What's new? (Home) Search this site Official Twp. Site About Charlestown  Index to Gov't Info  General Info  Organizations  The early days  Photo Albums Surplus & Needs Neighborhood links Notify me of updates About this site  FAQ  People are saying..  Our purpose  About us  Techie stuff  Contacting us Established June 2, 1997 by citizens for citizens Awards March 16, 1998 Website of the Week Daily Local News August 13, 1997

A beautiful part of southeastern Pennsylvania Fans of the World Series Champion Philadelphia Phillies   February 12, 2002              February 26, 2002   CHARLESTOWN TOWNSHIP PLANNING COMMISSION GREAT VALLEY MIDDLE SCHOOL, 7:30 P.M. February 12, 2002 Present: Bill Davison, Chairman, Michael Allen, Vice Chairman, Rick Reis, Andy Motel, Michael Churchill, Wendy Leland, Surender Kohli, P.E., Ed Theurkauf, Planner, Tom Comitta, Planner, Nanci Sarcinello, GIS Manager, Leah Campion, Secretary, and those on the attached attendee list Absent: Charlie Philips The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. Announcements There were none at this time. Approval of Minutes - January 22, 2002 Mr. Allen moved to approve the minutes, and Mr. Motel seconded. There being no comment, Mr. Davison called the vote and all were in favor. Resident Concerns in Whitehorse Road Neighborhoods Mr. Davison commented on an anonymous notice that was circulated to residents in the area of the impending Spring Oaks development. Mr. Davison said the information contained in the notice pertaining to Spring Oaks and future development is inaccurate. Many of the neighbors present were concerned that the Commission discussed items pertaining to Spring Oaks and a Devault Village concept specifically after residents left the previous meeting. Mr. Allen said those are two separate issues. Mr. Davison said a village concept was simply a discussion point of the planning issues reviewed during the second meeting of the month. Various neighbors stated the item was not on the agenda. Mr. Allen and Mr. Davison said it is a planning issue and discussion of planning issues was noted on the agenda. Mr. Churchill explained although he was not at the January 22 meeting, all second meetings of the month are primarily devoted to working with the Township Planner on items concerning the recently adopted Comprehensive Plan and other general issues pertaining to zoning, ordinances, etc. A neighbor asked what is considered Devault Village. Mr. Allen said the Commission has an opportunity to look at the area surrounding Spring Oaks, Devault Foods, and the post office to discover if an area of residential/retail/office space is a viable option. The Commission is still trying to establish the boundaries of the "village". Some residents were concerned that all the Transfer of Development Rights would be dumped into the Phoenixville Pike/Whitehorse Road area. Mrs. Leland said that is not the case. Mr. Allen said the Commission shares the residents' concerns, but would not know the options until the investigation process is underway. Mr. Motel stressed there is a distinction between the Spring Oaks Business Park and Planning Strategies throughout the Township, including the village concept. Mr. Churchill said the Commission must decide what types of studies on zoning the Planner should do. The Commission welcomes citizen input. Mr. Davison said the residents should express their views at the second meeting of the month. Mrs. Leland announced the CAC wrote an after-action report since the final meeting with the Turnpike Commission, then she circulated copies among the members. She also noted the Brightside Farm Open House over the weekend. She thanked the new tenants, the Binghams, for their hospitality and said the refurbishment of the house turned out well. She said the committee would now begin discussion on what to do with the farm. Conditional Use Spring Oaks Business Park Tim Townes, J. Loew and Associates, stated the Land Development Plan for the entire park is pending, and gave some background information on the current plan for the audience. The sketch now shows five lots instead of nine from the original subdivision plan. Mr. Townes said the Conditional Use hearing is underway, and he pointed out the two areas in need of a conditional use: a high groundwater area and a flood hazard area. Mike Rodgers, Supervisor, asked if the retention basin is underground, and Mr. Townes said no. It is a carbonite area and the above ground basin was approved on the original subdivision plan in the middle 1990's. Mr. Churchill asked why Mr. Townes is before the Commission this evening. He said he needs a recommendation for the conditional use. Mr. Davison asked how many conditional uses are needed. Mr. Townes corrected his previous statement and noted three, the additional item as a small encroachment on an area of steep slopes. Mr. Allen asked if Mr. Kohli has any issues with the conditional use plan. Mr. Kohli said he is satisfied the applicant can meet all