiEh
11,486 13,309 15,710/16,080/16,250 18,580/19,300/19,930 19,150/20,730/21,640 I
Projected Increases: 1990-2000 (36.8 to 41.5%) Persons Per Household: 1980 (3.74) I 2000-2010 (18.3 to 22.6%) 1990 (3.08) 2010-2020 (3.1 to 8.6%) 2OOO (2.81 to 2.85) 2010 (2.65 to 2.72) I 2020 (2.52 to 2.81)
Sources: 1999 Hausing Estimates - 1990 Census and Northampton Township Building Permit Records Housing Projections - Bucks County Planning Commission (January 1994) I
Subsequently, the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission released occupied housing I unit forecasts by municipality in 1994, which suggested lesser percentage increases for Northampton Township over the next thirty years than the Bucks County Planning Commission. Table 17 shows the anticipated growth of occupied housing units for Northampton Township, as forecast by the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission. 1
Table 17 I
DELAWARE VALLEY REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION OCCUPIED HOUSING UNIT FORECASTS FOR 2O00,2010 and 2020 I NORTHAMPTON TOWNSHIP 1990 2x0 rn -aoaD (actual) lfocast forecast) (forecast) I 11,1051 ,15308 17,375 18,088 I Forecast Increases: 1990-2000 (37.8%) 2000-2010 (13.5%) 2010-2020 (4.1%) I
1 The number of 1990 occupied housing units is drawn from Table H37 (Tenure by Vehicle Available) of STF-3, 1990 Census I Source: Year 2020 County and Municipal Forecasts of Occupied Housing Units, Vehicle Availability and Employed Residents, Direction.2020 Report #15 - Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission (June 1994) 1 I Housing Characteristics 34 1999 Update December 1999 I 1
I As stated in Population Characteristics, the Bucks County Planning Commission's current Year 2000, 2010 and 2020 population projections for Northampton Township were based on certain land use and utilities assumptions which are contrary to the 1989 Comprehensive Plan. The housing projections in Table 16 and Table 17 are premised on those population projections, and were also I found to be unacceptable.
The Township, in cooperation with the Bucks County Planning Commission, has undertaken a I housing projection analysis. A comprehensive study was performed to determine the Township's developable residential land, current growth and household size trends, and anticipated absorption rates. This information was used to project housing growth for Northampton Township to the Year I 2010; and is shown in Table 18.
I Table 18 REVISED HOUSING FORECASTS FOR 2000 and 2010 I NORTHAMPTON TOWNSHIP rn m 1990 1999 (proiections) (proiections) 'I (actual) (estimate) Low-High Low-High 11,486 13,309 13,334 - 14,061 15,184 - 17,124
I Projected Increases: 1990-2000 (16.1 to 22.4%) 2000-2010 (13.9 to 28.4%) I Sources: 1999 Housing Estimates - 1990 Census and Northampton Township Building Permit Records Housing Projections - Walter C. Evans & Associates (October 1995) I I I I I I I
Housing Characteristics 35 1999 Update December 1999 I I COMMUNITY FACILITIES The township's community facilities -- public buildings and public uses of land -- are important elements of the Comprehensive Plan. The existing community facilities have been surveyed in order I to provide a basis for making recommendations for future uses of land and the development of future community facilities. I Police: Demand for Police Service Increasing: With Population I The protection of persons and property is the largest single item in the Township budget, accounting for nearly one-fourth (1/4) of total general fund expenditures. The Township had a volunteer police force until 1964 when the first paid police personnel were hired. In that short time, the force has grown to I a total of forty (40) men and women with a budget of more than $2.9 million. The police station is located at the Township Complex on Township Road in Richboro. The Township is divided into three (3) patrol districts in order to cover the Township efficiently. The area I north and west of Second Street Pike and Newtown-Richboro Road is District One. District Two includes the area from Second Street Pike to Elm Avenue and Holland Road. The remaining area of the Township falls into District Three.
I The Northampton Police are participants in the County-wide emergency communication system (9- 1-1). The patrol vehicles are dispatched accordingly. There are twenty (20) police vehicles.
I While the patrol function of the police department has expanded with the population and increase in workload, the administrative division has not. In fact, it has decreased; in 1974 there were two I lieutenants, today there is one lieutenant assisted by a non-uniformed civilian. Fire Protection: Volunteers Provide Protection for Township
I The Northampton Township Volunteer Fire Company (NTVFC) provides fire protection for the Township. Functions include: fire suppression, rescue, training, fire police service, administration and support services. The company is totally tax-supported and is an all volunteer company with about I sixty (60) active members. This is common throughout most of Bucks County's municipalities.
Daytime emergency response continues to be an area of concern for the Fire Company. Fire I Company and Township officials are currently evaluating these trends. The critical issue regarding daytime manpower resources stems from the makeup of the community. Northampton Township is predominantly a residential community and as such, many fire company members are not available for service to the community during standard workday hours. In 1976, there were fifty (50) active I members of the NTVFC. In 1986, the total dropped to twenty-five (25) and coverage during daytime business hours has become difficult. Fortunately, the number of volunteers has rebounded in recent I years. Recruitment, however, continues to be a high priority for the Fire Company. Fire service to the community is provided from three stations. The Fire Administration Building and central fire station are located in the Township Complex at 55 Township Road, and substations are I located in Holland, at the intersection of East Holland Road and Old Jordan Road; and in Churchville at the intersection of Hatboro Road and New Road. I I Community Facilities 37 I 1999 Update December 1999 I The fire company currently operates the following apparatus:
four (4) engines I one (1) ladder truck I one (1) field unit one (1) tanker I one (1) heavy rescue vehicle
0 one (1)light rescue vehicle I one (1) marine rescue vehicle I one (1) special service unit Additional fire apparatus and manpower resources are available to the Township via mutual aid I responses from neighboring communities.
Municipal water service for fire fighting purposes is available throughout much of the Township; but the majority of the area primarily west of Hatboro Road is not serviced by the existing water system. I Residential developments along Pulinski Road are served by public water service; and within the past year, the industrially developed sections of the Township have been provided with public water service. I Communitv Ambulance Services: Volunteers Provide Emergencv Medical Care
The Tri-Hampton Rescue Squad (THRS), formerly the Trevose Heights Rescue Squad, based in D Trevose, provides emergency medical services to Northampton Township from three stations, one of which is located at the Township Complex at Newtown-Richboro Road and Township Road. The THRS has provided actual "in-town'' coverage since 1969; although it was not until 1976 when an addition to I the Richboro Station of the Northampton Township Volunteer Fire Company afforded the squad a two- bay garage, storage space, lavatory facilities, radio room, and day room. The Rescue Squad is financially supported through subscription services, billings generated from services to non- 1 subscribers, and contributions (through real estate taxes) from municipalities serviced. Although predominantly a volunteer organization which provides service to Lower Southampton Township and portions of Bensalem Township and Philadelphia, paid staff is utilized from 9:00 a.m. to 6:OO p.m., Monday through Friday at the Richboro Station in the form of a paramedic crew. I
A problem of volunteer participation is evidenced by the fact that of its seventy-five (75) members, only eighteen (18) operate from the Richboro Station. Volunteer membership from the .Northampton I community is a serious shortcoming for the THRS in providing services to the Township. Paid staff, at least during certain hours, has provided a solution to that problem; albeit an expensive one. 1 Increased space for necessary improvements in facilities and services is a second problem facing the provider of emergency medical services. Currently, the Rescue Squad maintains a fleet consisting of: D Four (4)Transporting Advanced Life Support Units
Two (2) Basic Life Support Ambulances I I Community Facilities 33 1999 Update December 1999 1 I
I One (1)Marine Rescue Power and Light Truck Two (2) Aluminum Rescue Boats and Trailer
I Two (2) Command Officer Cars I One (1)4-Wheel Drive Special Service Truck (used as a standby) Over 3,740 calls for service were handled by the THRS during the fiscal year ending September 30, I 1999, with 916 (or over 24%) of these being emergencies in Northampton Township. Library: Opened in 1985
I The Free Library of Northampton Township is one of the facilities located at the Township Cultural Center on Upper Holland Road in Richboro. It was formerly located in one of the buildings of the Nike base. The size of the library increased significantly when it was moved from its former facility on I Newtown-Richboro Road into the Cultural Center.
The Free Library contains about 76,000 print and non-print items, including: books, audio books- I on-tape, periodicals, pamphlets, records, audio and video cassettes, filmstrips, toys, puzzles and puppets.
Services offered include: adult and children's programs, such as story hours and the summer I reading club; information, in-person and by telephone; services for the visually handicapped; and a coin-operated photocopier. Personal computers are now available for public use.
I Library cards are issued without charge to anyone who owns property or a business, or lives in Bucks County. In January 1988, the Free Library joined the Statewide Library Card System. The Free Library joined the Bucks County Library Network in 1990. The network provides for computerized circulation I of materials and a county-wide computerized catalog. Patrons can also search the Network's electronic catalog from a home or office computer, day or night.
The Free Library is also a member of the Bucks County Free Library System which allows card I holders to borrow books from the total system collection and provides services such as book processing, cataloging, inter-library loans, rotating collections, and a central county-wide catalog. The Free Library anticipates joining the County's computerized circulation and on-line catalog system within I the next few years. In addition, the largest library facility in Bucks County, the library at the Bucks County Community I College, is located not far from Northampton. Residents who have local library cards may use the college library at no charge.
I MuniciDal Building: Extensive Municipal Complex Serves Township
The Township Complex, located on Township Road, is the center of government in Northampton. I The Administrative Building, Municipal Garage, Police Headquarters, District Justice, Fire Station, and Municipal Authority are all housed in buildings on this centrally located site. Completed in 1976, the complex provides modern quarters for the operation of the municipal government. Major I alterations and renovations to the Township Building were accomplished in 1990 to provide additional floor area. The Administration Building includes a meeting room for public meetings as well as office I Community Facilities 39 I 1999 Update December 1999 I space for the administrative functions and space for recreational activities. Expansion of the Public Works Building and an addition to the Municipal Garage were also completed in 1990. I The Township Complex is linked to the Cultural Center by means of a newly improved public street, Township Road. Space is still available within the Township Complex for further expansion. I Schools: Population Growth in Council Rock District I Northampton Township is one of five municipalities served by the Council Rock School District; the others are Newtown Borough, Newtown Township, Upper Makefield Township, and Wrightstown Township. Seven of the School District's buildings are located in Northampton; as well as the Administration and Business Offices, which are housed in the Nike base barracks and mobile units on I Twining Ford Road. The Township has two (2) secondary (junior high) school facilities and five (5) elementary schools: I Holland Junior High School - East Holland Road Richboro Junior High School - Upper Holland Road Churchville Elementary School - New Road I Hillcrest Elementary School - East Holland Road (opened in 1989) Holland Elementary School - Beverly and Crescent Roads I Richboro Elementary School - Upper Holland Road (replacing the former school on Second Street Pike in 1989) Rolling Hills Elementary School - Middle Holland Road I
Unlike many other districts which are struggling with declines in school population, Council Rock has had a steady influx of new families which has kept the school population high. Although the I Population Characteristics chapter notes that the people moving into the Northampton area tend to be established families rather than new families with few or no children, School District officials have pointed to recent trends which seem to indicate that as much as 40% of those who are moving into the NorthamptodCouncil Rock area are new families. As a consequence, the need for school classrooms I will be felt at the elementary and secondary school levels for many years to come.
The School District's total enrollment in September 1999 was 11,828 students; and over 60% of those I students resided in Northampton Township. In past years, the high school has been operating at more than 100% capacity. To alleviate this I overcrowding, the ninth grade was moved out of the high school into the junior high schools beginning in September 1986. All schools are presently utilized at capacity, with most elementary schools actually over-utilized. 1 Elementary schools now house grades K through 6 and the junior high schools grades 7 through 9. The change in the high school grade composition had an impact on the elementary schools which were I required to have temporary mobile classrooms (modular units) added to their facilities. The School , District has constructed seventy-five (75) modular classroom units in the School District and has approvals to add another thirteen (13) units. Of this total, fifty-two (52) units are in Northampton Township. I The School District is proceeding to develop two sites in the Township for a second high school and an elementary school. The high school will be located on the Morrissey tract, on the west side of a new collector road between Newtown-Richboro Road and Middle Holland Road; and the elementary school I I Community Facilities 40 1999 Update December 1999 I I
is being constructed on the southwest side of New Road, opposite Norton Drive. In cooperation with the I Township, both schools will contain indoor and outdoor athletic and recreational facilities which are intended to be jointly operated and maintained.
The School District owns a substantial tract of ground on Upper Holland Road, known as the Stehle I tract, across from the Richboro Junior High School. A portion of this property was developed as the new Richboro Elementary School; the remainder had been placed in reserve for the possibility of a secondary school facility. Subsequent studies revealed that neither school type could be accommodated, 1 as the residual property had an insufficient buildable area.
I Stormwater Management: Regulations and Improvements to Control Stormwater The Township's Subdivision and Land Development Ordinance contains stormwater management regulations (last revised in 1993) which require the construction of storm sewers and detention basins I in newly developed areas. The ordinance is not only protective, but is also diligently administered and enforced. The regulations were promulgated by the Bucks County Planning Commission pursuant to the Pennsylvania stormwater Management Act of 1978 (Act 167). In their "Neshaminy Creek I Watershed Stormwater Management Plan" the Planning Commission prepared a comprehensive hydrological study and prepared best management practices for all municipalities in the watershed in I order to avoid and/or mitigate adverse stormwater effects. In the implementation of that study, Northampton Township was required to adopt revised regulations for those portions of the Township within the Neshaminy Creek drainage basin. Rather than seek to devise separate standards for the Little Neshaminy Creek Watershed, the Township chose I to apply these new standards on a Township-wide basis.
Under the revised regulations, management systems must control stormwater so that the rate of run- I off from a 100-year storm after development is no more than seventy-five percent (75%) of the flow which existed prior to development. A 100-year storm is one which has the likelihood of occurring once I every one hundred years. The ordinance also recommends the use of designs which: Encourage infiltration of stormwater for ground water recharge through the use of basins and pervious materials, including porous paving with underground recharge beds and open block I walkways. Retard the transmission of surface pollutants, such as road oils and fertilizers, from entering I surface waters. Use oversized storm sewers with flow constrictions at discharge, energy reduction spillways. I In smaller developments located on soils suitable for recharge: utilize on-site recharge methods, including french drains, trench drains, depression recharge plantings; preserve existing vegetation, especially woodland; minimize site disturbance through limits on grading and I clustering; and refrain from altering existing topography. Utilize wet ponds, artificiavcreated wetlands, maintenance/minimum disturbance, or another I suitable alternative to accomplish pollutant control. Reduce/minimize lawns and landscaped areas; minimize/eliminate fertilization practices; I use small on-site retention basins. As a result of subdivision and land development activity during the 1970s and 1980s, perhaps more I Community Facilities 41 I 1999 Update December 1999 I than one hundred (100) detention basins, seepage pits and other stormwater management facilities were constructed within Northampton Township. Most of these facilities have been dedicated to the Township for maintenance. The Township provides routine maintenance of these facilities; I consisting principally of grass cutting during the growing season. During these routine procedures, the Township Public Works staff also inspects the outlet structures to assure that they are unobstructed and able to allow for the free flow of stormwater from these facilities. The proper functioning of I stormwater management facilities provides significant stormwater management benefits to numerous areas within the Township. I In 1992, a two million dollar ($2,000,000) bond was approved for certain stormwater management projects to remedy excessive storm run-off that was occurring in many areas that were developed prior to the 1970s. These problem areas and their solutions were: I Holland bad near UDper Holland Road and Middle Holland Road. This area was subject to severe flooding and had to be closed to traffic during periods of heavy rain. At times, the magnitude of this flooding was severe enough that water was transported across the roads onto I adjacent residential developments. This project entailed the construction of a substantial detention basin on the northwest corner of Holland and Upper Holland Roads and the installation of storm piping in Holland, Middle Holland and minor interior roads, providing much needed drainage relief. I
Bustleton Pike Area. This project involved the installation of storm piping on the east side of Bustleton Pike, near New Road. It provided relief from flooding of several residences. I
Spencer Road Area. In order to alleviate flooding conditions in Spencer Road, storm piping was installed in Spencer Road, from a point southwest of Temperance Lane to a point several I thousand feet north of Temperance Lane.
Jacksonville Road Area. Storm piping was installed in Jacksonville Road, in a northeast direction from Grenoble Road to a stream crossing under Jacksonville Road (between I Brookwood Drive and Ridgewood Place), providing relief to that road and many private properties fronting thereon. I Jacksonville Road SDur. A storm pipe was installed in an easement adjacent to Jacksonville Road, from Industrial Drive northwest to Traymore Avenue, which was connected to an existing storm pipe in Jacksonville Road. It serves to intercept overland flow from entering properties in I the Traymore Manor subdivision.
Windmill Villape Area. This project entailed the installation of piping in and around Vanderveer Avenue, Rotterdam North, and Dutch Drive to provide relief to an inadequate storm I sewer system.
Miscellaneous Outfall Structures. The outlet structures of five (5) existing stormwater I management basins' were modified so as to provide multi-stage discharge structures. This design would continue the discharge rates during major storms, but would better protect downstream properties through the provision of additional storage in the early stages of major I storms and/or during more minor storms.
The Township intends to provide a stormwater management relief system in the Casey View subdivision (an area roughly bounded by Elm Avenue, Holland Road, Robin Road and Cameron I Drive).
Another problem area which the Township is concerned is Lakeside Drive, off of Churchville Lane. I I Community Facilities 42 1999 Update December 1999 I This area has no storm sewers for storm drainage and often floods. Several developments in this part I of the Township drain into the Churchville Reservoir, and a storm sewer easement would be required to construct the necessary facilities to alleviate this problem.
I I I I I Community Facilities 43 I 1999 Update December 1999 I I CIRCULATION The Automobile is the Primarv Means of Transportation
I Although the main roads in Northampton were built on old stagecoach routes from the pre- Revolutionary days, most of the Township streets have been built as residential access roads as the I Township developed. The main state roads providing access through the Township are: Route 332 (Jacksonville Road, Almshouse Road, and Richboro Road); Route 232.(Second Street Pike); Route 532 (Buck Road), and Bustleton Pike. These arterial highways carry through traffic but also provide access to facilities in the I communities through which they travel. There are no limited access roads in Northampton, nor are there any four-lane roads. These primary state roads which provide access to Northampton are, in I many cases, 22 foot-wide roads with little or no shoulder area. The minor state routes are Almshouse Road (the western-most portion), Twining Ford Road, I Holland Road, Churchville Lane, and Bridgetown Pike. Other roads are Township roads or minor residential streets.
I Traffic Volumes Hiyhest on Maior State Roads
Counts of the number of vehicles using the Township roads can help to identify traffic problems and I transportation needs. Traffic counts conducted by the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission in Northampton indicate that the highest traffic volumes are along the routes which not I only provide access to Northampton facilities, but which also carry traffic through the Township. The highest traffic volumes are recorded in the Richboro area where the number of vehicles on Second Street Pike can exceed 22,000 per day. Second Street Pike carries traffic from the Roosevelt Boulevard area of Philadelphia, through several suburban communities, and across Bucks County to I the Delaware River. It also serves as the main shopping street in Richboro. Streets feeding into Second Street Pike (Almshouse and Newtown-Richboro Roads) also have high traffic volumes in the Richboro I area. Holland Road is a major thoroughfare through the Township and carries high volumes of traffic. Daily average volumes of approximately 11,000 vehicles were counted on Holland Road from 1991 to I 1995. This road provides access to the many new residential developments in the eastern section of Northampton, as well as carrying traffic across the Township.
The other major traffic carrier is Buck Road (Route 532) which runs from Philadelphia, through the I heavily populated areas of Lower Southampton Township, across Northampton, and through Bucks I County to the Delaware River. Public Transportation Service is Limited in Northampton I The public transportation service within Northampton is limited to two bus routes which provide connections to other public transportation lines in Philadelphia. SEPTA bus Route #58 crosses the southeastern corner of Northampton as it travels over Bridgetown Pike and onto Bustleton Pike. This I route provides service to the Market-Frankford transit lines in North Philadelphia. I Circulation 45 I 1999 Update December 1999 I Another bus route is the Newtown Shuttle Bus, also operated by SEPTA, which runs along roughly the same route as the R8 High Speed Line (formerly the Reading Railroad Line - Newtown Branch) with stops at Churchville and Holland in the lower part of the Township. This bus line connects with the I present terminus of the R8 High Speed Line at Fox Chase which provides service to Center City Philadelphia. I SEPTA bus Route #211, which had provided shuttle service between the Warminster station of the R2 High Speed Line and. the industrial parks in the Jacksonville Road corridor, was recently discontinued. I SEPTA has proposed the reopening of its Newtown high speed line and the use of lightweight diesel rail cars along the line. The transformation of this inactive rail line into a pedestrianhicycle trail has been suggested by others as a better alternative. The track is in good condition, and the rapid I population growth in the area gives it good potential for passenger service, according to the SEPTA study. New sidings and signals would have to be installed. The line would carry twenty-two trains per day and would be geared towards commuter traffic to Center City Philadelphia. Stops would be located I at Churchville, Holland, and Village Shires.
