What's new? (Home)
Search this site
Site Overview
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
|
March 11, 2008
CHARLESTOWN TOWNSHIP
PLANNING COMMISSION
GREAT VALLEY MIDDLE SCHOOL, 7:30 P.M.
March 11, 2008
Present: Andy Motel, Chairman, Mike Allen, Vice Chairman, Sarah Peck (arrived later), June Gorman, Rick Reis, Wendy Leland (arrived later), Ed Theurkauf, Tom Comitta, Linda Csete and those on the attached list.
Call to Order: 7:34 P.M.
Announcements - none
Approval
February 26, 2008 Minutes
Mr. Motel asked if there are any corrections or changes to be made to the Feb. 26, 2008 minutes. Mrs. Gorman said there were two references to March 13th that should read March 11th. Mr. Reis moved to approve the Feb. 26, 2008 minutes with these changes, and Mrs. Gorman seconded. Mr. Motel called for discussion, and there being none, called the vote. Four were in favor, none opposed.
Proposed Ordinance Amendments - Zoning Ordinance Articles 2, Definitions, and 4, 15 & 16 Relating to Open Space
Mr. Theurkauf reviewed proposed changes to Article 4 as follows:
|
Page
|
Proposed Change
|
Reason
|
|
2-4
|
Definition for Critical
Environmental Areas
|
Regroup categories, remove
inconsistencies, dimensional criteria, cultural and aesthetic considerations.
|
|
2-8
|
Remove qualification that
woodlands be largely free of invasive plants
|
Change wording to woodlands
"undergoing healthy natural succession", which means invasive species are not
taking over.
|
(Mrs. Leland arrived at this time.) Mr. Theurkauf reviewed proposed change to Article 4 as follows:
|
Section
|
Proposed Change
|
Reason
|
|
403.F.1
|
Mr. Theurkauf proposed two options
for the Planning Commission to consider for open space tract area on lots
containing a historic resource.
The Planning Commission chose Option 2.
|
Option 2 allows for more
flexibility, by allowing any area of a historic resource lot to be applied to
the open space requirement as long as the total open space comprises 40% of
the gross tract area.
|
Mr. Theurkauf reviewed proposed change to Article 15 as follows:
|
Section
|
Proposed Change
|
Reason
|
|
1502.B.15
|
Add agricultural uses that include
structures other than fencing as a conditional use
|
Consistency with requirement for
other structures permitted in open space.
|
Mr. Allen moved to recommend that the Board of Supervisors approve the changes to these sections of the Zoning Ordinance, plus Section 512 of the SLDO, as drafted in Mr. Theurkauf's March 4, 2008 memo and attachments, and specified that the Planning Commission recommends Option 2 be used for Section 403.F.1 of the Zoning Ordinance. Mrs. Leland seconded. Mr. Motel called for discussion, and there being nothing further, called the vote. Five were in favor, none opposed.
Plan Review
Thomas D. Alleva Sketch Plan - Lot Line Change
Brett MacKay, P.E., Chester Valley Engineers and Mrs. and Mrs. Alleva, owners, were present to discuss a sketch plan dated 1/22/08 proposing to change the lot line between Thomas & Helen Alleva's parcel #35-4-122.3 and Thomas Fillippo's parcel #35-4-122.
(Ms. Peck arrived at this time.)
Mr. Alleva explained that he wanted to square the lot, and would be adding about 1/2 acre to his tract. He said he has no plans to build on the lot or do any grading. Mr. Allen noted this is presently an existing non-conforming lot. Mr. McKay said the lot line change will bring the lot into conformance by increasing it to a net area of 80,000 square feet. Mr. Allen said the lot has too much impervious surface, but this can be corrected. Mr. Motel asked about the garage that is straddling 3 lots, all owned by Mr. Alleva. Mr. Alleva said the building actually straddles two lots; there is a mistake on the plans.
There was some discussion on the zoning for the Alleva parcel as to whether the applicable zoning is FR or TND. Mr. Theurkauf said that the lot wouldn't be subject to TND requirements and a single home can still be built as an FR lot, because under the MPC, construction of a single family home doesn't constitute land development. Under the TND, any land development must be built under the TND requirements, but that wouldn't apply here.
The Planning Commission discussed changing the zoning for this parcel to FR. Mr. Comitta said there can be no changes of any kind to the proposed TND ordinance, which includes this tract, and is scheduled for a vote on April 7th by the Supervisors. However, this change could be made subsequent to the adoption of the TND, should that move forward. He noted there are other minor changes to the TND ordinance to be made, and it is expected they would be made in a follow up process. This additional change could be included.
Mr. Allen suggested that Mr. MacKay speak with the township solicitor to make sure he agrees with the Planning Commission's interpretation that a single home could be built under the FR zoning. The applicant can then return to the Planning Commission with a revised sketch plan.
Mr. Comitta noted that per Mr. Theurkauf's memo, this subdivision will change the yield calculation for Tom Fillippo's adjoining tract, reducing it from 76 to 75 units. This will then require a change to Perry Morgan's Exhibit D-1 for the TND ordinance. Mr. Motel said the road configuration should also be changed so it's the same as that shown for TND Area 2.