his concerns including the need for extra construction specifications to demonstrate safety measures to be taken in the high groundwater area. Mr. Townes said a geo-technical engineer would be on-site during construction. Mr. Kohli asked the amount of encroachment on steep slopes. Mr. Townes said less than 200 square feet. He said he could eliminate the encroachment with use of a retaining wall. Mr. Kohli suggested he take that route. Mr. Churchill asked the percentage of impervious surface coverage. Mr. Townes said less that 50% on each lot as opposed to 65% on the original subdivision plan. Mr. Theurkauf said he has no comments on the conditional use. Mr. Reis moved to recommend approval of conditional use except for the area of steep slopes because the applicant has agreed to use a retaining wall. Mrs. Leland seconded, and Mr. Davison called for comment. There being none, he called the vote and all were in favor. Vincent Kling, Pikeland Road, said the proposed development would be very visible. He stressed careful consideration in preserving as much of the natural beauty on the site as possible. Subdivision/Land Development Scipione - Pikeland Road John Snyder, Esq., was present to represent Mrs. Scipione. He described the proposed subdivision of the 44-acre parcel into one large lot for the existing historic home with nine new lots behind it. He presented the subdivision plan and commented all of the proposed lots are located outside of any steep slope and high groundwater areas. He pointed out the locations of the common and private underground stormwater retention basins. Mr. Snyder said the applicant is asking for two waivers: first, in the areas of undisturbed land on the lot for the existing house, the applicant requests that only five foot contours need to be shown on the plan instead of two. Second, the applicant would rather not have the required island in the middle of the cul-de-sac. Mr. Davison said he is not fond of the islands either. Mr. Allen asked the diameter of the cul-de-sac. Mr. Kohli said 100 feet. Mr. Allen disagreed with Mr. Davison and said he prefers an island. Mr. Kohli said although the island is required by ordinance, maintenance of the cul-de-sac could be treacherous. Mr. Allen said not necessarily if the road is wide enough. Mr. Davison suggested discussing the item further at a later date. Mr. Davison asked if the applicant investigated the Open Space Option. Chip Vaughn, Vaughn & Sons, stated they did not find the Option workable because of the property surrounding the existing house. Mr. Davison suggested decreasing the number of new lots, shortening the cul-de-sac, and adding even more land to the existing property to make the Option feasible. Mr. Snyder said they discovered various knolls and natural sites very suitable to new homes on the rear of the property, which they worked with to develop the subdivision plan. Mr. Theurkauf said although he has concerns with this plan, he does not recommend the Open Space Option. Mr. Snyder said they are attempting to stay out of the steep slopes and woodland areas. Mr. Churchill asked if the homes would be visible from Hollow Road. Mr. Vaughn said not in the summertime but possibly in the winter. Mr. Snyder said he is in receipt of the consultants' review letters. He stated there is an unusual circumstance concerning a non-conforming half-acre parcel across Pikeland Road that the applicant owns. The lot is incorrectly shown as part of lot 10 on the drawing and should be labeled lot 11. Because it is un-buildable it would be tied to lot 10 with the existing house. Mr. Churchill said that is probably a legal issue that should be taken up with the solicitor. Mr. Churchill asked if the commissioners would be allowed to walk the property. Mr. Snyder said that would not be a problem, and they should arrange a time with Mrs. Scipione. Mr. Davison asked how the new road aligns with the proposed road for the Dixon subdivision across the street, and if the applicant would consider a trail connection along the road frontage. Mr. Snyder said he would investigate both. Mr. Churchill asked how far is the building envelope for lot one from the road. Another representative stated 75 feet. Mr. Churchill felt that would be a little too close for such a large house. Mr. Snyder said they would look into it. Mr. Reis commented that the road grade toward the cul-de-sac seems very steep. Mrs. Leland asked the size of the homes, and Mr. Vaughn said 5,000 square feet. Mr. Motel commented on the EIA report documenting household size. He felt the number of people per house would be considerably more than three. Mr. Snyder said historically homes of this size often house only two people, sometimes four to six. Three is not an unrealistic number. Mr. Motel said the tax information is also inconsistent with documentation for the Township. Mr. Snyder said the information is consistent with the census and other government data. Mr. Churchill said he is not entirely comfortable