The R1 High Speed Line (formerly the Reading Railroad Line - West Trenton Branch), which goes through the neighboring municipalities of Middletown and Lower Southampton, provides some train 1 service for Township residents. I Some Intersection Improvements Are Proposed Road improvements which are part of the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation's I (PennDOT's) 12-year program include replacing the Bristol Road bridge over the Conrail railroad (completed in 1995); and emergency repairs (1994) and a replacement bridge (1998) for PA Route 332 over the Neshaminy Creek. The installation of warning signals on and resurfacing of Bustleton Pike in the area of Willow Road (Herzog's Corner) was designated to be completed in 1998. I
Additionally, PennDOT plans to replace the Buck Road bridge over Leonards Creek and the Bridgetown Pike bridge over the Neshaminy Creek (1998). The Bucks County Planning Commission I solicits proposed projects every year for consideration by PennDOT for its upward 12-year program. I Street Lighting
Current policy for providing street lighting dictates that road intersections, where at least one of the roads involved is a major highway, should be considered for street lighting. Several studies have been I performed by the Police Department identifying intersections of major roads where street lighting would be beneficial. From these studies and subsequent recommendations, the Board of Supervisors have authorized installations of street lights at such intersections. I
The Township, in 1987, acquired the then-existing street lighting system from the Philadelphia Electric Co. under a recently approved program initiated by the Pennsylvania Public Utilities I Commission. The policy of attempting to retain some vestiges of Northampton's rural tradition, while providing lighting at major intersections in the interest of public safety, is expected to continue. Past history suggests that an average of five to ten street lights will be installed annually in accordance with the current policy; at an average cost of $1,500 to $2,000. 1 I I Circulation 46 1999 Update December 1999 I 1 I Pedestrian and Bicvcle Transportation Because of the size and development pattern of Northampton, pedestrian movement from one part of the Township to another is almost impossible. Within individual neighborhoods, sidewalks and low traffic volumes make it easier to travel on foot or on bicycle. But the narrow arterial roads and high I traffic volumes do not encourage travel other than by vehicle.
Pedestrian movement within the Richboro commercial area is difficult. There are sections of I sidewalk within the shopping district, but they are not continuous, and it is difficult to move from one group of stores to another except by vehicle. It is not possible to park in one location and then shop I throughout the district. With the exception of the bike paths within Tyler State Park, there are no bicycle paths in the I Township. Major Accident Locations
I The location with the highest number of accidents in the Township is Township Road and Newtown- Richboro Road. This is a complex intersection in a high volume area; opposite a main driveway to the I Richboro Shopping Center and within 500 feet of Second Street Pike. Other major accident areas, though not as serious, are: I - Almshouse Road and Jacksonville Road. This intersection was signalized in early 1998. - Bustleton Pike and Elm Avenue I - Buck Road and Holland Road I - Buck Road and Rocksville Road - Holland Road and Newtown-Richboro Road I Traffic counts are relatively high at these intersections, contributing to the accident rate. I I I I I
Circulation 47 1999 Update December 1999
I I UTILITIES, SOLID WASTE,AND OTHER SERVICES Sanitarv Sewers
I The sanitary sewer system within the Township is currently operated by the Northampton, Bucks County, Municipal Authority. Most of the developed area in the Township is served by sanitary sewers. II Some areas that are not served would require pumping stations to bring them into the system. The first sewers were installed in the early 1970s, with developers doing some of the work and the bulk of it being done by contracts that were paid for through a Bond Issue. Subsequently, most of the sewer expansion work was done by developers as part of their subdivisions. The Authority itself has constructed some sewers to meet severe needs but, in general, most of the new work has been constructed by developers. In May 1997, there were 11,653 sewer customers in Northampton Township served by the ~'I Authority. The Municipal Authority requires that each developer size the sanitary sewers within his development in order to take in the entire drainage area. This may require construction well beyond I the boundaries of the individual development, but the developer is protected by a reimbursement clause that provides him with some repayment from future developers who utilize the lines that he constructed.
The Northampton, Bucks County, Municipal Authority does not operate a treatment facility, but I discharges all sanitary effluent to the City of Philadelphia Northeast Treatment Plant by means of the Bucks County Water and Sewer Authority's Neshaminy Interceptor. A small portion of the Township does drain into Upper Southampton Township's system and this also goes to the Philadelphia treatment I plant via the Poquessing interceptor.
The existing sewer system serves only a portion of the area northwest of Hatboro Road. Because of I the topography of this area, it was necessary to install a pumping station to serve several new developments. A large area of ground along Pulinski Road was developed and provided with sanitary sewers. Future development in the Pulinski Road area will either require another pumping station or u enlargement of the existing one. Without public sewerage, and given the severe soil limitations for septic systems, the primary development option has traditionally been the rural residence, with an on-site system on a ten acre lot. I Other types of on-site systems, such as sand mounds, are permitted by state regulation on some of the soils in this portion of the Township.
The most serious problem regarding sanitary sewage disposal is the industrial park area on I Jacksonville Road which does not have public sewerage. The Bucks County Health Department has expressed concern about the disposal of industrial wastes in septic systems and their effect on the water quality in the area. Until recently, when public water service was made available to this area, ground I water from wells was the only source of water. Other problem areas include the Traymore Manor, Grenoble Manor and Harvest Acres residential areas. 1 An earlier plan to provide sanitary sewers to serve the industrial parks and the Traymore Manor area in the western portion of the Township involved the construction of a sewage treatment plant with Wanvick Township along the Little Neshaminy Creek. This plan was determined to be economically I unfeasible. In January 1997, the Township adopted an update to the Official Sewage Facilities Plan of Northampton Township and submitted the Plan to the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental I Protection for approval. The update addressed the provision of sewage facilities throughout the Little I Neshaminy Creek drainage area of the Township. Collection sewers and pumping facilities were Utilities, Solid Waste and Other Services 49 1 1999 Update December 1999 I proposed for most of the area southwest of Almshouse Road, plus the Traymore Manor, Grenoble Manor and Harvest Acres developments and the planned Clover Hill development located northeast of Almshouse Road. Treatment will be at the Northeast Philadelphia Wastewater Treatment Plant. The I remainder of the Little Neshaminy Creek drainage area, including an existing residential area southwest of Almshouse Road with ten acre lots, will continue to be served by on-lot sewage disposal systems. An On-Lot Septage Management Program will be developed and implemented by the I Township as part of this alternative to regulate the use of on-lot systems within the drainage area.
Public Water B
Public water is also provided by the Northampton, Bucks County, Municipal Authority. The original system was started by developers with the drilling of the first well in 1967. Continued construction I under the Authority was performed with a Bond Issue being floated for the work. Since the original system was built, developers have been providing the extensions as they build within the Township, under the direction of the Authority. I In May 1997, the water system provided service to 9,464 customers. Approximately half of the water used comes from the eleven (11) deep wells operated by the Authority. These wells tap into the Stockton Formation, which is the geological formation underlying most of Northampton Township. It is I considered a very good source of ground water. The balance of the water required by the Authority is purchased from the Bucks County Water and Sewer Authority, which in turn purchases it from the City of Philadelphia. In summer months, more water is purchased from the Bucks County Water and Sewer I Authority than is produced by the wells. During winter, this trend is reversed. The Northampton, Bucks County, Municipal Authority has two (2) more wells that have been 1 approved by the Delaware River Basin Commission (DRBC), and is in the process of putting the last of these wells into production.
There are four (4) ground storage tanks within the system capable of storing seven million I (7,000,000) gallons of water. The Municipal Authority has a long range Capital Improvement Plan that calls for the construction of additional ground storage tanks. A three million (3,000,000) gallon tank and pump house is being installed on a five acre site in the industrial park area; and another three I million (3,000,000) gallon tank is planned for the Upper Holland Road site. With the newest tank facility, service to the industrial parks and Traymore Manor, in the western 1 part of the Township, is being provided. Service in the parks does not have the traditional dual feed, but rather is connected to the main which presently terminates in Pulinski Road at Jacksonville Road. The three million (3,000,000) gallon storage tank handles the cushion in place of a dual line and, in addition, a deep well is planned at this site as an additional source of supply. I
Developers are continuing the practice of expanding the water system. It is the Authority's policy to have developers of large tracts donate land to the Authority for the purpose of their well development I program. This is a program which should continue. All water is constantly tested and meets all local, State, and Federal requirements. I Interconnections with private wells is not permitted. All water sold by the Municipal Authority is metered and the Authority has a strict water leakage prevention program.
Located within the Township is the Churchville Reservoir which is owned by the Philadelphia 1 Suburban Water Company. The water in this reservoir is used to augment the flow of the Neshaminy Creek; and none of this water is available to the residents of Northampton Township. If the Philadelphia Suburban Water Company should ever relinquish the Churchville Reservoir for the use of B
Utilities, Solid Waste and Other Services 50 1 1999 Update December 1999 I the Municipal Authority, a treatment plant, pump station and distribution mains would have to be I constructed in order to tie into the existing system. At an estimated cost of more than five million dollars ($5,000,000.), such construction would not be economically feasible.
I Media
Because of its proximity to Philadelphia, the major newspapers, television and radio stations I serving Northampton are based in Philadelphia. In addition to these metropolitan media, there are newspaper, radio and television services in the Northampton area. I The Bucks County Courier Times is a daily paper serving Lower and Central Bucks County, including Northampton Township. Their main office is in Levittown, but they maintain an office on Newtown-Richboro Road adjacent to the Township Complex. Township news is also reported in the I Neighbors section of the Philadelphia Inquirer. There are several weekly papers which circulate in the Northampton-Newtown area, such as the Bucks County Advance. The local radio stations are WBCB, which is located in Levittown, and WBUX, 1 in Doylestown. WCHR in Yardley and WIMG in Washington Crossing also provide local radio programming. I Cable television service is provided by Suburban Cable, Inc. This cable television service serves several Central Bucks County municipalities, including Northampton Township; and has its headquarters on York Road, Warwick Township. As of April 1997, 10,448 of the 12,800 homes in the Township had cable television service. Suburban Cable has a municipal access channel which is I utilized by the Township to provides information to residents about Township events and issues.
I Website
Since 1997 residents and other interested persons can access a profile of the Township and meetings I and events information through the world-wide web. The Township may be accessed through http://www.Northampton Township.com.
I Solid Waste Management
Prior to 1989, trash disposal was provided to Township residents by independent trash haulers. I Several companies had collection routes within the Township and the trash was taken to landfills for disposal. The Pennsylvania Solid Waste Management Act (No. 97 of 1980) required Northampton Township to adopt a solid waste management plan and submit same to the Pennsylvania Department of I Environmental Resources (DER) (now the Pensylvania Department of Environmental Protection). With the reduction of state licensed landfill space in the 1970s, the cost and availability to Pennsylvania residents of solid waste disposal in properly operated landfills was uncertain.
I Recognizing the need for a long-term solution to the solid waste management problem, in 1984 Northampton Township joined in the formation of the Southwest Bucks Solid Waste Committee (SWBSWC). Consisting of Ivyland Borough and the townships of Northampton, Upper Southampton, I Lower Southampton and Warminster, SWBSWC attempted to address the impending crisis with a regional approach. I During the succeeding two (2) years, the SWBSWC held public hearings and reviewed several solid waste management alternatives. Waste volume reduction programs such as recycling and I Utilities, Solid Waste and Other Services 51 I 1999 Update December 1999 I composting were also reviewed. The SWBSWC recommended the siting and construction of a 200 ton per day mass burn or waste-to-energy plant. In a 1985 report, the panel stated its belief that such a facility would be technically feasible, environmentally acceptable and economically viable. It was I projected that a waste-to-energy plant could handle all of the household and commercial solid wastes generated by the SWBSWC communities through the year 2000 at a lower cost than was being charged at the time. Furthermore, it was envisioned that the plant would be able to create revenue by selling steam I to industrial and military base customers.
Individual member municipalities were unable to agree, however, on a location for the waste-to- energy plant. Arguments against such a facility include the potential for increased traffic volumes 1 and the emission of unknown toxins. Others believe that if a well .enforced recycling program were established in the region, then the need for a waste-to-energy plant would be precluded. I In November 1988, Northampton, Warminster, Lower Southampton and Upper Southampton Townships, via their participation in the SWBSWC awarded a joint contract to the lowest responsible bidder, Waste Automation, Inc. (a subsidiary of Waste Management, Inc.) for the collection of I residential solid waste. The contract was for a five (5) year term and included recycling. A contract between the SWBSWC and the Bucks County Commissioners was entered into for the acceptance of recyclable materials and a return of the profits to the municipalities. I A breakdown of the refuse management environment into individual components took place in the period between 1989 and 1994. Initially, the Township recycled three materials: newspapers, clear glass and aluminum cans. In 1994, Northampton Township entered into a ten year contract with I Wheelabator-Falls, Inc. in an effort to guarantee a means of disposal at a more stabilized price. The Township now has separate contracts covering: I Curbside collection and hauling of refuse to disposal sites; Composting of yard waste; and I Collection and marketing of recyclable materials.
The economic benefits of cost avoidance (in the case of composting yard waste) led to the mandatory I separation of yard waste from household solid waste. New revenues were generated by the mandatory separation and sale of aluminum, clear glass and newspapers. Subsequently, recycling was expanded to include colored glass, plastics, bi-metal cans and magazines in 1994. With the volatility of the I recycling market and the expected changes in technology affecting solid waste management, any and all decisions in this area should be made with an eye toward maintaining an ability to respond to any significant change that could affect the Township's current service and/or programs. I Other Utilities D Other major utilities are provided by the metropolitan area services. Bell of Pennsylvania provides telephone service. Gas and electric services are provided by the PECO Energy Company. I The PECO Energy Company's electric power line No. 132 traverses the Township along the western boundary, adjacent to Ivyland Borough and Warwick Township. Two (2) interstate gas transmission lines bisect the Township: I Transcontinental Gas Line, three 30"-36"and 42" natural gas lines; and
Sun Pipeline Co., an 8" welded steel oil pipeline. 1
Utilities, Solid Waste and Other Services Fa I 1999 Update December 1999 1 I In addition to causing visual and public safety impacts, these major utility facilities often serve to limit the development potential of the properties they traverse or border. I
Utilities, Solid Waste and Other Services 53 I 1999 Update December 1999
1
I FUTURE LAND USE PLAN
The Future Land Use Plan is the most important single element of the Comprehensive Plan because I it reflects the goals of the community with respect to the future development pattern of the Township and forms a basis for the Zoning Ordinance, the legal tool for regulating development. The philosophy of the Future Land Use Plan is to depart as little as possible from the pattern of development which has I emerged during the past decade while accommodating the growth expected to occur in coming years in a desirable fashion. This general philosophy resulted from many discussions among Planning Commission members and with the public who expressed their views to the Commission. It was also the Township's desire that the Future Land Use Plan be coordinated with, and appropriately correspond to, I contemporary land use plans of surrounding municipalities, Bucks County and the Delaware Valley I Region. Local Perspective I The future land use plans of neighboring municipalities, as depicted in the Future Land Use Map - Region, were reviewed to determine the various interrelationships between the plans; as well as any possible inconsistencies between land uses or major public improvements. They include:
I Lower Southampton Township Comprehensive Plan (1980, unadopted) - This plan shows low density and medium density residential areas along its common boundary with Northampton, which is consistent with the residential zoning and uses in the southern corner of Northampton I Township.
Upper Southampton Township Comprehensive Plan Update (1998) - A 1968 plan proposed low I density and medium density residential areas along its common boundary with Northampton. These designations are complimentary to existing single-family residential uses in Northampton along Bristol Road. Although the update does not contain a formal land use plan, it I calls for the continuation of existing land use patterns. Warminster Township Comprehensive Plan (1962) - In this outdated plan, the Warminster Naval Air Warfare Center (NAWC) is a dominant feature in the Bristol Road comdor. Low I density and medium density residential areas comprise the balance of lands along its common boundary with Northampton. The NAWC has been closed, but the Facility Reuse Plan to redevelop the property with a variety of residential, nonresidential, educational/institutional I and parkhecreational uses has been endorsed by Warminster Township. The ultimate redevelopment of the NAWC will likely involve community, economic, and traffic impacts on Northampton, but they are unknown at this time.
I A Comprehensive Plan for the Borough of Ivyland (1968) - With the exception of small commercial and industrial area in the vicinity of the former New Hope & Ivyland railroad, Ivyland's relatively small common boundary along Bristol Road is planned for medium I density residential uses. The high density residential development planned for the western corner of Northampton Township would require significant traffic improvements to the intersection of Bristol and Jacksonville Roads and would require sanitary sewer service by the I Warminster Township Sewer Authority. Warwick Township Comprehensive Plan Update (1990 & June 1998 Draft Update) - The future land use plan shows the contiguous area to the north of Almshouse Road as a low density "rural I area" (2 acre lot size); the area between Almshouse and Creek Roads as suburban residential; I and the balance of the common boundary between Creek and Bristol Roads as planned Future Land Use Plan 53 I 1999 Update December 1999 I
industrial. These three land use categories mirror the future land uses planned for Northampton. I Newtown Region Joint Municipal Comprehensive Plan (1997) - Wrightstown and Newtown Townships are both included in this plan. Existing quarry and industrial uses in Wrightstown Township, along and adjacent to Swamp Road, are proposed to continued in the 1997 update. A I high density residential area has also been shown between Swamp Road and the Neshaminy Creek in adjacent to Rushland Village. Sewage facilities for the high density residential development is proposed to involve treated effluent with land application on adjoining zoning I districts. As the lands are segregated from Northampton by the Neshaminy Creek, negative impacts from this area is generally limited to truck traffic associated with the quarries. The balance of Wrightstown Township along the Northampton boundary is low density residential. I Tyler State Park and the Bucks County Community College are depicted as public purpose areas along the Neshaminy Creek, north and west of Newtown-Richboro Road, in the Newtown Township portion. Existing medium density residential development to the south and east of I Newtown-Richboro Road comprises the balance of the contiguous area of Newtown Township. These are existing uses opposite similar uses in Northampton: Tyler State Park and clustered multifamily developments. I
Middletown Township Comprehensive Plan (1994) - With several exceptions, the majority of lands adjacent to Northampton are planned as medium density residential. In the northwest I corner several existing institutional uses, the George School, Newtown Friends School and St. Mary Hospital, are shown as low density residential; and a continuing care retirement community, Pennswood Village, is recognized as a high density residential use. A railroad line is on the opposite side of the Neshaminy Creek from low density residential uses along I Bridgetown Pike in Northampton. Not unlike Wrightstown and Newtown Townships, the Neshaminy Creek serves as a wide buffer and also effectively limits through traffic to those few regional highways which bridge the creek. I
Four Boroughs Regional Comprehensive Plan (1975) - Langhorne Borough, also across the Neshaminy Creek from Northampton, has no direct highway connections to the township. It is I also separated from the township be the railroad line which parallels the creek. With the exception of some park lands, the north side of Langhorne is planned for medium density residential uses. I . In 1989, when the Future Land Use Plan was originally produced, several of the plans then in effect were found to be sufficiently out of date, particularly regarding existing land use and proposed regional highway and utility improvements. During the past nine years, Warwick, Middletown and Upper I Southampton Townships; as well as the Newtown Area Joint Municipal Planning Area have adopted new comprehensive plans. Warwick Township is in the process of adopting its comprehensive plan update. Despite the ages of the Lower Southampton and Warminster Township plans, the 1998 Future I Land Use Plan is consistent with all of the land use plans cited above.
Countv Perspective I
A new Bucks County Comprehensive Plan was adopted in December 1993, replacing a 1977 Plan. The 1993 Plan contains a growth management element with a goal of "foster[ingl land use planning I and controls which allow for orderly growth" (page 67). The continued and increased implementation of the development district concept is the central theme of the Plan. This growth management technique requires that development be properly planned, regulated and coordinated in concentrated areas best I equipped to accommodate growth. I Future Land Use Plan 5t 1999 Update December 1999 I I
I In a major deviation from the 1977 Plan, the 1993 Plan neither contains a Future Land Use Map nor "the precise boundaries of potential future growth;" leaving those decisions to the fifty-four I municipalities "as intended by the Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code (MPC)." As to Northampton Township, the Plan states on page 69 that the Township: I "grew considerably and [is] projected to continue growing substantially in the next 30 years.. .The Newtown and Northampton planning areas have experienced tremendous growth in the past. This is due to a variety of factors including the relative location of the planning areas between lower Bucks and the rapidly growing Doylestown planning area. I Transportation access and the availability of infrastructure make the areas attractive for more residential and non-residential development. Further, the recent commercial, industrial and office development in these areas provide continued employment I opportunities. It is anticipated, however, that growth will continue to occur at a slightly lesser rate due to increased development saturation of the areas." I As shown on Table 16 of the Plan, the Northampton Planning Area (Ivyland Borough, Northampton Township, Upper Southampton Township, Warminster Township, and Wanvick Township) exhibits the following positive growth factors: adequate infrastructure & services; adequate transportation access; concentrated development; adequate employment opportunities; adequate recreational I facilities; absence of environmental constraints; adequate shopping facilities; available land; and a good, centralized location. The table contains a single negative factor: traffic congestion.