Proposed Ordinance Amendments - Zoning & SLDO Definitions
Mr. Comitta addressed some issues relating to the definitions for both the zoning ordinance and SLDO.
First, he had discussed with Jim McErlane and Mark Thompson whether there should be a separate Definitions Ordinance that would apply to either the Zoning or SLDO ordinance. Two other options would be to have identical definitions sections in each ordinance, or to have tailored definitions sections with only those definitions included that pertain to each ordinance. He said the solicitors recommended against a separate ordinance for definitions, although Mr. Comitta said many townships do it this way. The reasoning wasn't based on legal advice but was an opinion that a separate definitions ordinance might be confusing to the administrative personnel. When someone comes in to the office to purchase a zoning ordinance or SLDO, they would have to remember to include the definitions ordinance with either one.
The Township Administrator responded that she didn't feel the administrative staff would have any difficulty including a separate definitions book with the ordinances. As more people go on line, fewer purchase the actual ordinance books from the township, and for those that do, it wouldn't be a problem to clip a definitions booklet to the ordinance being purchased.
Mr. Allen stated he preferred having a separate definitions ordinance and made a motion to recommend this. Mr. Reis seconded. Mr. Motel called for discussion, and there being none, called the vote. Five were in favor. Ms. Peck abstained, stating she wasn't sure of the implications.
Second, Mr. Comitta asked about some of the graphic exhibits included with the definitions in the zoning ordinance, which were analog representations first produced in the 1980's. If they are to be included in the revision, they should be improved. Mr. Allen suggested keeping and enhancing just those that are necessary. Mr. Comitta said this could be reviewed at the next meeting.
Third, Mr. Comitta asked about whether the Planning Commission wanted to update the language in the definitions, as those in the SLDO were last overhauled in 1982 and more colloquial language was used, for example "and the like" instead of "etc." Mr. Allen said they should update to more contemporary language.
Fourth, Mr. Comitta noted that in the draft sets of definitions for the two ordinances, those definitions relating to the proposed TND have been included.
The Planning Commission discussed how to proceed with the in-depth review of the two sets of definitions. The zoning ordinance has 35 pages of definitions; the SLDO, 29 pages. The Township Administrator suggested that each planning commission member enter their comments in "track changes" mode and email them to her so she can compile them for review at the next meeting. Mr. Motel agreed and asked that the members get these changes to her by April 27th.
TND Subcommittee Updates
Mr. Motel began a discussion on the TND subcommittees, recommending that each subcommittee report more fully on their progress at the next meeting.
PennDOT Issues: Lead: Wendy Leland, Secondary: Andy Motel, Mike Allen
Mr. Motel said he'll send a follow up letter to PennDOT thanking them for their participation in the road improvement discussions for Devault, and again noted his concern over the pedestrian path under the Morehall Road bridge. He said the issue of burying the utilities in Devault will be handled separately by Sarah Peck.
Turnpike Issues: Secondary: Andy Motel
Mr. Motel said he sent a letter to the Turnpike Commission expressing the Township's desire to include pedestrian access on the three bridges that are to be expanded. He said he needs to find the appropriate contact person to discuss the issue of beautification of the Turnpike in the Devault Area.
Municipal Building/Needs: Lead: June Gorman, Secondary: Michael Churchill
Mr. Motel asked everyone to share their thoughts on the municipal building. Mrs. Gorman said she's checked the county website to review their various departments to get a sense of what departments might fit into the municipal complex as lessors. Mr. Motel suggested she speak to County Planning Commission Chairman Rob Bailey to see if he had any suggestions for county uses that may be suitable for this area.
There was some discussion about including the Post Office in the municipal complex, although Ms. Peck said Tom Fillippo may want to move the Post Office to his new proposed building. They discussed the advisability of other tenants in the municipal complex, and whether the Township should own it or be a lessor. Mr. Allen noted the latter is for the Supervisors to decide.
Ms. Peck asked about timing for the municipal building, since it would serve as a focal point for the TND. Mr. Motel noted that, according to Tim Townes, they expect to break ground at Spring Oaks' TND Area 1 in about 18 months. The Township's timetable for a building is undecided at present. Ms. Peck suggested the Planning Commission go on a site tour of other township buildings, particularly newer ones, in the area. Mr. Motel asked Mrs. Gorman to set something up.
Mr. Motel asked that each subcommittee group be prepared at the next meeting to review their priorities in their particular areas.
State Police and Substation Issues: Lead: Andy Motel, As Needed: Michael Churchill; Kevin Kuhn
Mr. Motel said he's continuing to work on this issue.
Recreation/Railroad Issues: Lead: Rick Reis, Secondary: Michael Churchill
Mr. Reis said he's waiting for the feasibility study on the commuter rail line to be completed, as little can be learned until that time.
Mr. Allen mentioned the interest from a cricket club in utilizing some area on the township's 6-acre parcel in Devault, and whether this use should be considered in the TND recreation area. Mr. Motel said other considerations for the recreation area are finances, maintenance, a parks building, and the possibility of additional employees. He suggested the subcommittee consider how the township's costs can be minimized.
Adjournment:
The meeting was adjourned at 9:12 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Linda M. Csete
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.
|
|