with this layout and felt it merits more discussion. Mr. Theurkauf noted the Open Space Option he worked out did not show to be beneficial for the property. Mr. Churchill said he would like to have a joint outing of the commissioners to visit the property before any more discussion takes place. Mr. Davison asked if they completed perk tests and the representative said all lots pass for conventional systems. He also noted the common retention basin takes the road water and water from a few of the homes while some of the lots possess personal basins to handle run-off. Theresa Pisciella, 6 Somerset Lane, asked if additional trees could be planted between her backyard and the new homes since there is not much of an existing tree line. She liked the idea of a landscaped cul-de-sac island similar to Somerset's. Ian Hughes, 2287 Pikeland Road, also requested additional buffering between his lot and those proposed. Seibert/Winnick - Pikeland Road Mike Murray, Esquire, refreshed the Commission on the lot line change from his presentation on December 11. He said Mr. Kohli's review comments have been addressed. Mr. Kohli provided Mr. Murray with a copy of his February 2 comments that Mr. Murray had not received. The remaining issue is that of the Horseshoe Trail easement. Because the property would be sold, the new owner's attorney would be speaking with the solicitor on the subject. Mr. Davison asked if the perk test was complete for the four-acre lot, and Mr. Murray said yes. Mr. Kohli said the issues over the new driveway have been worked out with PennDOT. In fact, the second opening is more agreeable with PennDOT than the existing one. Mr. Reis stressed it is important for the Horseshoe Trail to be worked out as soon as possible. Mr. Allen moved to recommend the lot line change subject to Mr. Kohli's review letter of February 2. Mr. Motel seconded, and Mr. Davison called for comment. There being none, he called the vote and all were in favor. Discussion TDR Application - Great Valley Business Campus - Phoenixville Pike Mr. Davison said John Panizza, Genterra Corporation, is present tonight to discuss the possibility of a Transfer of Development Rights on his property at Phoenixville Pike and Yellow Springs Road. Mr. Panizza said the idea is a result of the Township's recently adopted Comprehensive Plan that mentions the concept of TDR. He explained to the audience the concept of transferring development from more out-of-the-way, environmentally sensitive, non-public utility areas to those with public utilities that are closer to major roads in more densely developed areas. The 53-acre parcel would act as the receiving zone for the development. It is currently zoned Light Industrial. Mr. Panizza does not feel this area needs any more office space. In the past, his company proposed office space for the site, but now his focus is on apartments, which he feels make more sense. His discussion tonight would focus on the parcel's slope, traffic issues, and density. Bob Smiley, Genterra, presented a map of developed and undeveloped areas in Charlestown. He pointed out three separate sending sites for TDR in the center of the Township totaling 164-230 acres each. After netting out constraints in each area, Section A could generate 73 lots, Section B, 64, and Section C, 75. Genterra is currently implementing TDR's in West Bradford and East Pikeland Townships. Mr. Reis asked if those TDR's are residential to residential, and Mr. Smiley said yes. Mr. Panizza compared the subject tract of land to the Woodview Apartment complex on Route 30 in Willistown. Mr. Smiley said the development is 30 1/2 acres, 264 apartments, with 6 units per acre. There are 36 units per building and the complex has its own swimming pool, fitness center, and community center. The proposal for the tract in Charlestown is 450 apartments on the 53-acre site with the same community amenities as Woodview. Mr. Davison asked if the complex would have single or individual owners. Mr. Panizza said the development would be comprised of rental units. Mr. Smiley said he would provide a demographic profile of residents in this type of community. Mr. Panizza said the next step is to hire a company that would break down the number of apartments in relation to the number of residents, children etc. Marc Melso, Whitehorse at Charlestown, asked what percentage of the property is not in steep slopes. Mr. Smiley said 65-75%. Mr. Smiley said that with the property zoned currently for office space, a business campus would generate more peak hour traffic trips than 450 apartments. He said an expert traffic consultant would be provided if discussions move forward on the project. Kevin Kuhn, Supervisor, said a financial comparison is imperative concerning revenue versus expense to the Township since apartments would be adding 1/3 to the population. Mr. Smiley referred to his handout to discuss the ordinance outline they previously used when developing the TDR ordinances for West Bradford