I Given the lack of specificity in the Plan, this Future Land Use Plan is not inconsistent with the growth management system advocated by the Bucks County Comprehensive Plan. I Regional Perspective
In furtherance of goals contained in a Policy Agenda, adopted by the Delaware Valley Regional I Planning Commission in December 1994, the Year 2020 Land Use and Transportation Plan (Year 2020 Plan) is being prepared to provide a framework for state, county and municipal governments, enabling them to better plan for their communities. Guiding Regional Growth, DVRPC Year 2020 Plan, one of the I elements of the Year 2020 Plan, addresses the future land uses of the region in three related areas: development, open space and agriculture. Two alternative scenarios of future development are I presented: A "Trend" scenario, which quantifies the amount of acreage that could be developed if the region continues on its current trend of sprawl development; and
I A "Centers and Corridors" scenario, which focuses future growth in and around existing communities (centers) and along the primary intermodal transportation routes (corridors) in I order to create a more efficient and compact pattern of development. Although the scale of this plan is not comparable to this plan or the Bucks County Plan, its spatial goals are not inconsistent. Future growth areas are generally contiguous to existing developed areas I with proposed sewer and water facilities. Northampton Township is depicted as a Year 2020 "Growth Center," an emerging center forecast for growth, which will see an increasing concentration of people, employment and services. With the exception of existing park lands, proposed open spaces along the Neshaminy, Little Neshaminy and Mill Creek Valleys and Churchville Reservoir, and a "rural or I agricultural" area in the northern corner of the township, Northampton Township is depicted on the I Land Use Plan as either "developed" or "future growth area." Future Land Use Plan 55 I 1999 Update December 1999 I I Recommended Plan Focusing on the major pieces of vacant land in the Township, the Commission developed the I following recommendations:
Residential Land Use I
Northampton is primarily a residential township, and the Planning Commission wants to retain the overall residential quality of the community. The bulk of the remaining vacant land has been I earmarked for future residential growth. The Future Land Use Map - Northampton Township shows that, in general, future residential development will be allowed at densities similar to that already existing in adjacent areas. The Housing Plan included in this Comprehensive Plan discusses the I specific densities and housing types recommended for the residential areas. This section presents the overall pattern of residential land uses and their relationship with other land uses.
Low Densitv Residential I
The area above Hatboro Road is intended to serve as a low density area with four (4) residential designations: 1 Environmental Protection - Areas which have been subdivided for large lot single-family detached uses (rural residences) due to severe limitations for on-site sanitary sewage I disposal are recommended for a single-family detached zoning classification, with a five (5) acre minimum lot size.
Countrv Residential - Properties with environmental limitations should be considered for a I single-family zoning district with two (2) acre minimum lot sizes. In order to better protect environmentally sensitive areas, clustering of single-family residential lots would also be appropriate for this district. I Agricultural Preservation - Agricultural areas where clustering of single-family residential lots is permitted as a method for preserving existing agricultural uses. I Neivhborhood Conservation - Existing residential developments would retain their present 40,000 square foot lot size classification. I These districts are consistent with the type of residential development occurring there now and with the development in adjacent Wanvick Township. I Other low density residential areas are located along Bustleton Pike, between Richboro and the Upper Southampton border, and adjacent to the Churchville Reservoir. The low density areas around Churchville Reservoir provide a good transition from the water and open space of the reservoir to higher density residential areas. The areas along Bustleton Pike have either been established as low I density areas already or have substantial amounts of land within the floodplain which make it unsuitable for higher density uses. I Low density areas in the lower portion of the Township include the lands along the Neshaminy Creek below Stony Ford Road and the large tracts of undeveloped land roughly contained within the boundaries formed by Buck Road, Mill Creek, and Neshaminy Creek. I I Future Land Use Plan 56 1999 Update December 1999 I I I Medium Densitv Residential Medium density residential areas are recommended for the portions of the Township which have been developed at these densities during the past twenty (20) years. These include the areas between I Hatboro Road and Bustleton Pike and the area below Worthington Mill Road, the areas around Richboro, and the area which extends through the center of the Township between Churchville I Reservoir and the higher density areas along the Neshaminy Creek. High Densitv Residential
Areas designated as multi-use residential areas have been located in two portions of the I Township: the area now used for higher density residential development along the Neshaminy Creek below Holland Road and the area below Holland and above the Lower Southampton border, where new higher density residential development exists. Multi-use residential areas are ones in which a mix 'I of higher density uses may be developed. This follows the pattern already established for these areas, but allows for some expansion in the area along Newtown-Richboro Road, west of St. Leonards Road.
Additional senior citizen housing would be appropriate to compliment existing housing in the 'I Richboro area.
Restricted residential uses have been designated for the western corner of the Township closest to I Ivyland Borough. This incorporates an existing small lot residential area and the area zoned R-5 in the present Zoning Ordinance. Restricted residential uses would include small lot residential I development, senior citizen housing, as well as manufactured and mobile homes. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR RESIDENTIAL USE
I In general, new areas should be developed at gross densities similar to those established by existing nearby residential developments.
I The overall density of the Township should be based on the housing demand as forecast in the Housing Plan. I Continue to keep lower density uses in the area northwest of Hatboro Road Allow for the development of a variety of higher density uses in:
I - in the Newtown-RichboroRoad/St. Leonards RoadMolland Road/Upper Holland Road area, I - in proximity to the Richboro commercial district, and - in the restricted residential area I in order to increase the supply of affordable housing in Northampton. I I I Future Land Use Plan 37 I 1999 Update December 1999 I Institutional Land Use I There are many small scattered institutions within Northampton. The types of uses which are considered to be institutions are: churches and religious facilities, schools and educational facilities, cemeteries, township facilities, utilities, military facilities, hospitals and clinics. The existing I institutional land uses have been recognized in the Future Land Use Plan and designated as future institutional uses. I RECOMMENDATIONS FOR INSTITUTIONAL USE
Maintain institutional land use patterns in areas where they currently exist. I Designate a new site for a new senior high school in the vicinity of Holland Road and Newtown- Richboro Road; and a site for a new elementary school on New Road. I Park and Recreation Land Use I There are several large park and recreation uses within Northampton, such as Tyler State Park and the Churchville Reservoir. Golf courses, Township and County parks, and preserved open space have been recognized in the Future Land Use Plan and designated as future park and recreation uses. I Appropriate areas for future Township parks are described in the Township's Recreation, Park and Open Space Plan. Because many alternative properties have been listed in the Recreation, Park and Open Space Plan it was deemed inappropriate to show any of them in the Future Land Use Plan. I RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PARK AND RECREXTION USE I Designate golf courses as recreation land uses. Provide for additional township recreational uses in accordance with the Recreation, Park and I Open Space Plan. I Commercial Land Use The Township has four (4) commercial areas: 1 - Richboro, the largest and most centrally located;
- Holland, which is second largest and expanding; I - Churchville, which has only a few commercial facilities; and I - Village Shires, a commercial area which was planned in conjunction with the Village Shires residential development.
There are a few isolated commercial facilities which do not lie within these districts, but the bulk of I the commercial development is found in these four (4) areas.
The Richboro area has the widest variety of commercial uses. Shopping centers with supermarkets I
Future Land Use Plan 33 I 1999 Update December 1999 I I
and other major commercial facilities are found at the edges of the commercial core, while smaller I buildings along Second Street Pike, Almshouse Road, and Bustleton Pike house offices, restaurants, banks, and other small retail and service establishments. Because of its central location and relatively good access, it serves as a commercial core for the Township. Most of the daily and weekly I shopping needs can be met within this area. The new commercial developments on Almshouse Road contain small shops and offices which add to the variety of goods and services found in the Richboro I commercial district. The Holland commercial area at Buck Road and Holland Road, though smaller than Richboro, has been expanding in recent years and contains a variety of commercial uses, including a major restaurant, professional offices, service stations, and banks. It does not have the same range of I commercial activities as Richboro and is located near the edge of the Township. Residents in this portion of Northampton, however, are within easy driving distance of the major commercial centers in I neighboring municipalities where their shopping needs can be adequately met. The Churchville area, historically a crossroads village like Holland, has a few commercial uses. In order to maintain its historic residential character, the introduction of additional commercial uses I would be inappropriate. The Village Shires shopping area is designed to provide convenience shopping for nearby residents.
I Because the Township wants to continue discouraging strip commercial uses along its major highways, the Comprehensive Plan recommends maintaining the same general boundaries for the commercial districts as presently exist. There are numerous examples in Lower Bucks County of I commercials strips along major roads, and Northampton has successfully avoided this land use pattern. A small convenience commercial area is planned to better serve Township residents in the I western corner of the Township. The 1989 Comprehensive Plan recommended three special office sites for the Richboro commercial area. These districts were intended to contain professional offices, in order to provide balance and variety of services within the commercial area. One of the districts was developed with age restricted I housing, a use found to be complementary to nearby commercial and residential uses. A second district is in the process of being developed wit age restricted housing. The development of a community ambulance facility will be occurring on the remaining site in the Richboro commercial I area. Together, these uses will serve to discourage strip commercial development, improve the delivery of emergency services, provide a wider customer base for commercial uses, and better serve the I residential needs of the elderly. The shopping centers at the edges of the Richboro district provide good end points for the district. There is room within the Richboro district for commercial growth, even without expanding the boundaries of the district. Many former residences have been converted to commercial uses. There are I numerous properties within the district which have the potential for conversion; and a major parcel of land on the southwest corner of Second Street Pike and Almshouse Road has been assembled and consolidated for a proposed shopping center. The pattern which has emerged in Richboro is that the I shopping centers provide the basic choice of goods needed and the smaller establishments provide specialty goods and services. I Pedestrian movement within the Richboro district is somewhat hampered by the lack of sidewalks in some areas. It is difficult to walk down the street from one store to another, and most people reach their destination by car. The successful conversion of the small residential structures into small commercial outlets will require better pedestrian access. These buildings are not designed for I highway access and customers may have to reach them by parking in a parking lot and then walking. I Future Land Use Plan 5B I 1999 Update December 1999 I
The Township recently embarked on an ambitious plan to revitalize and improve the Richboro district through the appointment of the Richboro 2000 Committee. The Committee will be establishing I design guidelines for buildings and structures and will address urgently needed improvements to vehicular and pedestrian circulation within the Richboro district. I The Commercial and Industrial Areas Plan in this document provides details on the development of the commercial areas. 1 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR COMMERCIAL USE Maintain the present boundaries of the commercial districts in Holland, Churchville, and Village I Shires; and revise the boundaries of the commercial districts in Richboro to coincide with property lines. 1 Support the conversion of properties within the commercial zone to commercial uses. Permit multi-family residential uses in commercial areas. I Permit convenience commercial uses in close proximity to multi-family residential areas, particularly agerestricted housing I Investigate the provision of a pedestrian system through the Richboro area to allow for pedestrian circulation. I Devise design guidelines and plan circulation improvements for the Richboro area,
Consider the preparation of an economic development plan to better attract and retain businesses, including professional offices. I
Industrial Land Use I
The 1964 Comprehensive Plan recommended that industrial uses be located in two well designed and well buffered areas, with general industry being recommended in the Jacksonville Road area and researchloffice uses recommended for the area along Holland Road between Newtown-Richboro Road I and Upper Holland Road. The purpose of designating these areas was to provide a balance of land uses within the Township. Because of the proximity to other industrial uses in Ivyland and Warminster, the Jacksonville Road area had been previously and appropriately zoned for industry and its location I made sense.
All the industrial uses in the Township are located in the industrial parks along Jacksonville Road. I There are now four (4) industrial parks between Jacksonville Road and the Township boundary. The parks have internal access roads and are subdivided into lots of approximately 2-3 acres. The Holland Road site was never developed for industry and was not recommended for industrial development in the 1989 Comprehensive Plan Update. I
The industrial area is now served by public water, and &e installation of public sewers is planned in the next several years to arrest the deterioration of the ground water caused by the disposal of I industrial wastes through on-site septic systems in that part of the Township. The Future Land Use Plan recommends maintaining the area for which industrial uses are recommended. I Vacant lots within the industrial parks as well as adjacent undeveloped parcels allow for some I Future Land Use Plan 80 1999 Update December 1999 I I
flexibility and limited future growth. Upon the successful extension of public sewer to this area and the I development of any remaining vacant industrial park properties, the Township should reconsider the I appropriateness of expanding areas for industrial uses. RECOMRlENDATIONS FOR INDUSTRIAL USE I Continue to concentrate industrial development in the areas along Jacksonville Road where industry presently exists. I Mow infill development of vacant parcels within these areas. Provide public sewer services to this area to reduce the threat of ground water contamination in the I industrial area as well as in nearby residential areas. 1 I I I I I I I I I I I Future Land Use Plan 61 I 1999 Update December 1999
I
I AGRICULTURE PLAN
The annual conversion of thousands of acres of farmland into other uses has become a national I concern. Because of its long heritage as an agricultural county, the loss of farmland in Bucks County municipalities during the past two decades has led to a number of strategies designed to slow the transformation of farms to development.
I Northampton's gently rolling terrain and prime agricultural soils have made it an important agricultural area since its founding. However, the area devoted to farming has been steadily diminishing. The reasons for farmland conversion are complex: urban growth pressures, the I unprofitablity of farming, and the tax structure are some of the factors which encourage landowners to sell land for other uses. But the singular effect of these forces is the reduction in the amount of I farmland in the Township. Farming: in Northampton E There were about 5,300 acres of land actively farmed in the Township in 1985. A handful of farmers accounted for much of the acreage farmed; most of the actively farmed land is located above Richboro, particularly above Hatboro Road. The active farmers cultivate rented land as well as land which they 1 own. Surveys have shown that the most successful farmers in suburban areas are those who are able to combine a retail outlet with their farming activities; several farmers in Northampton have accomplished this.
I Because the possibilities for development on farmland increase as public water and sewer becomes available, areas of Northampton which are farmed coincide with areas which do not have water and I sewer facilities. I Strategies for Farmland Preservation A number of strategies have been devised to try to slow the disappearance of farmland. The four major strategies are listed below along with their use or potential use in Northampton.
I Preferential Assessment - The tax burden on farmers can be significant because of the large amounts of land owned; this may encourage farmers to sell their land to developers. Pennsylvania is one of many states which has allowed its municipalities to grant lower I assessments and lower taxes to farmers and landowners who agree to keep their properties open or in cultivation for a specific period of time. Assessments are then based upon the use of the property rather than on the prevailing market value. About one hundred (100) landowners in I Northampton have taken advantage of Acts 515 and 319, the laws which grant preferential assessments. Act 5 15 allows preferential assessments on properties where uses are restricted to "farm, forest, water supply, or open space." Act 319 requires that land be used for agriculture, I agricultural reserve, or forest reserve. The program requires the owner to keep the land in its present state for a specified period of time in order to take advantage of the preferential tax rate, this being accomplished through a I restrictive covenant on the land.
The preferential assessment programs provide only a temporary solution. The landowner can I withdraw from the program at the end of this period or even withdraw earlier by breaching the covenant and paying a penalty. Because the lands do not have to be farmed, the programs may I Agriculture Plan 63 I I
slow development but they do not necessarily encourage the continuation of active farming. It will not preserve farmland permanently. I
Agricultural Security Districts - As individual farms disappear, the pressure on the remaining farms increases. Unless the farming community is a certain minimum size, it cannot survive. I The concept of the agricultural security district was developed because a successful farming community must be large enough to produce reliable supplies of farm products to buyers and be large enough to support the agriculture-related businesses, such as farm machinery sales and feed stores. Without a strong market for products and the necessary support services available I locally, farmers cannot survive. In addition, the proximity of farming activities to suburban development has caused conflicts which discourage the continuation of farming in developing areas. Residents complain about plowing and fertilizing at early hours; farmers complain about I residents using their fields as play areas. It is not always easy for the two activities to live side by side. But the preservation of an entire district would help minimize the number of interactions between suburban resident and farmer. I The Agricultural Security District legislation in Pennsylvania (Act 43) allows municipalities to form districts of a minimum size of five hundred (500) acres. Farmers and landowners who voluntarily become part of the district would then be protected from local nuisance ordinances I which might attempt to restrict farming activities and from condemnation of their properties by governmental agencies or utiltities. Municipal officials work with landowners in setting up the districts. Legislation is being considered by the state legislature which would pay landowners I for the development rights of their farmland. The upper portion of Northampton, along with portions of adjoining Warwick Township, has I been identified by the Bucks County Planning Commission as one of the eight significant agricultural areas of Bucks County. Because of good soils, the presence of serious farming activity, and the lack of sewerage and water facilities, the area has been pinpointed as a potential agricultural security district. However, the action must be intitiated by local landowners who 1 are interested in continued farming, and no such action has been taken in Northampton. Transfer of Development Rights - Transfer of development rights (TDR) has been proposed as a I means of protecting farmland and other natural resources from development. Areas which a community may wish to preserve, such as prime farmland, stream valleys, or historic landmarks, are identified. Other areas which, because of superior road access or available I public sewers and water supply, are identified as development areas. The right to develop to farmland is transfered (sold) by the farmer to a landowner in the development district who may then develop this property at a higher density. The farmer is able to capture the value of developing his property, through the sale of the development rights, yet still maintain his farm. 1 Development is then concentrated in areas where it should logically occur and where the community wishes it to occur. I Although it has been widely studied and discussed as a means of protecting farmland, the concept has not been put into practice in many areas. There may be practical drawbacks which remain undetected. Without practical experience with the concept, municipalities are reluctant to enter into such a program. In .addition, many farmers who sell their farms do so not only for the I financial gain but also because they have reached retirement age and they no longer are able or willing to farm. There is no advanatge to them to maintain their properties for farming. I TDR was discussed as a possible strategy for Northampton in 1976, when the Comprehensive Plan was written, but there was little support for the concept. The farmers were reluctant to try it, and the Township was not able to find a suitable development district which could be developed at I a much higher density. When the concept was reviewed again in 1980, the lack of support from I Agriculture Plan 64 I I
I farmers and municipal officials made it unproductive to pursue the idea. Agricultural Zoning - One approach to preserving farmland is agricultural zoning which requires very large lots in the areas where farming exists. Lots of 10 to 25 acres have been I proposed for some farming communities. This limits the development potential for the land and hence reduces the pressures for development. These same characteristics make it somewhat unappealing to many farmers. Most farmers consider their land to be a potential source of 1 income. With that reduced by large lot zoning, they have lost that potential. Some agricultural zoning allows for clustering of houses on a portion of the property as long as the bulk of the tract remains open. Overall density for a 50-acre tract, for example, could be one ~I dwelling unit per acre, with development being concentrated on a section of the property. This is one means of recapturing the value of the property for the farmer while also encouraging the I preservation of farmland. Some communities have used large lot agricultural zoning as a means of restricting development and have been challenged in court for such practices. Although some communities 1 have established agricultural preservation schemes which have withstood legal challenges, the threat of a suit by developers is one which many municipalities may not wish to risk.
Proposals for the use of agricultural zoning in Northampton have not been well received by I farmers. Even with the potential for allowing the same amount of development in a cluster formation, the designation of agricultural zones has been perceived as a scheme which would mean loss of income to farmers for two reasons. First, the farmer would not be able to sell off I individual lots of an acre or two at the perimeter of his property. Second, there has not been enough first-hand experience with the sale of tracts with cluster zoning to prove that the value of a I tract with such zoning is equal to that of a tract with one- or two-acre zoning. The preservation of farmland in Northampton depends on the interest and overwhelming support of the farming community as well as the willingness of Township officials to lend the governmental support, through ordinance and resolutions. Although everyone agrees that the existing farmland is an I asset to the community, there is also the realization that Northampton lies in the middle of a rapidly growing area and that the farmers, with good reason, do not want to jeopardize the potential value of I their properties.
The Comprehensive Plan recommendations are based on these views. The Plan suggests that the I areas now farmed or in reserve be designated as low density residential areas. The Township residents can continue to enjoy the presence of a farming community as long as it is feasible to farm in Northampton, but the Township is prepared to be realistic about the limited potential for long-term farming in a growing suburban area and to plan for an appropriate land use pattern as the farmland I changes to other uses. The creation in 1986 of a Northampton Township Farmland Study Committee was a good first step toward identifying areas which should be protected and developing protection methods which are acceptable to Township residents as well as being realistic. The Plan also I recommends that the Township continue to investigate the protection of critical natural features, including farmland, as part of the on-going planning process. I RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AGRICULTURAL AREAS
1. The use of preferential assessment programs available in Bucks County should be encouraged and I continued in Northampton. I Agriculture Plan 65 I 2. Agricultural areas should be designated as low density residential areas on the Future Land Use Map.
3. Development techniques such as clustering should be implemented as a means to preserve in the development pmess some of the open area which residents now enjoy. I I
1 I I
Agriculture Plan 66 I
I HISTORIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES
The importance of protecting special resources such as historic sites and structures and I environmental features increases as development pressures increase the value of all land in the Township. The following section outlines what has been done to recognize and protect historic and environmental resources and what strategies should be considered by the Township as part of future 1 preservation efforts.
