Buckingham Supervisors Deny Plans For 150,000-Square-Foot Warehouse

BUCKINGHAM, PA — The Buckingham Township Board of Supervisors early Thursday morning voted to deny plans by J.G. Petrucci to build a 150,000-square-foot warehouse off of Cold Spring Creamery Road in the township's planned industrial zone.

After listening to five hours of testimony and arguments on both sides, the supervisors voted 2 to 1 to reject preliminary plans for the project, slated for land located off of Cold Spring Creamery Road, Burnt House Hill Road and Stoney Lane.

"I've done a lot of listening," said Chairman Paul Calderaio who joined supervisor Jon Forest in voting to deny the plan. "Although I appreciate the willingness of the applicants who said they were willing to lower the amount of bays and work with us, in my opinion there are simply too many unaddressed concerns to warrant allowing this plan to go forward. That is why tonight I will be voting unequivocally no."

Added Forest, "My concerns have not changed over the past year. The July 23, 2023 minutes reflect that I had issues with 90 tractor trailers a day using our township roads."

Supervisor Maggie Rash broke with her colleagues, voting not to deny the plan fearing the loss of green space if the developer takes the township to court over its denial and it results in a court-ordered settlement.

Holding up a plan showing a good amount of green space around the proposed warehouse, Rash said, "I am voting no because I know where this is going to go from here. Eighty-two percent of this property is green and where it goes from here, I'm guessing, will be to court. I'm just telling you what the law says. They complied with everything. They stepped back from the waivers they asked for. I know how it goes and it's not going to come back to us like this," she said of the amount of green space on the plan.

The Buckingham Township Board of Supervisors, from left, Maggie Rash, Paul Calderaio and Jon Forest. (Photo by Jeff Werner)

The denial by the supervisors brought immediate applause from the audience, including Michael Bateman who has led the opposition against the proposed warehouse as the leader of the No Buckingham Warehouse Coalition.

"It's beyond clear that this community coming together and presenting all of these facts in a very clear and concise way, made a huge difference," said Bateman. "And the fact that this community bonded together across political affiliation against something that is so dangerous to this community is exactly why I love Buckingham. And I'm so excited to live here."

Is he concerned about what comes next?

"They've threatened unappealing projects throughout this process. It may be something more unappealing, but it's not going to be dangerous," said Bateman. "We accept the fact that something will be built on this land. We know that. But it could be something that makes a lot more sense. Personally we would love to see something like a medical building or an office park. We would absolutely love that. But we also understand and accept the fact that something is going to go there."

During the hearing, Bateman's group delivered extensive testimony against the project and called on the supervisors to deny the plan citing safety concerns, ecological dangers, zoning and future development concerns.

The group also argued that what was being proposed by the developer is a truck terminal, which is not an allowable use under the current zoning.

One of its members, Tim Cathers, an industry insider, delivered a detailed analysis on the impacts a terminal would have on that section of the township, including inbound truck traffic on residential roads, hours of service breaks and overnight parking and local road widths and accident potential.

During the hearing, the developer refuted the truck terminal claim, producing testimony from Richard Myers, the township's zoning officer, who said the application had been submitted as a G3 warehouse. "I see nothing that's inconsistent with that," Myers told the supervisors.

Looking for ways to make the project "more palatable," Supervisor Maggie Rash asked Murphy at one point if the developer would consider lowering the number of proposed truck bays from 30 to 15. She also asked if they'd be willing to limit the bays to one side of the proposed building.

"As a condition of approval, yes, we would agree to that," said Murphy.

Rash also asked if the developer would consider installing solar panels on the roof. "I'm the liaison to the EAC and we're trying to promote that. I would ask for that."

"As a condition of approval, we would agree," responded Murphy.

J.G. Petrucci had proposed building a 30-bay warehouse on the 57-acre DiGirolamo tract, which is located in the township's planned industrial zone.

As part of its plan, the developer had agreed to widen and improve Stoney Lane from the entrance to the development to Landisville Road and to make improvements to the intersection at Old Easton Road and Landisville Road. It had also planned to preserve half the property with a conservation easement.

The developer has the right to appeal the township's denial to the Bucks County Court of Appeals in Doylestown. They could also choose to consider redeveloping the site with another use that's permitted under the planned industrial zoning.