and East Pikeland. Mr. Davison gave an overview of the current high-density areas in the Township, PRD's 2 and 3. A previous application for apartments on the Valley Forge Christian College property was made by another developer but never moved forward. That application proposed six units per acre. Mr. Davison said the Commission would need to discuss the appropriateness of this site for TDR, residential or otherwise. Mr. Smiley said that East Pikeland did not wait to bring parties together as is customary with a TDR. They acted as a land bank for landowners interested in acting as the sending area. Mr. Davison asked if Genterra has sending parcels in mind. Mr. Panizza said there are various possibilities in areas A, B, and C pointed out at the beginning of the discussion. Mr. Smiley said those areas comprise roughly 600 acres in the center of the Township. Mr. Churchill commented on the suitability of apartments on the parcel since it is on the fringes of the industrial district with high density already across the street. There was some general discussion on the concept of a TDR land bank versus outright rights at time of agreement. Mr. Davison and Mr. Reis said the parcel could be a possible TDR for Light Industrial but were not sold on the idea of apartments. Mr. Motel and Mrs. Leland said they are willing to hear more on the concept of apartments. Vanessa Weisman, 2 Sawgrass Lane, said she would be pleased to see residential on the parcel. She has concerns with the type of industry that could be developed on the site. Mr. Davison said the Commission would discuss the proposal. Mr. Churchill asked Mr. Comitta's office to investigate a baseline density for the parcel. Mr. Comitta gave an example of Buckingham Township's TDR program where they ended up with scattered TDR sites over a period of 20 years. He does not want to see such an unconnected system in this Township. In general, with 150 New Urban Developments across the country, the standard unit amount per acre is between five and eight. Mr. Panizza said he would like to build one of the finest rental communities in this area. He said Mr. Comitta's point fits well with their ideals. Mr. Churchill hoped the development would be more aesthetically pleasing than the pictures provided for the Woodview complex. Mr. Panizza said his hopes are much higher. The development would be very expensive. The density is needed to make the high quality of the architecture, amenities, and land planning feasible. Mr. Kuhn commented Mr. Panizza's concept seems to go against the need for affordable housing in the Township. Mr. Panizza said there is a market for large (1800 square feet) apartments in this area. They may be pricey, but the demand is present to justify the cost. Marcia Solda, Merlin Road, said it is hard to believe people would rent such an expensive apartment abutting the Turnpike. Mr. Davison asked Mr. Panizza to return for the second meeting in March. Draft Grant Application & Proposal - Zoning & SLDO Amendments Mr. Comitta referred to the draft of the Tier 1 grant application form. The Commission should review the draft before it is sent to the County. There was discussion on priorities for which amendments to be tackled first. Mr. Allen felt that headings labeled Environmental Regulations (Primary & Secondary Conservation Areas) and Interpretation are housekeeping issues that could be dealt with swiftly without much discussion. He felt that TDR, New Zoning Districts, and Devault should have first priority. Mr. Motel said he did not notice a heading for a Major/Minor Subdivision ordinance. Mr. Comitta said that ordinance would be contained in the SLDO. Mr. Motel felt it should have a high priority with ties to the Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Comitta asked if subcommittees should be established to review each heading, or if the Commission should review them all as a group at the second meeting in March. Mr. Reis asked for Mr. Comitta's suggestion. Mr. Comitta said the review process would move more quickly if a different subcommittee reviews each heading, then presents their ideas to the entire Commission. Mr. Theurkauf said the housekeeping items could be written up into ordinances, presented with minimal discussion, then recommended to the Supervisors. Mr. Comitta said his office would redraft the prioritized list for February 26. Official Map Mr. Comitta said the ordinance draft is standard for an Official Map. Thornbury and West Whiteland Townships adopted this form. Mr. Churchill asked if there are other forms. Mr. Comitta said he could check with the County. Mr. Motel asked for clarification if there should be anything on the map that does not pertain to what is in the ordinance. He gave the example of the Pyle Farm. Mr. Theurkauf said it is perfectly acceptable to put existing public lands on the map as well as anything with potential for preservation or special designation. Mr. Davison asked if the Supervisors looked at the Map