I Historic Resources Northampton Township has abundant historic and archeologic resources. Demand for land for residential and commercial development introduces conflicts between the desire to protect historic and I archeologic sites and structures and the need to accommodate current development. The Northampton Township Historical Commission has been instrumental in pressing for preservation of historic properties. With permits now being required for demolition, the Commission has met with some D success in their preservation role. It is important that there is a clear understanding between the Commission and developers so that the heritage remaining in our Township will be preserved.
Developers must be informed of the Commission's concern and they must be encouraged to include 1 preservation and restoration of archeologic sites, farmhouses and historic buildings in their plans. Local governments have been increasing their role in preservation efforts. Active citizen groups, such as the Northampton Township Historical Commission, have been instrumental in a number of I communities in surveying historic resources and in pressing for preservation policies.
In 1976, Northampton Township Historical Commission volunteers surveyed the buildings in the I Township which were more than one hundred (100) years old. More than two hundred fifty (250) buildings were covered in the survey, which included: 1 identification by tax parcel number; description of the exterior; and, where possible
I description of interior characteristics.
Photographs were taken of the exteriors, and information on the date of the structures were noted, if I known. There was no evaluation as to the most important structures or those most worthy of preservation efforts.
During 1988 and 1989, under the auspices of the Bucks County Conservancy, a Comprehensive I Historic Sites Survey was undertaken. This was a major effort involving a cataloging, with photographs, of historic properties with buildings or structures over fifty (50) years old. An assessment of the architectural/historical significance of each property was utilized in determining eligibility for I inclusion on the National Register and/or the Conservancy's Bucks County Register of Historic Places. A mapping of these properties is contained in the Natural Resource Inventory. I There is no single concentration of these structures in any one portion of the Township. There are numerous buildings above Hatboro Road; mainly old farm structures which are still the primary buildings on the large parcels which remain in this section of the Township. Structures along what were the original main roads through the Township, such as Second Street Pike and Almshouse Road, I are locations for older structures. Small, older settlements, such as Churchville and Holland, have
I Historic and Environmental Resources Plan 67 I 1
small collections of older buildings. Many of the houses and structures converted to commercial use in Richboro are more than one hundred (100) years old. Several old structures are in commerical or 1 institutional usage, such as the Northampton Country Club building, Villa Joseph Maria, the Bucks County Courier Times offices, and some of the buildings within Tyler State Park; but most are privately owned residences. I Since 1976, some of these structures have been destroyed as part of the development process. There are others which, in 1986, are now more than one hundred years old and could be added to the inventory. I Preservation Methods I Registers of Historic Places: Thirteen (13) of the structures surveyed have been recognized as part of the Bucks County Conservancy's Register of Historic Places. But, according to the Conservancy, other sites and structures are worthy of recognition. Placement on the Conservancy's Register does not carry I with it any requirements with respect to preservation or alteration.
Four (4) structures are on the National Register of Historic Places, the official list of the nation's cultural resources worthy of preservation. Placement on the National Register does not interfere with a 1 property owner's right to alter or dispose of property. The effects of being placed on the National Register are: I 1. Recognition of the site or structure as having significance to the country, the state or the local community; I 2. Special attention is granted to the property in the planning of federal or federally-funded projects, and in the granting of surface mining permits, so that the value of historical properties are properly considered in the planning of any such projects; I 3. Eligibility for federal tax benefits; and
4. Eligibility for federal assistance for preservation, if available. 1 The four (4) properties on the National Register of Historic Places in Northampton are: I The Hip Roof House on Second Street Pike Hampton Hill on Twining Ford Road at Second Street Pike I Twin Trees on Second Street Pike, near Richboro
Twining Ford's Covered Bridge in Tyler State Park. I They are discussed in more detail in the Community Profile chapter. I Placement of structures on the registers at the local, state or national levels is an incentive to property owners to preserve and maintain these buildings. They have been identified as special community resources, and this may provide the encouragement to property owners to protect them. Preservation, however, is not guaranteed. I
Historic Districts: This is the most common approach to historic preservation, and many of the older communities in Bucks County have adopted ordinances which establish historic districts and local I
Historic and I Environmental Resources Plan I boards of historical and architectural review. The historic districts must be approved by the Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission before local regulations can take effect. This approach, authorized by Pennsylvania Act 167, is best suited to muncipalities which have historic districts or concentrations of older structures in one or more sections of the municipality. Newtown and Doylestown Boroughs, for example, have historic districts and Historical and Architectural Review Boards which review all proposed exterior changes to properties in the district and make recommendations to the governing bodies regarding proposed alterations, demolitions, or expansions.
Protecting Landmarks: Not all historic structures lie within an easily defined district. Because of the distribution of historic structures throughout Northampton Township, the historic district approach does not seem well suited. It would be impossible to designate the entire Township as an historic district. The largest concentration of older structures exists in Richboro, but the many alterations and demolitions which have occurred detract from the historic integrity of the area, and it is doubtful that the state would recognize it as an historic district.
Yet many of these older structures are assets to the community; and efforts should be made to protect them. Large older homes along Second Street Pike, for example, may become uneconomical to maintain as single-family residences. Farmhouses on the properties above Hatboro Road may be threatened when farms are sold and subdivided. Buildings within commercial areas may require significant alterations in order to accommodate off-street parking needs. These are issues which can be addressed in the Zoning Ordinance, if municipal officials are aware of the resources available.
Newtown Township, Bucks County, also has scattered historical landmarks worthy of protection which do not lie within an historic district. The approach they adopted in 1985 may be suitable for application in Northampton Township. Using the Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code as a basis for their action, the Township adopted amendments to their Zoning Ordinance. Section 605 (2) (vi) of Act 247 allows municipalities to pass ordinances for the "regulation, restriction or prohibition of uses and structures at or near ... places having unique historical or patriotic interest or value ..." The Zoning Ordinance amendments require that:
Proposed changes to "exceptional" or "contributing" historic resources be reviewed by the Township Planning Commission;
New structures within three hundred (300) feet of existing historic structures:
1) obtain a certificate of appropriateness from the governing body; and
2) maintain adequate buffering.
The passage of such an ordinance would require that historic structures be inventoried and evaluated according to a set of established criteria so that the "exceptional" and "contributing" resources can be identified and mapped. Northampton's 1976 survey provides a good start on such an inventory.
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PROTECTING HISTORIC RESOURCES
1. Update and complete the 1976 comprehensive survey of historic sites and sbuctures
2. Establish criteria for identifying the most important historic sites and structures. This includes buildings and sites in the commercial districts as well as residential districts. Identify those buildings and sites worthy of preservation efforts.
Historic and Environmental Resources Plan I 1 3. Investigate the passage of an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance requiring Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors action with respect to alterations, demolitions, and construction to or near historic landmarks, similar to the ordinance passed by Newtown Township. 1 4. Highly recommend to owners of historic commercial establishments and residents to submit a Historic Resources Jmpact Assessment if submitting a request for changes, alterations, demolitions and new construction,on all buildings and sites identified as worthy of preservation efforts. 1
Environmental Resources 1
The recognition and protection of natural resources has become an increasingly important element in municipal planning. The results of building without consideration for flood plains, steep slopes, 1 stormwater management or the protection of woodlands have been less than satisfactory. Northampton's 1963 Comprehensive Plan recognized the importance of physical characteristics of the land and contained a few paragraphs on soil conditions, topography, and aesthetics. The 1976 Plan contained a more comprehensive treatment of the subject, and maps of several soil characteristics, steep I slopes, flood plains, and wooded areas were produced.
The Environmental Constraints Map in the Natural Features chapter of this document shows these I areas which, because of their natural characteristics, impose constraints on development. Detailed maps of individual resources are contained in the Natural Resource Inventory. But knowing this information is not enough. The Farmland Study Committee has suggested that zoning and subdivision I regulations designed to protect critical environmental features be incorporated into the Township's policies and utilized in decision-making. A planning study should be undertaken to identify those zoning and subdivision regulations to implement the desired policies, Northampton's current policies, and methods which may be used for the protection of natural features. I
Flood Plains 1
The construction of substantial structures within flood plains or flood hazard areas poses a serious threat to life and property. Limitations on building within flood plains or flood hazard areas are now t incorporated into most municipal ordinances, not only because of their value to the Township but also because of the federal flood insurance requirements which have provided economic incentives to adopt such policies. I Northampton has mapped these areas and its Zoning Ordinance restricts land uses in flood plains to agriculture, parks and recreational facilities, open space, and other low-intensity uses which will not result in the loss of life or serious property damage. In addition, the Subdivision and Land 1 Development Ordinance regulates the building of utility systems, such as water supply lines and sewerage lines, within floodprone areas to avoid the problems of infiltration of flood waters into municipal systems. These policies are consistent with current thinking on flood plain regulation and 1 are in accordance with the national flood insurance program.
Soils Characteristics 1
The Soil Survey of Bucks and Philadelphia Counties, Pennsylvania of the U.S. Soil Conservation Service provides detailed information on the location and characteristics of soils within Northampton I Township. The characteristics which are most significant in the development of Township policy are:
Historic and 1 Environmental Resources Plan m I I
I prime agricultural soils and the suitability of soils for on-site sewage disposal. Although Northampton has significant areas of prime agricultural soils, much of this land has been developed. The Future Land Use Plan does not recommend the preservation of prime agricultural soils, so policies with respect I to preserving these soils are not required. Of greater concern are the soil types which impose restrictions on the use of on-site sewage disposal systems such as septic tanks. Much of the unsewered area above Hatboro Road and below Buck Road I contains soils which, because of low permeability and shallow bedrock, cannot safely accommodate the effluent produced by septic tanks.
I Some of the soil types in these areas have been approved by the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources for the use of sand mounds, another type of on-lot system. However, these 1 individual facilities have not been widely approved or utiltized in the Northampton area. Previous to January 1987, when new regulations concerning the administration of the sewage facilities permitting program in Pennsylvania were issued by the Pennsylvania Environmental Quality Board, parcels of land of ten (10) acres or more were exempt from the design and permitting requirements for on-lot sewage systems. These lots were exempt, under the theory that the effects of the effluent discharge would be insignificant on neighboring properties because of the large amount of land involved. Much of the development occurring along Almshouse Road above Hatboro Road, where public sewers are not available, was made possible by this exemption.
Under the revised regulations this exemption was removed; and except for existing 'lrural residence" lots purchased prior to January 10, 1987, which are subject to special transition rules, all development requiring on-lot sewage systems will be required to meet the permitting and design requirements of the new regulations, as enforced by the Bucks County Department of Health.
Wetlands
Wetland areas, defined by the Clean Water Act, are:
"area[sl inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances does support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted to life in saturated soil conditions, including swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas."
There are no "coastal wetlands", subject to tidal flooding of salt or brackish waters, in Northampton Township. There are "inland wetlands" in Northampton, however, which occur on flood plains along rivers and streams, along the periphery of lakes and ponds, and in isolated depressions. Wetlands serve to provide: water storage, flood water abatement, water quality improvement, plant and wildlife habitat provision and groundwater recharge.
Until the enactment of the federal Clean Water Act and Coastal Zone Management Act, and the enforcement of same by various federal and state agencies, the importance of wetlands was little known or respected. Restrictions of development on wetlands are now commonplace.
Wetlands serve to: store storm and flood waters, recharge groundwater, improve water quality, and provide plant and wildlife habitats. The US. Department of the Interior's Draft Wetlands Inventory identifies wetlands of ten (10) acres or more; and indicates wetlands around Churchville Reservoir and along tributaries of the Neshaminy Creek. A comprehensive survey and mapping of wetlands in Northampton Township has not been done. The Natural Resource Inventory contains a map based on
Historic and Environmental Resources Plan 71 the Wetlands Inventory.
Except for those areas which are within flood plains or flood hazard areas, Northampton Township does not regulate development in wetlands.
Policies for the protection of wetlands would involve one hundred percent (100%) protection of all wetlands and eighty percent (80%)protection of those areas within one hundred (100)feet of the limit of wetlands vegetation or to the limit of wet soils in order to provide an effective buffer. In order to effectuate such policies, Northampton will have to promulgate regulations restricting development in and around those areas and require the identification of wetlands by developers during the subdivision and land development process.
Steep Slopes
The Soil Survey noted above also provides information on areas of steep slopes. Slopes of 0-8%, 8%- E%,15%-25%, and over 25% are noted as part of the soil descriptions. Many communities have adopted restrictions on the development of steep slopes because of the threat of increased erosion and the dangers imposed by roadways and driveways on steep grades. In many zoning ordinances, the amount of land on which natural cover can be disturbed in areas of steep grades is restricted, and improved enforcement of erosion and sediment control plans is encouraged.
There are.very few steep slopes within Northampton Township, making it easier to regulate their development. The steepest slopes are located along the Neshaminy Creek, Mill Creek, and their tributaries and are coterminous with flood plains in many areas. In most instances, they will be protected by flood plain policies.
Northampton's Subdivision and Land Development Ordinance requires that the disturbance of vegetative ground cover be restricted to forty percent (40%) on slopes of 8-15%, thirty percent (30%)on slopes of 15-25%, and fifteen percent (15%) on slopes of 25% or greater. These regulations reflect the accepted standards for controlling disruption of vegetative cover on steep slopes.
Woodlands
Because of the good soils and gentle terrain, the land in Northampton was cleared for farming decades ago; the result being that stands of woodlands are limited to the Neshaminy Creek stream valley, the lands surrounding Churchville Reservoir, the area within Tyler State Park, and scattered parcels where cultivation did not occur. Because these woodlands are limited as well as unique, protection policies are especially important in Northampton. The advantages of shading, windbreaks, visual relief, and air cleansing provided by trees should be recognized and protection measures should be implemented.
The Subdivision and Land Development Ordinance requires that subdivisions and land developments seeking preliminary approval identify existing stands of trees. The preservation of woodlands is encouraged, though not required, in the cluster development provisions of the Zoning Ordinance.
Policies for woodlands preservation in other muncipalities which recognize the differing significance of trees in varying areas have been developed. For example, woodlands in environmentally sensitive areas, such as flood plains or wetlands, should be preserved at one standard (80% preservation); while woodlands on other sites are more appropriately preserved at another
Historic and Environmental Resources Plan 72 standard (50% preservation).
Many of the stream-side trees may enjoy the protection provided by flood plain regulations. Others should be identified and offered the protection of Township policy through Zoning Ordinance andor Subdivision and Land Development Ordinance procedures.
SDecial Environmental Features: The Neshaminy Creek Vallev and Mill Creek
Northampton is fortunate to have a significant natural feature along much of its border: the Neshaminy Creek and its tributary, the Little Neshaminy Creek. The Township has expressed its desire to protect a green belt along the Neshaminy Creek. The existence of flood plain regulations and steep slope restrictions protect this stream valley from inappropriate development in many areas. The length of the stream within Tyler State Park has also been protected, but much of the creek remains unprotected. Some suburban communities have been successful in protecting long green belts in perpetuity, with limited public access so that residents of the Township can enjoy it.
Preservation of the stream area can be accomplished in several ways. The subdivision and land development process provides an opportunity to capture land along the stream. The land immediately adjacent to the stream is unusable for development purposes because of flooding, and the dedication of I this area to public agencies or private conservancies can be encouraged.
The Township or other public or private agencies can secure conservation easements on the land 1 adjacent to the stream which will protect the land from unsuitable development and keep it open in perpetuity. Some landowners are willing to donate easements, or the land itself, for the tax benefits the donation provides.
I Mill Creek, in the lower portion of the Township, is also a scenic stream valley. Similar methods can be used to preserve it and the area around it. Low density development is recommended for the Mill 1 Creek area as a means of limiting the disruption to this area.
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
1. Maintain current policies with respeccto flood plains, flood hazard areas and steep slop
2. Aid in the enforcement of new regulations regarding the construction of on-site sewage disposal vstems; particularly on large lots.
3. Determine the location of wetlands within the Township; and adopt policies which require the preservation of wetland areas and adjacent areas.
4. Establish policies for the protection of woodlands, encouraging clustering or lot averaging on tracts where development would threatened large stands of trees.
5. Establish a policy of preserving a green belt along the Neshaminy Creek by: Working with developers during the subdivision and land development process;
Working with other landowners to acquire donations of land or conservation easements; or
Investigating other preservation efforts by the Planning Commission.
Historic and Environmental Resources Plan 73 6. Because much of the environmental data discussed in this chapter is more meaningful at the site level than at the Township level, require subdivision and land development applicantsto provide a thorough site analysis, and take into consideration the significant environmental features during subdivision and land development deliberations.
7. Continue to investigate appropriatepreservation and protection techniques through the Township's Planning Commission.
* Historicand Environmental Resources Plan 74 I
1 HOUSING PLAN
The Future Land Use Plan provides the Township with a general framework for the future use and 1 development of land. The general pattern for residential areas is identified, although the specific guidelines for residential development are contained in this section. I The four types of residential areas discussed in the Future Land Use Plan are described in more detail below. These areas contain sufficient amounts of vacant and/or undeveloped lands to 1 accommodate the Township's projected housing needs through the Year 2010. Low Densitv Residential Areas
I Residential development of single family detached houses at four (4) different densities is recommended for the future low density residential areas of the Township. The bulk of the recommended low density residential area is located above Hatboro Road, but there are significant 1 areas in other parts of the Township, specifically the area around Churchville and undeveloped tracts below Buck Road. 1 The low density areas have been specified for the following reasons: Most of the areas recommended for low density development are unsewered, which means that on-lot septic systems will be used in these areas, providing that soil conditions allow for them. 1 These individual septic systems require larger amounts of land in order to work properly.
The area above Hatboro Road and the open areas below Buck Road are important community I resources because they are relatively open areas which provide some relief from the more densely developed areas of Northampton and surrounding communities.
The areas recommended for four (4)types of low density development are recognized as such under I the current zoning regulations. Most of the parcels of land in these areas exceed one acre. However, lots which are less than that in size are protected as legal non-conforming lots.
1 5 Acre Minimum Lot Area
Most of these areas were subdivided as ten (10) acre single-family lots due to severe limitations for on-site sewage systems and/or environmental limitations, such as steep slopes. The rural I residency requirements were the impetus for the sizing of lots in these areas. Because of their inherent limitations and as existing large lots, they are generally unsuitable for further I subdivision. 2 Acre Minimum Lot Area
1 These areas also contain soils with severe limitations for on-site sewage systems and often have the additional environmental constraints typical of the five (5) acre area above, including steep slopes and flood plains. Typically, these areas are contiguous to or surrounded by existing I agricultural uses. 40.000 Sauare Foot Minimum Lot Area i Although allowing 40,000 square foot lots will not produce the same effect as open farm fields or 1 the large lot classifications above, this minimum lot size is reasonable for rapidly growing areas. Housing Plan 75 I 1999 Update December 1999 These areas are within or adjacent to existing single-family neighborhoods with similar lot areas. Public water and/or sewer is often available, thus permitting a smaller lot size than the previous low density residential areas.
20.000 - 30.000 Square Foot Minimum Lot Area
Within agricultural preservation areas and contiguous lands with environmental constraints, clustering of single-family lots on large tracts is permitted as a method for preserving existing agricultural uses and open space. Those areas which are in a position to be served by public water and/or sewer are prime candidates for the development of clustered lots, while areas which are inaccessible to these utilities can be permanently preserved for agricultural and open space uses.
Medium Density Residential Areas
The bulk of the residential development currently in the Township is medium density. Medium density single-family detached residential development on 20,000 square foot lots is recommended for some of the areas which are currently vacant but which are adjoining or surrounded by existing medium density residential areas. The current zoning specifies 20,000 square foot lots in the R-2 Residential Districts. Future medium density residential development, as envisioned, would be similar to what exists now in a number of single-family neighborhoods in Northampton.
Multi-Family Residential Areas
The establishment of areas which can be developed at higher densities and with a variety of housing types is important for a number of reasons. First, the Township wants to accommodate a range of income levels and life styles within its boundaries. The social changes which are apparent in all communities have created a demand for new types of housing. Single persons, single-parent families, elderly persons, and smaller families may not want or need the large, four bedroom home on a half acre or acre of ground which has become the norm in suburban areas. While this still meets the needs of many families, there is a growing demand for other housing types. Many suburban communities have recognized the need for neighborhoods where young adults who are native to the community can afford to live and where older persons can move when they wish smaller, easier to care for homes in their own communities.
Secondly, Pennsylvania laws make it clear that a community cannot exclude high density development or certain housing types. A number of court decisions have made it clear that municipalities, which are created by the state and granted their powers by the state, cannot exclude people who are potential residents merely because current residents do not wish to accommodate them. Developers have been granted rights, through the curative amendment procedure, to propose their own zoning ordinance amendments to cure deficiencies in a municipal zoning ordinance which prohibits certain housing types or densities. A number of court-ordered developments have been built in Northampton and other Bucks County communities in response to such challenges by developers. The multi-use residential district will help the Township to meet the housing demands of all segments of the population as well as help it to meet its obligations with respect to state laws.
