- Easton's zoning hearing board granted two variances for the proposed 110-unit development
- A steep slope variance and a riparian buffer mitigation will allow for the developer to upset some of the restricted ground on the property
- An engineer contended that granting the variances would actually improve the property overall
EASTON, Pa. — A proposed 110-unit development on the city's South Side was granted two variances that will allow the project to move another step forward following a zoning hearing board meeting Monday night.
The project is proposed at 301 Grant St. by developer Jacob's Knoll LLC, headed by Stephen Heiss.
Developers were seeking two variances — one regarding a requirement for a riparian buffer and another related to steep slope requirements.
A third variance, related to lighting for parking, was removed from the agenda following a decision by the developers to adhere to the zoning rule.
Heath Machamer, civil engineer and owner of HNT LLC Engineering and Surveying, said his firm has been involved in the project for years, engaging in site surveys, extensive soil testing for structures and roads, additional soil testing for proposed stormwater systems and other site assessments.
The development would feature 110 units in 55 two-story structures, stretching across 14.4 acres.
“There's enough of a project here that would afford the developer the ability and the funding to actually address those issues."Heath Machamer, HNT LLC Engineering and Surveying
The property is marked by slopes, and work on properties with slopes is limited based on the grade. Within a 12 to 25% slope range, a maximum of 30% of the land is permitted to be disturbed during development.
“Our proposal would actually slightly go over that limit of 34%,” Machamer said.
Machamer explained those steep slopes, located along the front edge of Grant Street, are the result of storms eroding the ground. Another slope Machamer noted is a human-made pile consisting of rocks and boulders, he said.
“As I've mentioned before, part of the hardship that the property is facing is we do have three separate main discharge points and then an additional storm sewer for that comes down into this portion of the property,” Machamer said.
“As part of the design, we would actually be capturing all of those storm sewer discharges. And we actually have a stormwater system proposed to capture and safely convey that into the stream.”
According to Machamer, developing the property with the variance for the steep slopes would improve the area, as opposed to leaving it as is, which would result in further damage to the land, and even Grant Street.
In addition, Machamer said the company’s plan to revitalize the riparian buffer area — “an area adjacent to a stream, lake, or wetland that contains a combination of trees, shrubs, and/or other perennial plants and is managed differently from the surrounding landscape, primarily to provide conservation benefits,” as defined by the U.S. Forest Service — would actually be more beneficial than leaving the property as it currently is.
“Our proposal is basically we recognize your requirements, and as part of our final design and planning, we would provide a mitigation plan that would be submitted not only to you, but it also would go to the EPA, which we would show that we are able to replant, stabilize and provide a mitigated riparian buffer,” Machamer told zoning hearing board members.
“Your ordinance is written such that you're trying not to disturb those existing riparian buffers. But we would submit to the board that if you take a look at the erosion that's on site, that riparian buffer is less effective now than when we complete the project.”
Toward the end of the hearing, Machamer said granting the variances and allowing for the project to move forward would provide a net benefit for the land.
“If you were proposing a single home, I would argue that you're going to propose it on the high end, and you're not going to take care of the existing erosion issues within the existing channels, or stream; wherein this proposal, there's enough of a project here that would afford the developer the ability and the funding to actually address those issues,” Machamer said.
The zoning hearing board opted to approve the variances, permitting the development to move forward. City council has yet to consider the development.