draft. Hugh Willig, Supervisor, said not the most current draft. Mr. Davison said the draft would be reviewed at the joint meeting with the Supervisors on February 26. Mr. Willig asked how the Commission arrived at a 120-day decision deadline. Mr. Allen said because one year is unreasonable when making decisions to sell a property. Mr. Willig was concerned that four months is not very long in the public process. Mrs. Leland said it is important the ordinance states what is required to happen by the 120-day mark. Mr. Willig said in reality, the process often takes longer than four months. Mr. Davison said a one-year timeline could create burdens for a homeowner. Mr. Allen said the Township should make every effort to take action to keep the public process moving. Mr. Davison said this discussion could continue at the joint meeting on February 26. He also stressed the need for the Commission and the Supervisors to be relatively on the same page in other matters as well. He said the Commission plans to discuss various lawsuits, negotiations, and design issues. If necessary, the items could be discussed in an executive session. Adjournment There was consensus to adjourn. Mr. Davison adjourned the meeting at 11 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Leah J. Campion Planning Commission Secretary   CHARLESTOWN TOWNSHIP JOINT MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION & BOARD OF SUPERVISORS GREAT VALLEY MIDDLE SCHOOL, 7:30 P.M. February 26, 2002 Supervisors Present: Hugh Willig, Chairman, Paul Hogan, Vice Chairman, Kevin Kuhn, Mike Rodgers, and Irene Ewald Commissioners Present: Bill Davison, Chairman, Mike Allen, Vice Chairman, Rick Reis, Charlie Philips, and Wendy Leland Others Present: Surender Kohli, P.E., Tom Comitta, Planner, Ed Theurkauf, Planner, Nanci Sarcinello, GIS Manager, Leah Campion, Secretary, and those on the attached attendee list Absent: Mike Churchill, Andy Motel The meeting was called to order at 7:35 p.m. Approval of Minutes - February 6, 2001 The minutes were deferred until the next meeting to give everyone a chance to review them. Discussion Comprehensive Plan Implementation Mr. Willig stated the Official Map is a key element of implementing the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Allen asked Mr. Theurkauf for the list of priorities in regard to Zoning Ordinance amendments and SLDO amendments. Mr. Theurkauf reviewed the draft list from February 5 for the Supervisors. Ms. Sarcinello passed out a revised draft ordering and grouping the priorities based upon the Commissioners' comments. The current order for Zoning Ordinance Amendments is as follows: "Housekeeping" items including revisions of environmental regulations, the Open Space Option, and the interpretation section Transfer of Development Rights Devault - LI & NC District Amendments/TND Overlay District New Zoning Districts PRD Design Standards Historic Protection/Adaptive Reuse Trail Protection Overlay District/Viewshed Protection Agricultural Priority Areas The current order for Subdivision and Land Development Ordinance Amendments is: Best Management Practices for stormwater management Incentives for applicants willing to create Open Space developments, Conservation Design Subdivisions, and interconnected trails and greenways. Major/Minor Subdivision Ordinance Revise the Plan Requirements Section and the Design Standards Article to address Secondary Conservation Areas Include as Appendices portion of the Appendix E "Implementation Tools & Techniques" to graphically portray preferred development outcomes Mrs. Ewald suggested another joint session after the Supervisors have a chance to review the prioritized list. Mr. Allen noted the current handout reflects the Commission's consensus on order of priority. Mrs. Ewald had a few items she would like to see discussed for revision in the ordinances. The first is the definition of a home occupation. With the growing number of residents wanting to work out of their homes on computers or otherwise, she does not see a problem with allowing certain businesses as home occupations. Mr. Philips agreed, and said some definitions across the board in the Zoning Ordinance might need to be updated. Mr. Hogan said Linda Csete, Township Administrator, solicited home occupation ordinances from other townships and found that the majority did not have an updated version. Mr. Davison said building height regulations might need to be adjusted and gave the example of Charlestown Oaks where with the garages under the dwellings, the roofs had to be flattened out to meet height requirements, thus creating a less attractive structure. Mrs. Ewald said the Township should look down the road at an adaptive reuse for the quarry. The Comprehensive Plan could be amended to include a plan for the area. She said the Bureau of Mines has information available that would allow the Township to investigate a reuse suitable for municipal purposes. Her third item concerned regional cooperation with not