The multi-use residential district can accommodate a mixture of housing types with an overall density of six (6) units per acre. This is comparable to the existing development which has taken place in the multifamily residential district. The types of housing units envisioned for this area include: single-family detached units on small lots, including zero lot line houses, patio houses and mobile homes; single-family attached units, such as townhouses and atrium houses; twin houses; duplexes; multiplexes; and garden apartments.
Housing Plan 76 1999 Update December 1999 I
1 Multi-use residential areas are proposed in areas adjacent to those presently developed in higher density residential uses. The two primary locations are the area along the northern edge of the Township, between the railroad line and the Neshaminy Creek, and the area along Bridgetown Pike I near the corner of the Township. In both these areas, the pattern of multi-family residential uses has been established. These two locations have a total area of approximately 730 acres or about 4.4 percent of 1 the total land area of the Township (not counting streets). The area along the Neshaminy Creek has about 90 acres of vacant land which could accommodate over five hundred (500) additional units at the recommended density of six (6) units per acre. This area 1 is particularly well-suited for higher density uses because of the proximity of a school and a small commercial center for convenience shopping; 1 good road access via Newtown-Richboro Road, Buck Road and Middle Holland Road; the availability of a Township recreation area on St. Leonard Road and access to a major I regional recreational area, Tyler State Park; and potential passenger rail service to Philadelphia and Montgomery County.
1 The total land area devoted to multi-family development and the existence of vacant land within these areas should be adequate to meet the Township's responsibilities with respect to multi-family I housing opportunities through the next five (5) to ten (10) years. The current height limitation of forty-five (45) feet and four (4)stories should be maintained. Mid- 1 rise or high-rise structures are not appropriate in the suburban setting in Northampton. The multi-use residential district includes an existing life care facility on Middle Holland Road and senior citizen housing on Newtown-Richboro Road in Richboro; both of which are appropriate I residential types in this district. 1 Restricted Residential Area The fourth category of residential use is classified as restricted residential for mobile homes and single-family residences on small lots. This is a sixty-six (66) acre area located in the corner of the Township near Ivyland Borough which incorporates the present R-5 District, as well as a small cluster I of houses on small lots. Also included is a tract of land which is separated from the nearby industrial area by the railroad tracks and which is currently zoned for agriculture. The recommended lot size is 10,000 square feet for both traditional and mobile homes; and the provision of modular unit development I and age restricted housing with various dwelling unit types in this area is also appropriate.
1 Site Planning: Techniques
Several of the residential land uses recommended here lend themselves to innovations in site I planning techniques which can be used to preserve the sense of openness in the remaining undeveloped areas of the Township.
For example, it is possible to allow for an overall density of one (1) acre per unit while still protecting 1 the sense of open space which exists in these areas through the use of creative site planning and I development controls. Several techniques have been developed which are designed to allow for a Housing Plan 77 1999 Update December 1999 reasonable level of development in suburban communities while preserving a feeling of openness as well as protecting significant natural features. All of these techniques have been used in Pennsylvania and have withstood legal challenges.
Lot Averaging;
Most traditional zoning ordinances specify a minimum lot size for residential uses. When a flat tract is being developed, it is possible to divide it into lots which conform to these regulations. However, in areas where there are woodlands, slopes, scenic areas, or portions of the tract which should be left open for environmental reasons, it may be desirable to allow for lot averaging. Instead of requiring each lot to be one acre, the average lot size for an entire development could be one acre if the developer is striving to save wooded areas or protect certain natural features.
The total number of houses permitted on the tract would not be increased, but the site plan might be varied slightly so that some lots would be larger than one acre while others would be smaller. The provisions for lot averaging would be embodied in the Zoning Ordinance. Many ordinances specify an absolute minimum lot size for developments which use lot averaging. For example, if lot averaging is used in a one acre zone, the lot size after averaging could not be less than one-half (1/2)acre. Lot averaging encourages the developer to give some thought to the characteristics of the site and how it can best be utilized. It does not increase the number of units, so the concept will not result in higher intensity development.
A minimum tract size for the entire development should be specified, along with an absolute minimum lot size if lot averaging is allowed. Lot averaging is a relatively common provision in land use controls and it has been utilized in many municipalities.
Cluster Zoning;
In an effort to preserve open space in suburban areas, some municipalities have allowed clustering of residences on a small portion of a tract rather than encouraging the entire tract to be used. In some communities, the total number of units permitted on a site may actually be increased as a means of encouraging clustering. The purpose of clustering is to accommodate the development while protecting open area.
The disposition of the undeveloped area in clustering schemes is a concern for municipalities. If it is good farmland, and the size of the tract is sufficient, it can be deed restricted and sold or leased for farming, as has been done in some Bucks County municipalities. It can be managed by a homeowners' association. The mechanism for maintaining the land must be carefully thought out and regulated through the municipal land use codes.
The Township permits cluster-designed subdivisions in a number of residential districts. In the AR Agricultural Residential District, this technique has been enhanced to permit the transfer of density between noncontiguous tracts. This has served to make this a more attractive development alternative than conventional subdivision, but there is little assurance that development will occur on those tracts that are most capable of accommodating development, i.e., those tracts served by public water and sewer facilities, collector streets, and other public improvements.
In order to afford the maximum protection for existing farm operations in the AR District, as recommended in the Agriculture Plan, the Housing Plan recommends that the residential portion of any cluster-designed subdivision be directed to those properties which have been planned to be served by public sewers.
Housing Plan 78 1999 Update December 1999 Performance Zoning
Performance zoning, like lot averaging, is based on the realization that not all tracts of land are alike and that some variability in the way each site is used may be desirable. Performance zoning requires that all natural features on a site be identified and mapped. Standards for the extent to which natural resource areas can be utilized are included in the Zoning Ordinance, as determined by the Township and based upon their goals. For example, all wetlands and flood plains could be preserved. A certain percentage of woodlands could be preserved. In areas where agriculture is important, prime agricultural soils may be subject to restrictions on the amount of land which can be developed. In addition, a performance zoning ordinance would specify the amount of land which must remain as open space, the amount of impervious coverage which is allowed, and the overall density of the site.
The primary differences between a performance zoning approach and the way in which Northampton currently regulates development are:
performance zoning requires that all natural features be mapped by the developer and considered in the site plan, and
performance zoning offers choices as to how the site can be developed, including traditional minimum lot size development, cluster development, and subdivisions which allow a variety of housing types.
The specific regulations in a performance zoning ordinance are, of course, determined by the municipality. Many communities in Bucks County and elsewhere have adopted some components of this approach as they relate to residential development.
Planned Residential Development
Planned residential developments (or PRDs) were conceived as a means to provide for a range of residential types and community facilities within one development. Many PRDs are primarily residential and allow for clustering, as defined above, and for a variety of housing types, such as is now permitted in Northampton's R-3 District. PRDs, as permitted under the Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code, may also include convenience shopping areas, school sites, recreation areas, and other community facilities in order to provide for community needs within the development. The PRD provisions may embody concepts such as clustering, lot averaging, or performance standards as described above. In many cases, large PRDs are built in stages over of period of years.
Transfer of Development Rights
The transfer of development rights is a means of protecting open land by transferring the rights for developing it to another location where development is more desirable or more readily accommodated. A full discussion of this technique is provided in the Agriculture Plan.
The techniques which seem most appropriate for use in Northampton are: lot averaging, clustering, and the requirement for natural resource mapping for all developments, as used in performance zoning. This would allow the Township to know where the critical features are and to permit the developer some flexibility in dealing with specific site characteristics so that natural features and open space may be protected. These techniques would not increase the intensity of development and may encourage better use of the remaining open land.
Housing Plan 1999 Update December 1999 Providing Opportunities for Low- and Moderate-Income Households and Persons With Special Needs
Recent national, state and county studies have addressed the problem of housing affordability. The housing needs of individuals and families with low and moderate incomes are not being adequately met in the Commonwealth, in Bucks County, and in the Township. There are many factors which have contributed to this shortfall; some of which are outside the scope of local government, including: financing; interest rates; the cost of land, building materials and labor; and profits.
Through its powers to zone and its regulation and processing of development, however, local government has been given the responsibility to make land use decisions. The studies have concluded that the land use decisions of a municipality have an effect on the price of housing; and, in that regard, it is incumbent on local government to regularly address and reconfirm their planning practices.
Together with the low density and medium density residential areas, the multi-family residential and restricted residential areas are intended to provide a wide range of housing opportunities for the housing consumer. In addition to allocating sufficient lands and densities for residential use, the Zoning Ordinance has been amended to permit a wider variety of housing types in the multi-family residential district. The multi-family residential district now requires a mix of dwelling unit types in developments of more than sixty (60) dwellings. Group homes and community residential facilities, which accommodate unrelated persons and persons with special needs, are now permitted in all residential districts by special exception; and are subject to the same area and development regulations as dwellings.
In furtherance of increasing housing opportunities, the Township should reinvestigate the use of clustered housing on compact lots to reduce the length of streets and utility lines. The use of bonus densities to encourage the use of rental units and/or the integration of lower cost housing units within new developments may be appropriate in certain districts.
Potential for New Dwelling Units
An analysis of the existing zoning districts and their respective provisions for residential development was performed to ascertain whether existing zoning ordinance regulations would permit development sufficient to meet the Township's Year 2000 population and housing forecasts (see Table 18). As shown on Table 19, the Township has an ultimate capacity of over 16,200 dwelling units, assuming a complete build out of all residential zoning districts under their present classifications. The present zoning districts contain sufficient areas to meet the Township's low housing projection for the Year 2010 (15,184 dwelling units). As stated in the Housing element, the Township rejected the Bucks County and Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commissions' Year 2010 and 2020 housing projections (see Tables 16 and 17) as being unrealistically high.
In order to accommodate a sufficient number of dwelling units to meet the Township's Year 2010 housing forecast (in Table 18), it is recommended that several properties located in low density residential zoning districts be reclassified in order to provide additional housing opportunities into the next century.
As shown in Table 20, approximately 238 additional dwelling units could be accommodated in the Township as a result of these reclassifications.
Housing Plan 8) 1999 Update December 1999 1 Table 19.
I ESTIMATED DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL BY ZONING DISTRICT 1 (FULL BUILD-OUT UNDER EXISTING ZONING CLASSIFICATIONS) TOTAL AVERAGE TOTAL DISTRICT ACREAGE DENSITY DWELLING UNITS ~I EP 595 .15 89 CR 1,318 .35 461 8 AR 2,700 .67 1,809 R- 1 2,514 .72 1,810 R-2 5,223 1.46 7,626 I R-3 728 5.40 3,931 R-5 34 4.50 153 1 PO 27 4.50 122 REC 1 303 .72 218 I TOTALS 13,374 1.213 16,219 I 1 Excludes public properties Table 20.
! ESTIMATED DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL BY ZONING DISTRICT (F’ULL BUILD-OUTAFTER RECOMMENDED RECLASSIFICATIONS) 1 TOTAL AVERAGE TOTAL DISTRICT ACREAGE DENSITY DWELLING UNITS I EP 595 .15 89 CR 12% .35 430 AR 2,469 .67 1,654 1 R- 1 2,472 .72 1,780 R- 2 5,326 1.46 7,776 1 R-3 746 5.40 4,028 R-5 & Age Restricted 107 4.50 482 REC 1 303 .72 218 I TOTALS 13246 1.242 16,457
1 1 Excludes public properties
I Potential for Affordable Housing I Housing Plan 81 1 1999 Update December 1999 1
Projections of various dwelling unit types were conducted in order to determine the adequacy of the Housing Plan to provide sufficient opportunities for the development of housing which meets the needs 1 of low- and moderate-income persons and households. As forecast in the Housing Characteristics chapter, from an estimated 13,309 dwelling units (as of November 1999) the Township is expected to grow by some 1,875 to 3,815 dwelling units to a total of 15,184 to 17,124 dwelling units by the Year 2010 (see I Table 18). As demonstrated in Table 20, the mid-range of the Year 2010 forecast (16,154 dwelling units) can be realized.
For the purposes of this analysis, it was assumed that any and all dwelling types other than single- 1 family detached could be developed by the private sector in order to meet the housing needs of low- and moderate-income persons and households. As shown in the Housing Characteristics chapter, it was estimated that over 23% of the housing stock (3,080 dwelling units) was other than single-family I detached as of November 1999.
Under the present zoning ordinance there are several undeveloped tracts in the R-3, R-5 and PO Districts which are capable of being developed at densities in excess of five dwelling units per acre or i more: I 31-23-42-1 & hlorrissey 83.674 ac. 502 du's 31-23-46 1 31-35-23-1 Donald & Faith Bertolet 6.37 ac. 11 du's 31-1-1 Vincent & Norma Poli, et a1 34.2159 ac. 136 du's 1 31-5-87, -87-1, Goldman 19.80 ac. 72 du's -87-2 & -87-3 1 TOTALS 144.0599 ac. 720 du's 1 As depicted on the Future Land Use map, two undeveloped tracts have been recommended for reclassification to high density residential:
31-35-7-6 Buck Road Enterprises 17.80 ac. 107 du's I Various West corner of Township approx 20.00 ac. 120 du's I TOTALS 37.8 ac. 227 du's Therefore, the total number of additional dwelling units potentially available to low- and moderate- I income households (947) would represent 30.1% of the total dwelling units that could be constructed between 1999 and a full build-out. With a complete build-out of these sites, the ratio of dwelling unit types other than single-family detached units could increase from over 23% in 1999 to over 24.4%. 1 1 1
Housing Plan I 1999 Update December 1999 I I 1 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR RESIDENTIAL AREAS 1. AUow low density single-family detached residential development at varying densities in the areas I specified for single-family detached residential on the Future Land Use Plan. 2. Allow medium density single-family detached residential development on lots of at least 20,000 square feet with public sewerage available.
I 3. Allow multi-use development, other than mobile home parks, at six (6) units per acre in the areas so specified on the Future Land Use Plan. Housing types can be varied and include attached as well as 1 detached units. 4. Areas for restricted residential development should be provided where small lot single-family residences, mobile home parks andor modular unit developments will be accommodated. Include I age-restricted housing in these areas. 5. Consider revisions to the land use controls which would require natural resource mapping for all new developments and which would allow for lot averaging and clustering in order to preserve open I space and to protect critical natural features. Consider the suggestions of the Farmland Study Committee, which may help the Township to preserve natural features while accommodating I growth. 6. Investigate the use of bonus densities to encourage the use of rental units and/or the integration of I lower cost housing units within new developments.
1 I I 1 I I I
I Housing Plan 83 1999 Update December 1999 1 I CIRCULATION PLAN The circulation system -- streets and public transportation services -- provide residents with a means of traveling within the Township and to places beyond its boundaries. The Circulation Plan I must complement the Future Land Use Plan by helping to meet existing needs and by anticipating the needs for new or improved services. The recommendations made are based upon a series of discussions with the Planning Commission members and the public, and on the reports of accidents I within Northampton.
Northampton, like most of its suburban neighbors, is automobile oriented. Public transportation I plays a very minor role in circulation, so the emphasis in this Plan is on streets. The Circulation Plan has five major components:
1. Recommendations to keep through-traffic out of the center of Richboro as much as possible by I creating alternative routes with adequate shoulders and acceleration and deceleration lanes, using existing roads and by implementing other road improvements in the Richboro area;
I 2. Avoidance of the development of major four-lane highways of the type which has detracted from some communities around Northampton; I 3. Recommendations to provide suggested rights-of-way for future roads in sections of the Township which are currently undeveloped; these paper streets, to be constructed in conjunction with new development, should be designated as "collector" type roads;
I 4. Identification of intersections or portions of roadway which may require upgrading to afford a higher degree of safety to community traffic;
I 5. Recognition of the plans which county, regional, or state agencies may have for street or public transportation improvements. I Richboro Circulation Improvements
As Northampton and surrounding communities have grown, the amount of traffic through Richboro i on Second Street Pike, Bustleton Pike, Almshouse Road, and Newtown-Richboro Road has increased dramatically. Because of the configuration of roads in the Northampton area, north-south traffic traveling between Lower Bucks County and Central Bucks or the Wrightstown area passes through I Northampton, creating congestion in the Richboro shopping area and adding to the traffic with which Township residents must contend. I Based upon discussions with the Planning Commission, a proposal for an alternative route around Richboro is being suggested. It would involve no major construction but would involve promoting the use of existing roads, through signs at the several intersections, and some intersection improvements I which would ease the flow of traffic. The Proposed Circulation Map shows the proposed alternative route, which uses Bristol Road, Hatboro Road, Churchville Lane, and Holland Road. Traffic coming up Bristol Road and heading in 1 the direction of Wrightstown or Route 413 could continue on Bristol Road to Hatboro Road and proceed across Northampton on Hatboro Road rather than traveling on Bustleton Pike and Second Street Pike. Traffic wishing to cross Northampton in the lower portion of the Township, as well as traffic from the i Warminster-Hatboro area, would be encouraged to use Churchville Lane and Holland Road to Route
I Circulation Plan 85 I I 332 rather than Second Street Pike and Newtown-Richboro Road. 1 There are several advantages to this approach. First, by spreading the traffic over several major roads, the need to upgrade any single road may be diminished. Second, the highest traffic volumes in the Township are in the Richboro area. Recently completed improvements at the intersection of Second Street Pike and Almshouse Road are expected to ease the situation somewhat; but Richboro is the central I shopping area for Northampton residents. The Cultural Center, with its library and senior center provide additional reasons to visit Richboro, and traffic congestion caused by through-traffic will diminish the appeal and the usefulness of these community resources. The goal of the circulation system is to serve the residents and to provide the necessary support for the land use pattern. If Richboro is to be the community center for shopping, community functions, and professional offices, the street system must allow residents easy access and must promote the use of other routes for traffic not destined for Richboro.
The realignment of Hatboro Road at Almshouse Road would have to be accomplished in order for this portion of the alternative route to work. This improvement has already been suggested because of existing traffic congestion at this point. Preliminary engineering studies have been completed indicating that the realignment is feasible. The intersection of Sackettsford Road, Hatboro Road and Route 232 may require improvements in the long term, but they are not required for the alternative route to work at this point in time.
Traffic would be encouraged to use this alternative route through signs placed at critical intersections which would indicate the route through Northampton.
New Streets and Rights-of-way
Additions to the street system are proposed on the Proposed Circulation Map, based upon the needs of current residents and on the desire to establish a workable street system as the Township continues to develop. By analyzing the street system and projecting future needs, a system of roads can be planned instead of letting it develop segment by segment with each new development.
Most of the suggested improvements would be constructed when the vacant properties they traverse are developed. New legislation in Pennsylvania, called the Transportation Partners Act of 1985 (Act 47), may help Northampton accomplish these improvements. Under the Act, a municipality can delineate the transportation improvements needed, assess developers for a portion of the improvements, and gain access to some state funds for transportation improvements.
The following road improvements are recommended. The numbers by the text correspond to the numbers on the map.
1. Township Road - Township Road extends from Newtown-Richboro Road to Upper Holland Road, although it is not opened to public traffic past the Municipal Authority Building. The Future Land Use Plan suggests that the area along this road be devoted to office uses, thus requiring the improvement and opening of Township Road all the way to Upper Holland Road. This would provide access to the community facilities located along Township Road as well as serving the office uses and providing an alternative route within Richboro.
2. Tanvard Road Extension - Tanyard Road now ends at Second Street Pike, where traffic must either go into Richboro or turn right onto Second Street Pike. The land lying between Second Street Pike and Bustleton Pike opposite the end of Tanyard Road is now in agricultural use. By extending Tanyard Road through this property, when it is developed, the flow of traffic will be
Circulation Plan a6 I I improved in the immediate Richboro area. 3. Connection between Tanvard Road and Almshouse Road - The addition of a road linking Tanyard Road with Almshouse Road just above the Richboro shopping area is suggested. This connection would not only ease the flow of traffic in and around Richboro, but would provide a I natural boundary between the commercial zone and adjacent residential uses. The area is currently undeveloped. The proposed road would link the end of Friesland Drive with Almshouse Road, above the driveway now existing from Almshouse Road to the Wilson farm. 11~ The Future Land Use Plan indicates medium density development for this area, and a collector street will be required as it is developed. 1 These first three improvements - Township Road, Tanyard Road, and the Tanyard Road to Almshouse Road connection - provide a small internal loop within the Richboro district for Northampton residents. In addition to providing access to community and commercial facilities, it 1 provides an alternative to the main Richboro intersection. 4. Middle Holland Road - Umer Holland Road Connection - The Township has a number of T- intersections which work well on local roads because they slow the speed of traffic but which may I provide a hindrance to smooth traffic flow on through streets. In order to avoid the construction of four lane streets, some realignments of existing roads in undeveloped areas are suggested to improve the traffic capacity of the two-lane streets. Traffic capacity depends not only on the I number of lanes but also on factors such as alignment, surface conditions, auxiliary lanes for parking and turning, and grades. The intersection of Upper Holland with Holland Road is a T- intersection which, because of vacant land on the far side of Holland Road, could be avoided by providing a four-way intersection and a connection with Middle Holland Road. This would I increase the capacity of these roads without increasing the number of lanes. It would provide a safer intersection which would lend itself to easier signalization if needed.