only Schuylkill Township or Phoenixville, but with East Whiteland Township as well. Mr. Reis asked if East Whiteland was invited to join discussions for regional planning, and Mr. Kuhn said yes. Mrs. Ewald said they invited Charlestown into discussions, and she feels it is important to include them. Mr. Davison asked about Independence Construction Materials Expansion at the quarry. Mrs. Ewald said she believes they are already beyond their allotted number of trucks in and out per day, but asked Mrs. Csete to investigate the regulations. Mr. Davison asked Mrs. Csete to obtain their production numbers and how long they intend to be in business. Mr. Philips suggested investigating the legalities of grandfathering of structures and businesses across the board. Mr. Willig asked the Commission how they arrived at the list of priorities. Mr. Reis said the "housekeeping" items were ones the members thought the Township could implement quickly without much controversy. He said the members felt TDR should be started on as soon as possible. Mr. Allen said TDR is a good tool for preserving open space. It is an option the Township does not currently have. Mrs. Ewald said the development of any new zoning districts would be very controversial because a change in district changes land values. Mr. Kuhn commented land values change if the steep slope ordinance is adjusted, but Mrs. Ewald said not in the same way. Mrs. Ewald said another district should be added to the list called Recreational Open Space. Brightside Farm, Township lands along Pickering Creek, and Charlestown Park could be included in that district. This change would not be controversial. Mr. Kuhn asked the benefit to the change besides categorization. Mrs. Ewald said in order for the Township to keep true to the original desires for the land and to prevent future boards from disposing of the land. Mr. Davison said the change would be even stronger with a deed restriction. Mr. Philips agreed changing the name would plainly say the land is what the Township intends it to be. Mr. Kuhn said he does not want to have to change the zoning map every time the Township acquires a property. Mr. Davison asked what other Townships call their open space. Mr. Theurkauf said many do not give an actual name to the open space, but provide for it in all districts. Mr. Philips said he is most concerned with keeping future boards from selling away all the acquired open space. He felt the name change is worthy of future discussion. Devault Village Mr. Davison said he would like to know the expectations of the Supervisors for the Devault area since the Commission has not yet decided on the best course of action. Mr. Reis said he would like to know how the area plays into regional talks. Mr. Kuhn said he was an early proponent for the Devault Village concept, but is wary on building new villages. He would rather build back up what is initially present. He is interested in exploring other options besides commercial development. Mr. Philips said the area definitely has potential for greater things than large scale commercial. Mrs. Leland said the Township must decide if the Turnpike should be the dividing entity for Devault and the Phoenixville Pike area or if the two should be joined. She envisions a few small shops or restaurants in Devault, anything that could keep traffic to a minimum. Mr. Philips said the Township could eliminate certain ideas that would absolutely not work. A village concept was an idea that could be viable among many and a point of discussion that is important to the Comprehensive Plan. Mrs. Ewald said J. Loew and Associates had approached the Township with cluster homes for Spring Oaks in the past, but the Supervisors did not find the concept favorable because of the tax base problem. Mr. Davison said adaptive reuse of the Phoenixville Pike corridor is also important. Mrs. Ewald said she would like to see medical offices in that area. J. Loew and Associates could implement those as well on Spring Oaks. Mr. Davison noted there is interest in the Commission in including the property for sale at the corner of Charlestown Road and Route 29 in the Devault area. Mr. Kuhn asked if there have been major objections to recent businesses on Phoenixville Pike. Mr. Allen said not the businesses per se, but some of the buildings are very unattractive, and the few homes that are left would eventually become something else. Mr. Davison said the Commission does not have any themes yet for either area, but he feels it would be nice for Charlestown residents to live and work in the Township. This could happen with the introduction of smaller, more intimate office space. Mrs. Csete commented that she drives down Phoenixville Pike every day and the mismatched signage and building design is what makes the corridor somewhat unattractive. There is still a great amount of attractive green space along the road, and the institution of conformity for signage and building facades could be beneficial for the future. Mr. Allen agreed. Mrs. Ewald noted the Radnor Township sign ordinance has been quite successful. She also suggested a public art clause for commercial buildings as is done in Philadelphia. Mr. Davison said all the suggestions are good possibilities. Official Map Mr. Comitta said at a previous meeting, Mr. Churchill asked for data on other Townships that possess an Official Map. Mr. Comitta passed out documents detailing other municipalities' official maps, their ordinances, and the draft map and ordinance for Charlestown. He said the Chester County Planning Commission was very helpful in providing the information. He presented three large-scale maps from Thornbury, West Whiteland, and Uwchlan Townships. Less than 10 Chester County municipalities have Official Maps already in place and six are proposed. The ordinances range from broad to very detailed. He noted the State set a one-year decision deadline for the purchase of property, but Charlestown would like a 120-day deadline. The benefit of an Official Map is that the County would give an extra $50,000 towards the purchase of land if the parcel is called out on the Official Map. The most important decision is what properties to include on the Map. Mr. Comitta pointed out the parcels, railroad right-of-way, Horseshoe Trail, and road extensions up for potential reservation. Items could be added once the Map is implemented. Mr. Kuhn noted that the Rapp House is labeled as municipal land. Mr. Comitta said it could be changed to existing Open Space. Mrs. Ewald suggested adding the parcel adjacent to the 6.2-acre Township-owned parcel on Whitehorse Road to the potential reservation category. Mr. Davison said he feels residential properties are the most important. Mrs. Ewald said some of the commercial properties are gateways into the Township and should be reserved for potential municipal improvements. Mr. Philips said to prevent demolition by neglect, the Township could place various properties with important historic structures on the Map. Their inclusion could buy the Township some time for structures in danger of being torn down. He mentioned revision of the Historic Ordinance as well. Mr. Kuhn felt revision of the ordinance would be a more effective means of preventing demolition. Mrs. Ewald asked if the County still has a historic preservation network, and Mr. Philips said yes. Mrs. Ewald recalled another Township made its entire municipality a historic district and wondered if Charlestown could investigate the process. Mr. Philips said that could be very controversial, but he could look at any available information. Mr. Davison asked Mr. Philips to ask the H.A.R.B. for an outline of what they would like to implement in the next six months. Mr. Comitta commented that surprisingly, Tredyffrin Township is the only entire historic district in Chester County. Mr. Willig saw some opportunities to link open space on the Map and asked why some properties were overlooked. Mr. Davison said the Commission concentrated on properties in the Special Heritage Viewshed Protection Areas. Mr. Philips and Mr. Allen said the Supervisors could add their suggestions for properties to be added or taken off. Mr. Philips asked the Supervisors if they feel the Official Map is a priority. Mr. Kuhn said yes, and does not feel there is much work left to do for its completion. But there should be more discussion on the decision deadline. He felt 120 days is too short, one year too long; he suggested six months. Mr. Davison said 120 days would be required to enter into the due diligence period. Settlement could occur 90-120 days after that. Mr. Comitta said the Township must acquire or initiate condemnation within the given time period. The Supervisors could announce at a public meeting that they intend to start condemnation. Mr. Willig did not like the term condemnation because of its negative connotation. Mr. Davison said there could be beneficial tax breaks in friendly condemnation. Mr. Allen said he continues to have a problem with a deadline longer than 120 days. Mr. Willig said if the Township does not want to condemn the property, the process would take much longer than 120 days. Mr. Allen said one year is very unreasonable for the seller. Mr. Davison felt the Township should be able to say within 120 days that we want the property or not. Mr. Kuhn said he would hate to miss an opportunity because the clock runs out. Mr. Willig said the Township should create a schedule for the length of the process, then work through a couple scenarios. Mr. Kuhn asked the triggering event for a sale discussion if the property is on the Map. Mr. Comitta said when the property comes up for subdivision or land development. Mrs. Leland said the worry is for people who have financial hardships. Mr. Willig said the triggering effect removes that hardship. If the property is sold to a developer before there is an application for subdivision, the Township must buy the property from the developer. Mrs. Ewald