I 5. Middle Holland Road to Route 332 Connection - The area between Middle Holland Road and Route 332, above Penns Courts and Hampton Estates, is undeveloped and in single ownership. Should it be developed at a future date, a collector road roughly parallel to Holland Road is I recommended. The road would extend from the new alignment of Middle Holland Road (recommended above) to the end of Spring Garden Mill Road, where it meets Route 332, in order to provide access to this area.
I 6. East Holland Road to Stonev Ford Road Connection - The largest undeveloped tract of land in Northampton lies between Buck Road, East Holland Road, and Stoney Ford Road. The Township should anticipate the future development of this tract and provide for connections from this tract to I all three roads. At the same time, an improvement to the East Holland Road configuration can be accomplished. East Holland has a series of right angle turns as it runs through the undeveloped portion of the Township below Buck Road. With new and expected activity, the removal or I elimination of these right-angle turns should be accomplished as a condition of development. The street recommended herein would alter these right angles into an acceptable configuration. I Two (2) additional road improvements are recommended, but only under certain circumstances: 7. St. Leonard's Road - If and when that portion of the Morrissey tract along St. Leonard's Road is proposed for development, the horizontal and vertical alignments of this street between Indian I Summer Drive and Newtown-Richboro Road should be corrected.
8. Twininp Ford Road to Newtown-Richboro Road Connection - If and when the Northampton I Valley Golf Club is considered for non-recreational development, a road from Twining Ford
I Circulation Plan 81 I I Road through to Newtown-Richboro Road would be desirable. It should be noted that development of this property under circumstances other than its current recreational use is not recommended. However, if preservation of this recreational asset or a portion thereof could only be achieved I through some level of development, then a road, as described, could be beneficial. Because Twining Ford Road ends at Tyler State Park, all traffic from Twining Ford Road must go onto Second Street Pike and must, if heading south or east, go through the Richboro business district. I The road would meet Newtown-Richboro Road at the Township Recreation Center, making that area more accessible to residents of the Township who live in the Twining Ford - Worthington Mill Road area. I
I Intersections Reauiring Further Studv I Not all of the traffic problems in Northampton can be solved by suggesting new roads or rights-of- way. There remain at least two difficult intersections which will require traffic engineering studies and solutions. These intersections, which are marked on the Proposed Circulation Map, are: I
A. Bristol Road and Knowles Avenue - A high accident area, this intersection is complicated by the presense of the railroad crossing on Bristol Road adjacent to the intersection. I B. Buck Road and Holland Road in Holland - Buck Road intersects Holland Road, Chinquapin Road, and Old Bristol Road within a short distance. The situation is complicated by the presense of steep slopes, Mill Creek, and a bend in Buck Road after it meets Holland Road. With the I increasing development of the Holland area, further consideration will have to be given to this intersection so that serious traffic congestion and hazards may be avoided. 1 Eight (8) other intersections may need to be considered for signalization; particularly if further subdivision activity takes place in their immediate vicinity, adding pressure to the moderate to serious traffic congestion problems already experienced at these intersections. They are: I Hatboro Road and Almshouse Road
Bristol Road and Bustleton Pike I Lower Holland Road and Holland Road i Newtown-Richboro Road and Holland Road East Holland Road and Buck Road I Tanyard Road and Second Street Pike
Tanyard Road and Friesland Drive I Friesland Drive and Almshouse Road I Countv. State and Regional Plans for NorthamDton Roads 1 None of the recommendations above conflict with the transportation plans prepared by the Bucks County Planning Commission, the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission, or the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT). Most transportation improvements 1
Circulation Plan €8 I I I
recommended at the county or regional levels are implemented only if they become part of the I PennDOT twelve-year program. The only three (3) improvements contained in the "Recommended 1988-2000 Twelve Year Transportation Program" are: 'I A bridge improvement on Bristol Road at the Conrail railroad crossing; I Safety improvements on Bustleton Pike at Herzog's Corner; and The replacement of the PA Route 332 bridge over the Neshaminy Creek.
I Public Transportation
There are two changes in the public transportation system which may affect Northampton residents. I The first is the possible electrification and re-opening of the Newtown Railroad line which crosses the lower section of the Township. This route, according to SEPTA, has high potential for passenger service because it serves one of the fastest growing areas in the Delaware Valley and because the track 1 is in good condition. If reopened under present plans, the line would include twenty-two (22) trains a day with stops at Village Shires, Holland, and Churchville. Good rail service to Montgomery County and Philadelphia would reduce traffic congestion during peak hours by offering an alternative to I automobile travel to work. The Bucks County Office of Public Transportation offers minibus service to senior citizens in Doylestown and Quakertown, and is beginning to provide service within Northampton. The new I senior center at the Township Cultural Center will be the focus of this service initially, with the County providing transportation for Northampton seniors to and from the Center. As the system expands, the minibuses will be available to transport senior citizens to and from doctors appointments, shopping 1 areas, and other locations. Although the Township cannot itself implement changes in the public transportation system, it should lend its support to those initiated by other agencies as one means of reducing vehicular I congestion in the Township. These proposed additions to the public transportation system offer potential improvements to circulation in the Township and should be encouraged by local officials. I Bicvcle Transportation I The growth in the popularity of bicycling has generated a demand for biking facilities, both for recreational use and as a means of transportation. Because of its dependence on automobile travel, the construction of bikeways may provide a welcome alternative in the Township. There are three levels of bikeways, ranging from those which restrict the crossflow of traffic and pedestrians to those which I involve sharing a right-of-way with car traffic.
In many sections of the Township, the roads are not wide enough to allow for a restricted right-of- I way for bicycles. As the road improvements are planned and new subdivisions laid out, consideration should be given to the inclusion of space for bikeways. 1 The planning of bicycle facilities is discussed in more detail in the Park and Recreation section of this Comprehensive Plan. I I Circulation Plan 88 I I
I Pedestrian Circulation I i In order to provide adequate pedestrian circulation between residential development and nearby ~ commercial, institutional, and park and recreation uses, sidewalks andor pedestrian walkways I should be installed. Sidewalks should be located within existing or ultimate street rights-of-way; while pedestrian paths would be situate within off-street easements or rights-of-way. These facilities will serve to reduce dependence on private vehicular transportation and school bussing. . I Because existing street rights-of-way have been found in many areas to be either insufficiently wide or topographically unsuitable for standard sidewalk construction, it is recognized that the installation of sidewalks and pedestrian paths will require preliminary planning and engineering input. I Additionally, the fiscal impacts of such facilities should be adequately addressed. The Proposed Circulation Map indicates those primary pedestrian routes that should be provided I upon futher study by the Township. Until such an investigation is completed, it is recommended that the Township require applicants for subdivision and land development approval to:
offer ultimate rights-of-way for dedication or reservation for sidewalks and pedestrian paths I along those routes; and construct sidewalks and/or pedestrian paths along a designated route, regardless of the whether I an adjoining sidewalk or pedestrian path is immediately available to tie into. I RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CIRCULATION
1. Create a system of alternative routes around Richboro by encouraging through traffic to use existing alternate routes and by implementing intersection improvements. i
2. Delineate locations for new streets in undeveloped sections of the Township, as noted on the Proposed Circulation Map. Investigate the use of Act 47 to help fhance these improvements I 3. Undertake engineering studies of problem intersections. I 4. Support the efforts of County and regional agencies with respect to improved public transportation services to the Township.
5. Bicycle and pedestrian circulation should be recognized as legitimate alternatives to vehicular I transportation and should be further studied by the Township. I I I I
Circulation Plan I I
CORlRlERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL AREAS PLAN
The Commercial and Industrial Areas Plan addresses the specific needs of these portions of the Township. Their location and size have been indicated on the Future Land Use Plan, but specific recommendations on their development are contained in this chapter; just as the specific recommendations for the future residential development of the Township have been described in the Housing Plan. Only some aspects of the commercial area development are within the control of the municipal government. Others, such as the type of commercial facilities which locate in commercial zones, are controlled by market forces rather than by the Township. Industrial Area
The Township's only industrial area is in the west corner, closest to Ivyland, where four (4) industrial parks have been built off of Jacksonville Road. The area of these parks is approximately 330 'I acres, although all the land within the parks has not been developed. The building lots are about two acres in size and relatively modern industrial buildings occupy the sites. As has been noted several times, the most significant problem with this development of industries is the lack of public water and I sewerage and the resultant deterioration of the groundwater due to industrial pollutants seeping from on-site septic systems into nearby wells. A portion of this problem has been resolved through the provision of public water service to the industrial parks. The Utilities Plan recommends that public I sewer also be provided to this area. With the exceptions of the sewer problem and a concern that there are insufficient supportive land uses in the immediate vicinity, such as restaurants and day care, the industrial areas function well. I There is a minimum of conflict between the industries and residences in the area. The parks place less demand on Township services than do most residential areas, which need to be provided with schools, recreational facilities, police and other services. From the point of view of the occupants of these areas, I the industrial parks function well, are well-maintained, and provide a reasonable environment for the conduct of business. Adequate provisions have been made for parking, loading, and the circulation of trucks and cars within the area. There is no street lighting, however.
I No new industrial areas have been recommended on the Future Land Use Plan, in accordance with the goals set by the Planning Commission. One concern about the limitation of industrial growth to this single area are the tax implications of such a policy. Many communities strive to attract businesses, I industries, and offices because they provide a good tax base without resulting in significantly higher demands for public services. Some municipalities have sought good ratables to enhance their tax revenues as well as to provide a source of local employment. However, Northampton has sought to build I a strong residential community without large amounts of its land devoted to commercial or industrial usage. The Future Land Use Plan reflects this goal.
The Future Land Use Plan further calls for a reduction of the industrial area; specifically, the I designation of the tract located at the southeast corner of Bristol and Jacksonville Roads to low density residential development. This recommendation stems from the unusual size and shape of this tract, which makes an industrial park development design particularly difficult in conjunction with I standard subdivision, storm water management and traffic considerations. In addition, the Township envisions considerable problems with providing this site with public water and sewer facilities to allow for proper industrial development. Lastly, the designation of this area as low density residential I blends well with the adjacent property which is utilized for recreational purposes, the Spring Mill Country Club. I I
Commercial and Industrial Areas Plan 91 I 1999 Update December 1999 I Commercial Areas
The main commercial area is Richboro. The goal of the Future Land Use Plan is to: I revise the boundaries of the commercial districts in Richboro to coincide with property lines; I concentrate on strengthening the commercial core by allowing the conversion of residential or transitional uses to commerce and permitting multi-family residential uses; and I improve the functioning of the area through small-scale design improvements and improved vehicular and pedestrian circulation.
Richboro is a popular shopping area. Several supermarkets, specialty stores and drug stores make it I attractive as a local convenience shopping area. It does not try to compete with nearby malls, nor should it. Shoppers' surveys, conducted by Thomas Tyler Moore Associates, indicated that the residents liked Richboro because of the variety of goods and services available. I
The Richboro area, though once an historic crossroads like Newtown, Doylestown, or Fallsington, has not kept the same feel as some of the other crossroads in Bucks County. The commercial area has I developed as a series of small shopping centers, all of which are automobile oriented and self-contained. There is very little relationship among them. The lack of sidewalks throughout Richboro makes it difficult to move from one shopping center to another. I Most of the older crossroads communities struggle with the need for parking. Because of the way in which Richboro has developed, parking is not as difficult a problem as it is in some of the older boroughs which have retained most of their older buildings. It is important to note that the shoppers' survey did not I indicate that parking was a problem. This is unusual for shopping areas such as Richboro because in most of these older communities, parking deficiencies plague merchants and shoppers. I Some of the character of the Richboro area might have been lost as older structures made way for newer shopping areas, a concern expressed by some of the shoppers surveyed who wanted the area to look more "colonial". But the development of areas such as Richboro does not occur without compromises. In the case of Richboro, it may have traded the ambience of an old village for convenient parking. I
Many of the Richboro commercial facilities are new structures. There are several areas, however, where the original houses still exist, either as residences or as small commercial uses. The area along I Second Street Pike across from the Crossroads Shopping Center; the section along Almshouse Road between the two new shopping areas (Mallard Creek and Weathervane); and the main intersection of Richboro are transitional areas where future conversions of buildings and reuse of land will require the I special attention of the Township to assure that new development meets the needs of shoppers in Richboro. For example, sidewalks should be provided as properties are developed or converted. This will provide a start toward a sidewalk system which will make pedestrian movement in the business district possible. I The land uses at the ends of the business district should be ones which provide good end points for the area and which do not conflict with adjacent uses. Ofice or institutional uses provide a good transition from commercial to residential zones, for example. In most sections of the Richboro commercial area, I the facilities at the end of the district meet these criteria. For example, the Crossroads Shopping Center, because of its orientation away from the residential areas and toward the business district, provides a good end for the commercial area on Bustleton Pike. Similarly, the day care facility on Second Street I Pike beyond the Richboro Elementary School is a commerciaYinstitutiona1 use which provides for a good transition to the residential area beyond. The Township Complex on Newtown-Richboro Road is a logical end point for the business district. The importance of creating a logical end to the district should be considered in deliberations on proposed Zoning Ordinance amendments or variances. I I Commercial and Industrial Areas Plan 92 1999 Update December 1999 I Sidewalks should be provided, as well as pedestrian links to Second Street Pike, if possible. The potential for creating a Town Center in this area is great. The presence of the Township Complex, which is already a gathering place because of the strong recreation program, the Free Library and Senior Center, the Richboro Junior High School, the Richboro Elementary School, and the commercial district create a Town Center which can be a significant asset in a large suburban community. The introduction of mixed residential-commercial uses, senior citizen housing and higher density housing should be encouraged in order to strengthen and provide vitality to the Richboro area.
When the Richboro Business Area Study was completed in 1982, several recommendations were made I with respect to parking standards, signs, sidewalks, and land use controls for the commercial area. Because the focus of that study was narrower than the Comprehensive Plan, it was able to include many detailed recommendations specifically geared to the business district -- the type of recommendations 'I which are beyond the scope of this study. These recommendations should be reviewed and, where appropriate, incorporated into Township policy.
I In 1996, the Board of Supervisors' created the Richboro 2000 Committee, a nine-member advisory panel delegated the responsibilities of promoting the Richboro business district and recommending actions and I policies to the Board of Supervisors regarding the improvement and beautification of the area. The other commercial areas in Holland, Churchville, and Village Shires, are smaller than Richboro and serve more localized shopping needs. These areas do not have the associated activities, such as the Township Complex and Cultural Center, which attract people to the area and serve to encourage use of the I business district. There is no need to expand the commercial district boundaries of these areas.
Churchville, the smallest of the areas, is an historic crossroads which retains some of its earlier I character. This character should be preserved as much as possible
Holland has been expanding recently and is an automobile-oriented shopping area which contains I several attractive older buildings and the wooded stream valley of Mill Creek. The woods and the creek contribute to the visual appeal of the area, and this should be recognized in the future development of the area.
I The Village Shires shopping center is a small convenience center on Buck Road which is part of the Village Shires residential development. It is the newest of the shopping areas and the buildings are part I of an integrated whole. I RECOMMENDATIONS FOR COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL AREAS 1. Revise the present boundaries of the commercial area in Richboro to coincide with property lines
2. Encourage design improvements in the Richboro District, such as sidewalks, placement of utilities I underground, appropriate conversions of older residences to commercial use, and integration of the new office districts with the commercial district
I 3. Review the recommendations made in the comprehensive study of the Richboro district completed in 1982 and the Richboro 2OOO Committee; and adopt their recommendations where appropriate. I 4. Limit commercial zoning in Richboro to logical end points of existing and proposed streets and effective '%buffer$'such as institutional and professional uses. Recommended end points are:
Tanyard Road and Second Street Pike; I Bustleton Pike at the Crossroad shopping Center and Fox Chase Savings and Loan properties; I Newtown-Richboro Road at Titus Avenue;
Commercial and Industrial Areas Plan 9B I 1999 Update December 1999 I Upper Holland Road at Township Complex and School District properties; Second Street Pike and Manor Drive; and Almshouse Road at the Weathervane and Mallard Creek developments. I I I I I I I 1 I I I I i I I I I Commercial and Industrial Areas Plan 91 1999 Update December 1999 I I UTILITIES AND SOLID WAslE PLAN The major utilities controlled locally are water and sewer facilities and solid waste disposal. The importance of water and sewer systems to the development of the Township is evident when the I Township land use pattern is observed. The areas above Hatboro Road which lack these public services are relatively undeveloped compared with the sewered portion of the Township. Therefore, public policy on the installation of water and sewer facilities must address not only health and safety questions but I also the issues of Township growth and growth management. I Water Facilities Public water facilities are available throughout much of the Township, although there are some areas of the Township that are without service. Some of these areas are of some concern in that they can I be and have been subject to groundwater supply problems, such as drought, pollution and contamination, and fire safety problems. Evidence of ground water pollution had been found in the industrial areas along Jacksonville Road and Traymore Manor, the residential area abutting the I industrial area which contains some 150 residences which draw water from private wells. The Northampton, Bucks County, Municipal Authority (NBCMA) recently provided public water to the industrial areas to prevent the potential health problems associated with groundwater deterioration.
I The Official Plan for water service in Northampton Township is the 1970 Master Plan for Water Supply for Bucks County. It calls for the provision of public water throughout the Township. It is recommended here that the Official Plan be revised to more accurately reflect the need for public water I service in those moderate and high density development or growth areas and the absence of such need in the low density residential areas of the Township, as recommended in this Plan. I More specifically, those residential areas which have experienced difficulties with groundwater supply should be considered for extension of water service. These areas are:
1. Chinquapin Road Area - Chinquapin Road, Witherington Drive, North Marmic Drive and I South Marmic Drive.
2. Northampton Hills Area - Locust Road, Holly Knoll Drive, Magnolia Drive, Wisteria Drive, I Linden Road and Beech Street.
3. Traymore Manor Area - Lea Road, Norwood Road, Hill Road, Inland Road, Hunt Drive, North 1 and South Traymore Drives, Brookline Road and Overlook Drive. 4. Grenoble Manor Area - MacFarland Avenue, Neshaminy Drive, Driscoll Drive and 1 Homestead Drive. 5. Northampton Terrace and High Knoll Areas - Upland Drive, Pennlyn Road, Ross Road, I Fairhill Drive and Charlotte Drive 6. Churchville Manor Area - Sherwood Drive, Green Drive, Stratford Drive and Windsor Drive I 7. Hillside Manor Area - Hilltop Drive, North Hilltop Drive, Valley Drive and Bristol Road 8. Pine Lake Farms Area - Longview Drive, Dawn Drive and Chapel Drive
I 9. Lakeview Farms/Green AcresKasey View/Elmview Areas - Brook Drive, North Drive, Aqua I Drive, Wilson Drive, Cameron Drive, Bluebird Road, Starling Road, Cardinal Road, Wren Utilities and Solid Waste Plan 96 I 1999 Update December 1999 I Drive and Elm Avenue
10. Holland Park Estates Area - West Patricia Road, Serene Drive, Austin Drive and Morning 1 Glory Avenue
11. Holland View Area - Broadview Road, Sugartree Road, Lakeside Drive and Churchville Road I
12. Hidden Cove Estates Area - Hidden Cove Drive, Mildred Avenue, Lydia Avenue, Lake Drive, Jean Avenue, Kay Avenue, Churchville Lane and Bristol Road I 13. Holland Farms/Woodlake Estates Areas - Mallard Road, Martin Drive, Crescent Drive, Lakeview Drive and Twist Drive I 14. Hillcrest Farms Area - West Rambler Drive, East Rambler Drive, Christopher Drive, Ronald Drive and Rocksville Road I 15. Miscellaneous Streets - Bonnie Road, Titus Avenue, Burdsall Avenue, Wheatsheaf Road and Grasshopper Drive (western portion) I All of these areas recommended for extension of water service are shown on the PmposedSewerand Water Services Map.
In that water lines have recently been extended to the industrial parks along Jacksonville Road, a I further extension along Jacksonville Road to the Cherokee Industrial Park and the intersection of Jacksonville Road and Bristol Road is recommended; but only in conjunction with future development at that intersection. Other recommended water line extensions related to anticipated development I include: 1. Churchville Area - Bustleton Pike, Bristol Road and Churchville Lane I 2. Former lands of Warminster Naval Air Warfare Center
3. Worthington Mill Road, south of Twining 'Road I
In order to maintain an adequate water supply for domestic, industrial and fire fighting needs, the NBCMA has determined that an interconnection with one or more adjacent public water sources may be I required in order to offset the loss of pressure which is expected to result from the continued extension of water service into the western end of the Township. To that end, discussions have been ongoing between the NBCMA and the Warminster Township Sewer and Water Authority. I Public Sewers I Planning for sewage facilities has involved federal, state, county, and local officials. When the federal government was subsidizing the construction of local sewer facilities, they required regional planning and cooperation on sewerage. Federal financing has been virtually eliminated, but I Pennsylvania law (Act 537) now requires that each municipality have its own Sewage Facilities Plan. Additions to the sewer system must be recorded as part of the Plan through amendatory revisions. Until 1997, when a SewaFe Facilities Plan UDdate for the Little Neshaminv Creek Drainage Area was adopted I by the Board of Supervisors, Northampton Township's Sewage Facilities Plan was the plan adopted for Bucks County, last revised in 1989. That Plan denoted that the entire Township was to be provided with public sewers. I I Utilities and Solid Waste Plan 96 1999 Update December 1999 I I
The Future Land Use Plan and the Housing Plan suggest that a sizable portion of the area northwest I of Hatboro Road (the areas shown as low density residential) will not need to be provided with public sewer. The Township should give consideration to extending sewers to the area designated on the Proposed Sewer and Water Services Map, which is the same general area above Hatboro Road for which public water has either been provided or is recommended. The basic reason for this is the health and I safety of Township residents and the protection of the groundwater resources in the northwest portion of the Township.
I The recommended extension of sewer service is planned for two areas, to be completed within the next five (5) years. The first is a small area near the intersection of Hatboro Road and Sackettsford Road, which has had numerous problems with failed on-lot septic systems and is of moderate density I zoning. The second is the larger area identified as the same general area for which an expansion of public water service is recommended. This second area includes properties diagnosed with malfunctioning on-lot sewage disposal systems and areas planned for industrial, commercial and higher density residential development. Three (3) new sewer systems and one (1) existing sewer I system, consisting of gravity sewers and sewage pumping stations, will be utilized to expand the Township's sewer system in these two areas. Treatment would be provided at the Northeast I Philadelphia Wastewater Treatment Plant. The areas where sanitary sewer expansion is recommended are: I 1. The Industrial Parks, Traymore Manor and Grenoble Manor Areas - Commerce Drive, Richard Road, Louise Drive, Vincent Circle, Pulinski Drive, Industrial Drive, Steam Whistle Drive, Indian Drive, Humphreys Drive, Railroad Drive, Council Rock Drive, Norwood Road, ~I Lea Road, North and South Traymore Avenues, Hunt Drive, Inland Drive, Brookline Road, Overlook Drive, Hill Road, MacFarland Avenue, Driscoll Drive, Neshaminy Drive, Homestead Drive (to be served through wastewater treatment plant constructed in conjunction I with Warwick Township) 2. Harvest Acres Area - Clover Road, Barley Road, Harvest Road, Kings Lane and a portion of I Hatboro Road (to be served through a pumping station) 3. Highland View/College ParWMeadow Lenorthington Farm Areas - Highspire Road, Primrose Drive, Stanford Drive, Beth Drive, Lehigh Drive and Temple Drive
I 4. Spring Garden Mill Area - Spring Garden Mill Road, Woodstock Drive and Verna Way I Other recommended sewer service areas related to anticipated development include: 1. Northwest side of Hatboro Road - from Pulinski Road to lands of the former Warminster Naval Air Warfare Center, southwest of Bobbie Drive
I 2. Lands in the western corner of the Township, along Bristol Road and at the terminus of Richard Road
I 3. Undeveloped lands northeast of Pulinski Road, between Hatboro Road and Jacksonville Road
Many suburban municipalities are hampered in their efforts to extend sewer service by a lack of I sewer capacity. However, there are no indications that lack of sewer capacity will interfere with the proposed sewer extensions. The Neshaminy Interceptor originally consisted of a single eighteen inch (18") line, beginning in Tyler State Park. Development in the eastern portions of the Township and along the border with Newtown and Middletown Townships had been restricted until a thirty (30) inch I parallel line, designed to handle the additional expected flows both from Northampton and Newtown I Utilities and Solid Waste Plan 97 I 1999 Update December 1999 I Townships, became operational in the late 1980's. Treatment for sewage in this line occurs at the Northeast Wastewater Treatment facility in Philadelphia which was expanded in the late 1980's. I Solid Waste Management I While addressing the short term problems of solid waste disposal, the Township will continue, via the Southwest Bucks Solid Waste Committee (SWBSWC) to apply for grants and undertake joint studies in order to address the long term problems and other ramifications of Act 101 of 1988. I The scarcity of new sites, the increasing public sensitivity against landfill expansion, added to more stringent environmental regulations have put an ever intensifying pressure on Northampton Township officials to seek alternatives to landfills. A small case waste-to-energy facility is a way to I lessen the need for landfill space in an effective, efficient and economical manner for the long term. Even so, there are few residents and business owners who would volunteer to have a waste facility located near or adjacent to their property. I
Until a final, long term solution is established, Township officials should continue to seek alternatives that will: I Provide competitive solid waste disposal prices for Township homeowners and businesses;
Guarantee collection and disposal of the Northampton Township waste stream; and I Expand the recycling program in conjunction with neighboring municipalities. I Table 21 I SOLID WASTE GENERATION NorthamDton Township 1970 1980 1990 2ooo* 2010" I Population 15,807 27,392 35,406 40,000 44,000
Total Township I Solid Waste Generation 18.57 35.41 45.89 59.89 64.25 (tons per day)
* projections, as provided by SWBSWC I
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR UTILITES AND SOLID WASTE I
1. Provide public water facilities to the Cherokee industrial park and following residential areas: Traymore Manor, Northampton Hills, Grenoble Manor, Chinquapin Road, Northampton Terrace, I High Knoll, Churchville Manor, Hillside Manor, Churchville, Pine Lake Farms, Lakeview Farms, Green Acres, Casey View, Elmview, Holland Park Estates, Holland View, Hidden Cove Estates, Holland Farms, Woodlake Estates and Hillcrest Farms. I 2. Revise Master Plan for water supply for Northampton Township to reflect the need for public water service to moderate and high density residential development and delete proposed service to low density residential areas (as shown on the Future Land Use Map). I I Utilities and Solid Waste Plan 98 1999 Update December 1999 1 I
I 3. Provide public sewerage facilities to the industrial parks and following residential areas: Traymore Manor, Grenoble Manor, Harvest Acres, Highland View, College Park, Meadow Lea, I Worthington Farm and Spring Garden Mill. 4. Further revise the Sewage Facilities Plan for the remainder of the Township not covered by the 1997 Update to reflect the expansion of public sewers, as recommended; including the deletion of proposed I service to low density residential areas (as shown on the Future Land Use map). 5. Develop both long and short term plans for solid waste management that will: encourage efficient collection of residential refuse; allow for the implementation of a workable recycling program; and guarantee safe and reliable disposal of solid waste in compliance with Acts 97 and 101and other state mandates. I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I Utilities and Solid Waste Plan 99 1999 Update December 1999
I
I COMMUNITY FACILITIES PLAN The community facilities which presently serve the residents of Northampton have been reviewed in the Community Facilities background study and in the Park and Recreation Plan which accompanies I this document. The public buildings and public uses of land are important elements of the community, and the comprehensive planning process provides an opportunity to examine the possible need for future I facilities or services. Because of the recent completion of several new municipal facilities, there are no real deficiences in the present level of services in the Township. The Community Facilities chapter presented earlier in I this report describes the current facilities. The recommendations which follow are provided to alert residents and officials to the possibilities of future needs as the Township continues to grow.
I Police Protection
The need for police protection increases as the population grows, so the further development of the * I Township which is anticipated in the Future Land Use Plan will affect the need for police protection. Based upon current population trends, the police officials anticipate the need for command personnel to I be assigned to the evening shift and additional personnel for patrol on all shifts. A seven year program (1988-1995) for the police department includes plans for a complete overhaul of existing districts and an addition of a Fifth District due to the expanded growth of existing District One.
I It is planned that command personnel be assigned to the evening shift as well as the day shift. A position is planned to oversee the records division, civilian employees and the training function of the I department. The seven year program forsees the need for forty (40) employees by 1995. It should be noted that the 911 emergency number is a possibility in the future of Bucks County. When 911 is adopted it will be county-wide. The Township will then be faced with a decision to utilize I county dispatch for the police department or continue to self-dispatch. One of the factors to be weighed will be the cost of the equipment that must be purchased by the Township that would duplicate county equipment. Preliminary studies of the 911 system indicate that it would not be cost effective for the Township to maintain its dispatching service. If the Township, after implementation of the 911 system, I chooses to utilize county dispatch, it is planned that the police building would remain open twenty-four (24) hours a day, seven (7) days a week with civilian station attendants (clerical support staff). It would be impractical to close the building after normal business hours due to the amount of walk-in u complaints and in-person requests for emergency service. The Northampton population is expected to grow to about 48,140 by 2000 and to about 56,570 by the year I 2010. 1988 population was estimated to be 40,055 people. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has established guidelines on the number of police personnel needed for each one thousand residents. However, many suburban communities have fewer than 1.5 per 1,000. In Bucks County, it is not uncommon to have less than 1 policeman per 1,000 residents. Northampton currently has 0.85 sworn I police personnel for every 1,000 residents.
Based on the FBI standard, Northampton should have a police force of 60. This is excessive for a I township such as Northampton. However, the population increases which have been occurring and which will continue to occur will put increasing pressure on the police force. I A more appropriate measure of police personnel needed would include an evaluation of response time to emergency calls, road mileage to be patrolled, assignment availability, population density, and I Community Facilities Plan 101 maintenance of a supervisor ratio of at least one to five (15). I The Police Department’s current plan anticipates the need of between 35 and 40 personnel over the next four (4) years. In 1992, a thorough study should be conducted, incorporating the above referenced factor, to determine what growth of police personnel should be expected to the year 2000, if any. I The implications of this anticipated need for police are mainly budgetary. The police station and radio unit are relatively new, so that salaries and new police vehicles will be the main costs to the Township. There is no projected need for new police buildings at this time. If County dispatch is I utilized as a result of the 911 program, the Township would have additional space in the current building for the expected growth of sworn personnel. I Fire Protection I Fire company officials have identified three (3) fire protection issues facing the community. They are:
1. The need for paid personnel I 2. The need for additional fire stations I 3. The lack of municipal water service in the western portion of the Township With the increasing volume of calls for service being recorded by the fire company, fire company I officials have identified the need for paid full-time personnel to supplement the volunteer effort during the daytime work week hours. Continued growth in the community will increase the volume of services required by the fire company. I Proportionately, the need for daytime emergency responses, as well as additional responsibilities for fire code enforcement, and fire prevention functions will also rise. An effective level of daytime community fire protection will have to be established and manpower resources provided to address these I conditions. Because of the physical size of the Township, as well as current and anticipated development of the I community, the fire company has identified the need for additional fire stations. Response times are increasing as responding firefighters and fire apparatus must negotiate increasing volumes of traffic.
Required fire flows needed to extinguish severe fires in these districts cannot be delivered via I conventional static water supply delivery systems (tankers, streams, and ponds), and the ability of the fire company to provide an acceptable level of fire protection in these areas is limited. In addition, the unavailability of municipal water service in the industrial district severely impedes the installation of I offensive fire protection systems such as fire sprinkler systems. Second only to fire prevention, the installation of fire sprinkler systems should represent a cornerstone in the community’s first line of fire defenses and is the key to modern, efficient, cost effective management of community fire protection. I
Fires in the adjacent rural residential developments can be fought with tanker and water shuttle operations; but these evolutions are much less efficient than those utilizing municipal fire hydrants I and demand the availability of greater manpower resources and equipment.
As the Township continues to grow, there may be deficiencies in volunteer manpower. Recent I I Community Facilities Plan 102 I I
efforts in recruitment have met with some success; and further efforts on an annual basis, such as open I houses, newspaper and CATV advertising, should be encouraged. If manpower problems continue to grow in the future, the Township may have to face the prospect of considering paid drivers or some other alternatives, even including the structural reorganization of Township services to stress a public safety I orientation.
One of the most highly regarded aspects of the NTVFC's services is their response time. A major I factor affecting response time is the distance from the station to the scene of the call. The negative affect that distance has for the response time of both the personnel and equipment has been compounded in Northampton Township by the increase in traffic.
I In order to provide a "first truck! response within an acceptable time frame throughout the Township, an additional location has been identified for a new fire substation. This is in the vicinity of Pulinski Road and Hatboro Road. This location would provide excellent response time to the I surrounding area, including the industrial parks on Jacksonville Road which are currently the longest runs for the NTVFC from its present location. I Although it is not identified as an immediate or near future need, the potential for an additional substation in the vicinity of Buck Road and Rocksville Road is also recognized.
It is believed that these two locations will not only prove beneficial in relation to response time, but I will also be located in areas that will minimize the adverse effects of traffic and noise that residents often complain of.
I It is suggested that Township officials look into methods for preserving the specific sites, as shown on the Community Facilities Plan, so as to allow for their potential use as fire stations. I In addition, it is suggested that an ad hoc committee be formed to review these proposed sites and others suggested by the NTVFC to formally identify areas which could be used in the future for fire emergency facilities. The ad hoc committee should contain members of both the NTVFC and the Planning Commission. The final recommendations from this committee should be considered by the I Board of Supervisors for incorporation in this Comprehensive Plan to the extent that they may alter the I above-mentioned recommendations. Schools I Even though substantial growth is expected in the future in Newtown Township and areas north of Northampton Township, School District officials still believe that overall enrollment for years to come will reflect a high level of participation from the Northampton area. The district's Long Range Plan anticipates a substantial increase in enrollment during the next few years due to the level of I development occumng in Northampton and Newtown Townships.
Enrollment is expected to increase slightly on an annual basis, reaching a peak of between 10,500 to I 12,000 students sometime in the mid-1990's. It is expected that pressure for additional secondary school facilities may be felt by 1994. The School District is currently evaluating whether a new secondary I school facility, to be operational at that time, should be planned. As referenced earlier in this Plan, two (2) new elementary schools are under construction: one in Holland, adjacent to the Holland Intermediate School on East Holland Road, northwest of Buck Road; and one in Richboro, across from the Richboro Intermediate School on Upper Holland Road. I Additionally, two expansions of existing elementary schools outside of Northampton Township are I Community Facilities Plan 103 1 1
planned to be implemented by 1989. The projected population growth of Newtown Township and Northampton Township is anticipated to continue providing sufficient numbers of students so the I School District will not be faced with the issue of school closings for some time. All schools will continue to be used at a level near capacity. I The School District owns property on Upper Holland Road, adjacent to the Township Cultural Center. A portion of this property will be developed with the new elementary school. The remainder has been reserved for the possible construction of a new secondary school facility. At this point, it is not certain that such a facility will need to be built at that location. It is anticipated that within the next year or so I School District officials will be making a decision as to whether or not a new secondary school facility, either an intermediate or senior high school, will have to be built. I Newtown Township is growing more rapidly than some of the surrounding area. Therefore, any new facilities that may be contemplated, beyond that which has already been identified, may be sited so as to serve that area more efficiently. Because the School District does own a school site in I Northampton, and because there is some doubt about the future construction of a new secondary school facility, the Future Land Use Plan does not designate any new sites for future school use. I Township Facilities
The Township has had the foresight and commitment to create a modern municipal complex in I Richboro which houses many of the governmental functions as well as the new Cultural Center. The municipal building, police station, fire station, public works department, municipal authority, and the Cultural Center are all new buildings along Township Road which provide a convenient and pleasant I environment in which to conduct township business and personal recreation.
Librarv Facilities I
Future needs of the Free Library are for more seating space for patrons, additional shelving, and a larger parking area in order to keep up with increasing population and its library demends. The I constant use of the Cultural Center's multi-purpose room would indicate consideration of another meeting room if the Free Library is to expand its programming. There is adjacent land available for building and parking lot expansion. I Pennsylvania standards for library facilities suggest that 1.5 volumes per capita is a desirable library size. Northampton currently has 44,000 volumes, which exceeds this standard, based on the 1980 census. If the library is to keep up with the Township growth, the collection would have to expand to I 56,775 volumes to meet the 1990 projected population of 37,850 and to 72,225 volumes to meet the projected population of 48,150 by the year 2000. I The library is not required by the state to meet this volume standard by itself, but the system as a whole must meet the volume standard for its service area. However, an attempt should still be made to reach this total, as the Northampton residents are active and demanding library users. 1 In order to accomodate the increased number of volumes and to allow more room for patrons, the library will probably have to increase to approximately 15,000 square feet; or about 50% of its present size. The Library Board will address the future needs in a 5-year plan, to cover the years 1989-1993. I I I Community Facilities Plan 104 I I I Emergency Ambulance Service With the increased growth that has occurred in the Northampton area, and the expected continuation of growth, it is recognized that additional facility space and equipment will be needed to adequately I service the Northampton area.
Current Rescue Squad plans call for the following improvements to address problems facing the I emergency medical services in Northampton Township: Initiation of a Basic Life SUDDO~~crew stationed at the Richboro facilitv to improve services. A new Basic Life Support Crew, consisting of two persons, is believed to be needed to enhance I daytime coverage on weekends when volunteer participation is at its weakest. It is also anticipated that such a crew could relieve the paramedic crew of handling all calls and allowing I for broader coverage during the week for the more seriously ill or injured patients. Initiation of Dlans to secure a larPer facilitv in the Richboro area. The THRS has expressed a desire to move its base of operations from its present location in Feasterville to Northampton I Township. The Feasterville location would then become a satellite location. The base or headquarters station would house one (1)Advanced Life Support Unit, two (2) Basic Life Support Units, one (1)transport van, and a Special Services Unit. A building containing approximately 8,000 square feet'would be required. Ideally, it should be located close to the center of Richboro, so I as to minimize adverse effects of noise and traffic in residential areas, but outside of a traffic congestion area.
1 The best location for a possible rescue squad headquarters would be along the' proposed Township Road, south of the existing Municipal Authority Building. If such a site could not be obtained, a secondary location would be across from the municipal water tower on Second Street Pike, north I of Newtown-Richboro Road. Since it is anticipated that the vacant property in this area will be developed in the near future, a suitable site may be obtained in conjunction with that land development plan.
I Increased visibilitv within the NorthamDton communitv. In order to broaden both the financial base (through subscriptions) and volunteer membership, efforts to enhance the THRS through I vigorous promotion and improved public relations should be pursued. i Stormwater Management The Township has adopted an aggressive program to control stormwater. Its Stormwater Management Ordinance has been cited by the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources as a model ordinance. The ordinance provisions are diligently enforced. The only deficiencies in the I control of stormwater are due to developments which occurred prior to the passage of the ordinance.
The Township has recently adopted an ordinance which will help them deal with the problem of I correcting areas with minor flooding problems. The Off-Site Stormwater Drainage Contribution Fund has been created which requires developers to pay $2 per linear foot of roadway in new residential developments and $30 per parking space in new commercial developments to fund the cost of minor I drainage projects. This fund will enable to Township to correct some of the deficiencies in the drainage system. These areas have been identified by the Township Public Works Department and the Township Engineer.
I Northampton Township has unilaterally begun a program, which it refers to as the Stormwater
Community Facilities Plan 105 1
Management Initiatives Program. This is a completely locally funded program. The first phase of the program, involving the identification and quantification of existing drainage problems, has been 1 carried out. These existing problems have been identified by citizens, elected and appointed officials, and consultants. After identification, the projects were prioritized. The Township has received funding to implement the suggestions of the study. Stormwater management and/or relief programs I are in the planning process for the following areas:
Holland Road Area - involving the installation of storm sewer in Holland Road, Upper Holland Road, Middle Holland Road, East Holland Road, and associated areas. The project may also I include the construction of detention basins in the Upper Holland RoadHolland Road area and/or the Holland Road/East Holland Road area. The purpose of the project is to relieve flooding along Holland Road, principally near its intersections with Upper Holland Road and I Middle Holland Road; and to provide relief from associated flooding in several of the residential areas to the east of Holland Road. I Second Street Pike and TwininP Ford Road - involving the installation of a storm sewer system in Twining Ford Road, just east of Second Street Pike. The purpose of the storm sewer system is to eliminate flooding of Twining Ford Road in the area east of Second Street Pike. I Jacksonville Road Spur - involving the installation of storm sewer in an easement to the northwest of Jacksonville Road, between its intersections with Pulinski Road and Almshouse Road. This project will be an extension to the Jacksonville Road Storm Sewer Project, installed I in the early 1980's. This extension will enable the existing system to more efficiently collect water flowing in an easterly direction from the areas to the northwest of Jacksonville Road. I Jacksonville Road/Grenoble Road Area - involving the construction of a storm sewer in Jacksonville Road, from a point near its intersection with Grenoble Road, down to the stream crossing under Jacksonville Road just northeast of Brookwood Drive. The purpose of the project is to provide storm drainage for Jacksonville Road. I
Bustleton Pikemew Road Area - involving the installation of storm sewer along Bustleton Pike and in an easement to the east of Bustleton Pike; all in the vicinity of the intersection of Bustleton I Pike with New Road. This project will be an extension of the forty-eight inch (48") culvert in an easement to the east of Bustleton Pike. The purpose of the project is to relieve flooding in the Bustleton Pikemew Road area and around the homes to the east of that intersection. I Spencer Road, northeast of Creek - involving the construction of storm sewer in Spencer Road northeast of its intersection with Temperance Lane. The purpose of the project is to drain a relatively flat portion of Spencer Road, which currently ecxperiences inundation during storms. I
Spencer Road/Temperance Lane Area - involving the construction of storm sewer in Spencer Road, both southwest and northeast of its intersection with Temperance Lane. This project is an I extension of an existing storm sewer system to collect the water more efficiently near its source.