asked what would happen if the developer has an equitable interest in the land. Mr. Comitta said it does not matter, only of the developer applies to change the layout of the land. Mr. Kuhn said this information changes the economic for the Township's purchase. Mr. Comitta commented the Township could create street patterns as a way to plot future development suitable to the Township. Other townships have used this technique. Mr. Comitta said he would ask advice from the solicitor on the number of properties called out on the Map. Mrs. Ewald suggested the Commission seek advice from their counsel as well. Plan Approval Mr. Davison said the Commission is looking to be on the same page with the Supervisors when making recommendations on subdivision plans. Mr. Willig said the decision is usually between preserving an existing structure or preserving woodlands and steep slopes. He felt the two boards would naturally have different ideas. Mr. Philips said the Commission is looking to get a sense of whether or not they are doing the right thing when making their recommendations. Mrs. Ewald said there is no way of knowing if you are making the right choice. It is important that the Planning Commission is very aware of the technical aspects of any application to keep from being misled by applicants. Mr. Kuhn said an idea had been brought forth by one of the solicitors to stamp every page of every plan in an application that comes through the Township Office. This would alleviate the problem of applicants attempting to insert pages, disguise a new plan as a revised plan, etc. Mr. Davison said the Commission has a problem with applicants showing up at meetings without going through the correct application and review process. Some applicants often create confusion between the Supervisors and the Commission on the Commission's recommendations. Mrs. Ewald said she has no problem with the Commission seeming way of base when making a recommendation because creativity could eventually solve problems in a difficult plan. Mr. Allen asked why the Supervisors would send a plan back to the Commission once they have the members' recommendation. He felt the plan would be in the Supervisors' hands at that point. Mrs. Ewald said not necessarily. By sending the plan back, the Supervisors are giving the Commission another chance to explore a different avenue. She commented better communication lines should be established between the two boards. Mr. Kuhn said most applicants understand the Supervisors would not look at a plan until the Planning Commission is satisfied. Mr. Philips said it is important the members receive specific dialogue on the Supervisors' concerns before applicants have a chance to flavor it. Mr. Allen brought up sidewalks and cul-de-sac planters. He felt the Township should take a position on both items. Mrs. Ewald said the fire companies do not like cul-de-sac planters. Mr. Allen said the planters would not be an issue if the Township requires an increased road width around them. Mr. Kuhn did not think they have any purpose. Mr. Rodgers felt sidewalks are important for the Open Space Option, but are unnecessary in developments with bigger lots. Mr. Kuhn said sidewalks could sometimes be beneficial. Mrs. Ewald felt the concept should be dealt with on a case by case basis. She felt trails in developments are also important, and complimented Mr. Theurkauf on being so diligent about a trail system. Mr. Allen also felt the Township is often hung up on the removal of trees. He said he would rather sacrifice some trees and replant than sacrifice good design. Mr. Willig did not feel there should have to be a choice. Mr. Allen said in the case of hedgerows, he would rather see a hedgerow replanted than have a fragmented community. Mr. Philips agreed tucking houses into woods could sometimes be beneficial rather than building them in open fields to preserve trees. The Township must be willing to be flexible. Mr. Davison said the boards should agree to be vocal on the tree discussion. Mr. Theurkauf agreed that no one feature should drive a design. But he would continue to be an advocate for the protection of natural resources because of applicants' engineers willing to ignore natural features. Apartment Density Mr. Comitta passed out density research charts based on John Panizza's Volpi tract density of six units per acre. The Planning Commission requested this item. Scipione Site Visit The Commission agreed upon March 3 at 11am and invited the Supervisors to join them. Adjournment There was consensus to adjourn. Mr. Davison adjourned the meeting at 9:50 p.m. An executive session was held after the meeting to discuss legal matters. Respectfully Submitted, Leah J. Campion Planning Commission Secretary Home      Site Overview      Contact Us Please report any problems with this site by clicking here. Site development, maintenance and funding by Township resident Jacob D. Merriwether. Hosting by PLH Worldgroup Communications, Inc.