Retrofit Detention Basins - involving the study of a number of existing detention basins in a residential area east of Bustleton Pike, roughly in the vicinity of Lower Holland and Upper I Holland Roads. These were some of the earliest detention basins constructed in Northampton Township. This project would involve the hydraulic study of these detention basins, to determine if improvements could be made to the outlet structures, so as to make these basins better able to I retain stormwater in more frequent, less intense, storms, and in the early stages of the more intense storms. I Northampton Township, along with thirty-one (31) other municipalities, is also participating in a I Community Facilities Plan 106 I I
stormwater management study of the Neshaminy Creek watershed. Along with the municipalities, the I participants in this study are the Neshaminy Water Resources Authority, the Bucks County Planning Commission and the Bucks County Conservation District. The objectives of this comprehensive study are to: decrease flood damage, reduce erosion, maintain natural drainage, improve water quality, and I increase recharge. The study consultant has obtained detailed information about each municipality. This information includes items such as existing storm sewer systems, existing stormwater management facilities, existing problem areas, and planned new systems. It is expected that the I program will result in model ordinances, which can be adopted by the individual municipalities in an effort to achieve the abovestated objectives in each municipality.
I RECOMMENDATIONS FOR COMMUNITY FACILITIES
1. The Township has been diligent about planning for and constructing adequate facilities for its I population. Because of past policies, there are no outstanding deficiencies in public facilities, and the Township should continue these policies of providing for the neceSSary facilities. I 2. The Township should be aware of the probable need for increased police and fire protection as the Township grows. The possible need for fire substations and a new headquarters for emergency II ambulance services should be considered. I I I I 1 I I I I I Community Facilities Plan 107 1 I I FISCAL ANALYSIS ExDenditure Trends I The rapid development of Northampton Township has brought about corresponding growth in its local government. The Township has expanded the scope of its services to meet the increasing demands of local conditions.
D This trend can be seen in Table 22, which traces expenditure trends in the municipal government over the past eleven (11) years. This table is a composite of the various funds which comprise the total municipal budget and represents all operating activities of the local government. Capital improvement 1 funds were excluded from this and subsequent tables. For ease of discussion, municipal expenditures were divided into six generally accepted categories of activity: General Government, Public Safety, I Public Works, Culture and Recreation, Debt Service, and Statutory and Unclassified expenditures. Overall, municipal expenditures have increased eighty-nine and six tenths percent (89.6%) since 1988 to a 1998 operating budget of $12.2 million. By comparison, the cost of living in the Philadelphia area increased 32.5% from December 1987 to December 1997. This rapid increase in municipal I expenditures is not uncommon in developing communities such as Northampton.
The largest component of municipal expenditures is Public Works, which accounts for almost I twenty-eight percent (28%) of the Township budget. Since 1989, when the Township assumed the responsibility for solid waste management, the Public Works category has included this component. I The $3.9 million spent for Public Works is drawn from portions of the general and highway aid funds. Public Safety, at nearly $3.6 million, represents about twenty-five percent (25%) of the total current budget. Police services account for the majority of the funds in this category; and other components of this category include fire protection, ambulance/rescue service, code enforcement, planning and I zoning, and emergency management. The majority of these monies are listed as "protection to persons and property" in the general fund budget but also include the ambulance/rescue tax and fire tax funds. During the past ten years this category increased at a steady pace each year, but at a rate (61.9%) I significantly less than the overall Township budget.
The Statutory and Unclassified category includes items such as employee benefits and insurance I coverage. Since 1988, it has been the third largest component of the public budget. The General Government category includes administration, the tax office, and buildings and plant. Expenditures for General Government peaked in 1989; went through a reduction over the next I three years; and has decreased to less than eight percent (8%)of the Township budget over the past four years.
I Culture and Recreation includes funding for recreation, the library, and the senior center. In terms of growth, this budget category has more than tripled over the past ten years. A Library Tax and Park I and Recreation Tax supplement the General Fund to pay for these activities. The increase in the cost of Debt Service has doubled, rising from $383,366 in 1988 to a peak of $788,309 in 1995. During this period, the Township borrowed money for several major projects: the Cultural Center and the Maier Tract (park land). These projects, together with payments for the municipal I building, were each contained in separate tax funds. General obligation bonds of $300,000, $1.75 million and $4.095 million were issued in 1975, 1987 and 1988, respectively. These three bonds were refinanced in 1992 by a new general obligation bond; which also provided revenues for stormwater I drainage and recreation projects. A 1998 general obligation bond ($6.5 million) will be used for a I Fiscal Analysis 109 I 1999 Update December 1999 Table 22
Expenditure Trends in Northampton Township Municipal Operating Budgets 5. v) 19881998
Budgeted Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Change 1998 1997 1996 1995 1994 1993 1992 1991 1990 1989 1988 1988-98
Gen. Gov't. $1,109,645 $1,036,187 $1,007,580 $908,602 $961,614 $917,939 $895,967 $1,030,941 $1,195,919 $1,246,934 $1,130,662 -$21,017 Percent of total 7.8% 9.1% 9.6% 9.1% 10.2% 9.8% 10.3% 11.4% 13.8% 14.9% 19.0% -1.9%
Public Safety 3,558,362 3,243,747 3,053,456 2,943,738 2,786,475 2,773,356 2,737,975 2,563,813 2,541,541 2,457,714 2,197,238 +1,361,124 Percent of total 25. I % 28.6% 29.2% 29.6% 29.5% 29.5% 31.6% 28.5% 29.4% 29.3% 36.9% +61.9%
Public Works 3,930,347 3,397,620 3,365,330 2,999,483 2,79038 1 2,9 16,333 2,817,999 2,687,772 2,386,492 2,360,602 629,782 +3,300,565 Percent of total 27.7% 30.0% 32.1% 30.2% 29.5% 3 1.O% 32.5% 29.8% 27.6% 28.1 % 10.6% +524.1%
+ Culture/Rec. 1,026,950 939,282 844,564 777,201 684,531 686,192 621,565 521,968 43 1,714 381,603 329,423 +697,527 + Percent of total 8.4% 8.3% 8.1% 7.8% 7.2% 7.3% 7.2% 5.8% 5.0% 4.5% 5.5% +211.7% 0 I)cl)l Service 701,302 669,701 6723 12 788.309 746,225 744,638 6 1,567 8 13,579 8 14,825 682,028 383,366 +3 17,936 Percent of total 4.9% 5.9% 6.4% 7.9% 7.9% 7.9% 0.7% 9.0% 9.4% 8.1% 6.4% +82.9%
Statutory 1,875,912 2,039,356 1,529,289 1,529,715 1,481,744 1,363,183 1,542,297 1,389,635 1,279,345 1,263,523 1288,259 +587,653 & Unclassified Percent of total 15.4% 18.0% 14.6% 15.4% 15.7% 14.5% 17.8% 15.4% 14.8% 15.1% 21.6% +45.6%
TOTAL $12,2023 18 $I 1,325,893$10,473,03 I $9,947,048 $9.45 I, 170 $9,402,202 $8,677,370 $9,007,708 $8,649,836 $8,392,404 $5,958,730 +6,243,788 Percent change 7.7% 8.1% 5.3% 5.2% 0.5% 8.4% -3.7% 4.1% 3.1% 40.8% -5.7% +104.8% from previous year
C.P.1.-u 166.4 164.3 159.1 155.4 151.3 147.5 144.4 139.4 129.9 125.6 (December) Percent change +1.3% +3.3% +2.4% +2.7% +2.6% +2.1% +3.6% +7.3% +3.4% +5.6% +32.5% from previous year
Notes: Capital funds, street light maintenance fund, pension funds, cash on hand at the beginning of the year, and inter fund transfers are excluded.
B C.P.1.-U represents the Consumer Price Index for all urban consumers in the Philadelphia, PA - New Jersey region. Data are presented for December of 1988 through 1997. c) (D 1982-84 = 100. 8 I variety of capital projects, including: traffic and signalization improvements; a fire company substation; a new rescue squad building; a new salt shed; additions to the library, Holland fire station, I and recreation center buildings; land acquisition; and capital equipment.
1 Revenue Trends
Revenues in all categories have increased since 1988 by 104.3%. Many of the revenue sources are I sensitive to external economic forces, and have shown variability. Revenues are shown in Table 23. Again, all operating funds have been combined; and capital funds, inter fund transfers, and cash on I hand at the beginning of the year have been excluded. In 1995, Real Estate Taxes were surpassed by Act 511 Taxes as the largest single portion of the Township revenues, accounting for 39.3% of all anticipated revenue in 1998 ($4,710,750). This is the Local Tax Enabling Act which establishes a wide variety of taxes which local governments and school I districts are permitted to enact.
On August 10, 1994, the Board of Supervisors authorized the collection of an Earned Income Tax, I retroactive to July 1, 1994, which is imposed in the amount of one percent (1%)on the salaries, wages, commissions and other earned income of residents and wage earners of Northampton Township. In 1998, the Township anticipates receipt of $3,780,000 from the Earned Income Tax. The advantage of this D tax is that it produces significant revenue with a single levy. More importantly, unlike the Real Estate Tax, revenues from this source should increase annually without the need for additional levies since incomes are more responsive to inflationary trends in the economy than are assessment values. One disadvantage is that residents of Northampton working in Philadelphia and paying that city's Wage I Tax are exempted by the Sterling Act from paying an Earned Income Tax in their home municipality. However, except for Philadelphia, when an individual is employed in a different municipality than the one in which he lives, and when both municipalities levy the Earned Income Tax, the tax prevails in the I resident municipality. Another significant revenue producer in this category is the Real Estate Transfer Tax. One percent (1%)of the price of each real estate transaction taking place in the Township is collected and split I between the Township and the School District. The proceeds of the Real Estate Transfer Tax are somewhat difficult to estimate in advance. In 1987, this tax was budgeted for $400,000 but a strong real estate market produced revenues of over $960,000. This was repeated in 1988, with a budgeted amount of D $750,000 ultimately producing over $991,000 in real estate transfer taxes. With slow downs in the real estate market, revenues were significantly reduced for several years; illustrating the unpredictability 1 of this tax. In recent years, this revenue has stabilized at about $750,000. Revenues from a third Act 511 Tax, the Per Capita Tax, are split with the Council Rock School District; so that only $5 per person accrues to the Township. The School District levies another Act 511 I tax, the Occupation Tax, which is not presently shared with the Township. Departmental Earnings, which produced 12.7% of total revenues in 1988, experienced a dramatic increase in 1989. This was primarily due to the imposition of refuse collection service fees on each I residence or residential property. For 1998 the fee has been set at $180. Protective inspection fees and recreation programs also contribute significant amounts. The total of all departmental revenues I yielded over $3,000,000 in 1995, elevating this category above Real Estate Taxes for the first time. Real Estate Taxes, which had provided the majority of tax revenues in the past, were reduced to 14.45 mills in 1997 and then further reduced to 13.00 mills in 1998. Only 3.00 mills are dedicated to the I general fund; and separate real estate taxes are levied for: fire (2.00 mills); the library (2.00 mills); debt (4.50 mills); park and recreation (0.90 mills); and the ambulance and rescue squad (0.60 mills). D Fiscal Analysis 111 I 1999 Update December 1999 Table 23
Revenue Trends in Northampton Township Municipal Operating Budgets
19881998
Budgctcd Actual Actual Actunl Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Chdiige I998 I997 1996 1995 1994 I993 1992 1991 1990 1989 1988 1988-98
Act 511 $47 10.750 $4,838,725 $4,508,087 $4,107,054 $994,509 $848,898 $833,898 $768,430 $818,728 $967,308 $1,091,506 ~$3,619,244 Taxes Percent of total 39.3% 39.7% 37.4% 33.6% 10.1% 8.9% 9.7% 9.0% 9.4% 11.7% 18.6% +331.6%
Real Estate 1,666,I30 1,837,812 1,925,118 2,534,826 3,624,557 3,584,630 2,824,499 3,305,563 3,089,133 2,873,706 2,323,401 - 1,057,335 Taxes Percent of total 13.9% 15.1% 16.0% 20.7% 36.7% 37.7% 32.8% 38.7% 35.6% 34.8% 39.6% -45.5%
Licenses & 209,008 137,208 132,186 112,876 117,854 110,921 103,354 42,046 75,621 91,934 51,932 +157,076
CI Permits CI N Percent of total 1.7% 1.1% 1.1% 0.9% 1.2% 1.2% 1.2% 0.5% 0.9% 1.1% 0.9% +302.5% Fines 107,500 1-11,160 88,580 99,409 86,372 96,410 96,714 104.51 1 98,169 73,570 88,011 +19,489 Percent of total 0.9% 0.9% 0.7% 0.8% 0.9% 1.O% 1.1% 1.2% 1.1% 0.9% 1.5% +22. I %
Interest/Rents 347,694 340.634 279,412 378,940 172,505 101,653 117,973 220.172 31 1,503 395,747 258,487 +89,207 Percent of total 2.9% 2.8% 2.3% 3.1% 1.7% 1.1% 1.4% 2.6% 3.6% 4.8% 4.4% +34.5%
GrantsIGifts 1,341,270 1,237,045 1,531,923 1,377,715 1,255,875 1,021,560 994,099 966,831 976,241 784,755 636,773 +704,497 Percent of total 1 1.2% 10.2% 12.7% 11.3% 12.7% 10.8% 11.5% 11.3% 1 1.2% 9.5% 10.9% +I 10.6%
Departmental 3,085,135 3,0953 16 3,058,8 18 3,090,100 3,157,263 3,188,077 3,205,470 2,680,828 2,5713 16 2,356,327 747,397 +2,337,738 Earnings Percent of total 25.7% 25.4% 25.4% 25.3% 32.0% 33.69'0 37.2% 3 1.4% 29.6% 28.5% 12.7% +312.8%
Misc. Revenues 520,710 580,107 535,661 506,819 470,220 546,890 441,550 455,148 742,220 713,865 670,720 -150,010 Percent of total 4.3% 4:8% 4.4% 4.1% 4.8% 5.8% 5.1% 5.3% 8.5% 8.6% 11.4% -22.4%
'I'Ol'AIA $I1,988,197 $12,178,207 $12,059,785 $12,227,739 $9,879,155 $9,498,286 $8,617,557 $8,543,529 $8,683,131 $8,257,212 $5,868,227 +$6,119,970 Percent change - 1.6% + 1 .O% -1.4% +23.8% +4.0% +10.2% +0.9% -1.6% +5.2% +40.7% +3.8% +104.3% from previous year
Note: These figures exclude all capital funds, cash on hand at the beginning of the year, and inter fund transfers. e \o W W I The pace of development (and growth of the tax base) has slowed down in recent years as the supply of prime developable land has been reduced. Northampton's total taxable real estate tax assessment for 1 1998 is estimated at $126,901,110; which is a 23.3% increase from 1988 ($102,914,000). Since last year ($123,567,120),there has been a rise of almost 2.7%.
I Grants and Gifts is the fourth largest component of the budget and was expected to total over $1.3 million in 1998. This category also includes intergovernmental transfers, such as: State Motor Vehicle Fuel Taxes ($597,589), Foreign Casualty Insurance Taxes ($250,000), and Foreign Fire 1 Insurance Taxes ($225,000). Other budgeted revenue sources for the Township in 1998 include: interest, rents, and royalties earnings ($347,694), licenses and permits ($209,008) and fines ($107,500). The Miscellaneous category I ($520,710) shown on Table 23, includes reimbursement credits, sales of fxed assets, and donations.
1 RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Northampton's rate of expenditure growth may have to level off in the years ahead as the pace of I development slows. 2. A Township-wide fiscal impact study should be undertaken so as to better understand the relative impacts of various residential and nonresidentialuses; and the availability and use of alternative 1 revenue sources.
3. It may be appropriate to review a fiscal impact analysis, tailored to a specific project, before 1 entertaining requests for significant future rezonings. 1 I 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 Fiscal Analysis 113 1999 Update December 1999 I 1 IMPLERlENTATION STFWTEGIES The preparation of the Comprehensive Plan is the first step in devising the township's strategy for future use of land in the Township. It sets the goals and suggests policies which might be used to achieve I these goals. To implement the Plan's recommendations, the governing body of the Township must adopt the Plan and revise Township ordinances so they reflect the policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Many of the 1 implementation methods have been suggested in the document already.
Zoning is the major tool available to municipalities to implement land use plans. The Zoning I Ordinance sets the district boundaries as well as specifylng minimum lot sizes. The Future Land Use Plan recommendations are specified in some detail so that, once adopted, the zoning districts can be I readily designed to coincide with the future land use categories. Minimum lot sizes can be based upon the detailed recommendations of the Housing Plan. In the Townships's present Zoning Ordinance, the difference between the AR zone and the R1 zone is so insignificant that the resulting development would appear to be almost the same. The AR zone has a 1 minimum lot size of one acre (43,560 square feet) and the R1 zone specifies a minimum lot size of 40,000 square feet. The Future Land Use Plan recommends a greater distinction between the low density residential areas (5 acre, 2 acre and 40,000 square foot minimum lot sizes) and the medium density 1 area of 20,000 square foot minimum lot sizes.
The Housing Plan also suggests that some variation in the layout of subdivisions be allowed. This 1 would be accomplished through further amendments to the Zoning Ordinance and the Subdivision and Land Development Ordinance. If clustering is to occur in order to preserve natural features, municipalities often encourage this through the zoning process, possibly allowing for density bonuses for clustering. Lot averaging would have to be incorporated into the Zoning Ordinance as well. The I requirement that natural resources be mapped when a developer proposes a subdivision would be embodied in the Zoning Ordinance and the Subdivision and Land Development Ordinance.
1 The Circulation Plan requires a different approach. The proposal for providing alternative routes throughout the Township to lessen traffic congestion at key intersections will require the involvement of the Township government in conjunction with the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation to 1 establish directional signs along the route. The establishment of street locations through undeveloped properties can be accomplished by specifying these locations on the Township's Official Map, as well as by working with developers as proposals are made. By making the suggested routes public, developers will be aware of the Township's intentions and may try to incorporate the proposed street locations into 1 their plans. The Transportation Partnership Act, mentioned within the Circulation Plan, should be investigated to determine if it will be helpful to Northampton.
1 As to the Commercial and Industrial Areas Plan, the boundaries of these areas are not proposed to be substantially altered. Attention to site planning details will be required in order to provide the necessary pedestrian and vehicular links among the parts of the commercial area. When reviewing I proposed zoning changes or variances, the Township should be attentive to the general goals of the commercial district so that any changes will be consistent with these goals.
The Utilities and Solid Waste Plan may be the most difficult to implement because of the potential I expense of providing sewer and water service. In the past, the Township has been able to have developers pay for sewer extensions. This may be possible in some areas, but the Township Authority feels that assessments for the cost may have to be imposed on the residents. This is a policy matter 1 which the Township will have to resolve. D Implementation 115 1 1999 Update December 1999 Implementation of the Comprehensive Plan requires that the Plan be kept up to date and referred to when the Township faces decisions about the future development of the Township. Upon the adoption of this Plan Update, various planning projects should be pursued in the following order:
1. Zoning Ordinance -- Prepare revisions to the Zoning Ordinance and Map with specific attention to:
Review site planning techniques, such as: lot averaging, cluster zoning, performance zoning, planned residential development, and transfer of development rights I Revise zoning map in accordance with the Future Land Use Map
Impervious surface standards for residential and industrial districts I Off-street parking requirements and parking space design standards for all uses I Prepare use regulations for senior citizen housing, including continuing care retirement communities
2. Prepare a new Sewage Facilities Plan in accordance with the recommendations contained in I the Utilities and Solid Waste Plan
3. Prepare revisions to the Master Plan for Water Service in accordance with the I recommendations contained in the Utilities and Solid Waste Plan 4. Official Map -- Prepare an Official Map pursuant to the Pennsylvania Municipalities I Planning Code showing: existing and proposed streets, watercourses and public grounds, including widenings, narrowings, extensions, diminutions, openings and closings
5. Amend the Subdivision and Land Development Ordinance with specific attention to: I the provision of environmental and natural resource information on plans I requiring installation of public improvements consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, Sewage Facilities Plan, Master Plan for Water Service, the Official Map and/or other adopted studies I revisions to landscaping requirements
6. Engage a traffic engineer to provide a plan for implementation of the proposed alternative route I around Richboro
7. Prepare engineering studies for the street intersections cited herein and other traffic and I circulation improvements as may be required 8. Seek to reactivate the Newtown railroad line and provide a new station at Village Shires I 9. Undertake a special study regarding bicycle and pedestrian circulation
10. Undertake special studies within the Richboro Commercial District, with an emphasis on I improving traffic circulation and design standards along Second Street Pike
11. Continue to research and implement promising agricultural preservation techniques I I Implementation 116 1999 Update December 1999 I I 12. Undertake periodic analyses to determine whether residential and nonresidential 1 development areas have sufficient capacity to meet future growth needs 13. Undertake a study of the relative fiscal impacts of different residential and nonresidential u uses 14. Prepare a Capital Improvements Plan to assist in the planning of public facilities, including I an implementation schedule 15. Prepare an Economic Development Plan to assist in the promotion of economic growth, I including the attraction and retention of a variety of businesses 1 I I I I 1 1 II
1 1 i I Implementation 117 1 1999 Update December 1999