A beautiful part of southeastern Pennsylvania

April 24, 2007   CHARLESTOWN TOWNSHIP JOINT WORKSESSION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION GREAT VALLEY MIDDLE SCHOOL, 7:30 P.M. April 24, 2007 Present: Andy Motel, Chairman, Mike Allen, Vice Chairman, June Gorman, Michael Churchill, Sarah Peck, Rick Reis, Ed Theurkauf, Linda Csete, Township Administrator, and those on the attached list. Call to Order: 7:35 PM Announcements Mr. Motel added a discussion on Trammel Crow/Atwater to the end of the agenda. Approval of Minutes March 27, 2007 Minutes Mrs. Gorman moved to approve the March 27, 2007 minutes and Mr. Allen seconded. Mr. Motel called for discussion, and there being none, called the vote. All were in favor. Presentation - J. Loew & Associates Jack Loew and Tim Townes presented concept plans for Spring Oaks that fit in with the proposed Traditional Neighborhood Design (TND) zoning for Devault. Mr. Townes introduced John Dewey, John Mosteller and Eric Schrock of Dewey Homes and architect Perry Morgan. Mr. Townes displayed the following: An aerial view of Spring Oaks, for which both residential and office development plans have been considered. The currently pending plan for a Residential Cluster development with 126 units including townhouses and single family homes. Mr. Morgan began the first of three parts of the presentation by showing the following plans and drawings: A set of six photos depicting existing conditions. Mr. Morgan showed which areas are best suited for development, and which areas, such as forested areas along Rees Road, should be left alone. Topography showing the undulations of the land. The roads were patterned to run parallel to the topography, and some units are shown with walk-out basements or garages. Context plan showing the surrounding uses, including the Pa Turnpike, Phoenixville Pike and the general community. The proposed entryways to the Spring Oaks TND relate to these uses, with one entrance off Whitehorse Road, a secondary entrance off Rees Road, and a future tie-in to the Fillippo tract to the south of Spring Oaks. Site plan depicting the layout of homes and the various product types, including single homes, carriage homes (twins) and townhouses. The carriage homes are designed to look like single homes. No houses are shown close to Whitehorse Road, and the trees are preserved as much as possible. An area near Rees Road and the Whitehorse @ Charlestown development across from it show larger single homes. The development roads are laid out in a grid pattern that has been bowed and curved to fit the topography. The intersections have specialty paving, and the roads terminate in focal points such as greens or pocket parks. There are a variety of product types that are mixed together in an integration that subtlely moves from less dense to more dense housing. There is a continuity of style among the various types. Sketch of the Whitehorse Road entrance showing two large bodies of water on either side, stone monuments, stone walls and a fountain. The entrance is designed to make a grand statement. Enlargement showing the driveways and alleys. The larger single homes have garages in the front that are recessed from the house. Some townhouses and carriage homes have attached garages; others have detached garages that are not seen from the street. All units have two car garages and two parking spaces in the driveway. Additional guest parking is accommodated throughout the plan. Open Space Plan showing existing woodlands, a peripheral trail system that links to the sidewalks, pocket parks, and a large oval recreation area. The pocket parks may vary, with some more formal looking with statuary or fountains, and others for either passive or active recreation. The oval area is about 2 football fields long. Smaller green areas on the corners can be used to create neighborhood identity, with mailboxes, information kiosks, etc. Entry Plan showing more detail on the Whitehorse Road entrance. Mr. Morgan said this is already a low lying area, and the water features create an amenity, along with the paving patterns and a curved island similar to one in Eagleview, to give the area a park-like character. The signage is welcoming but located away from Whitehorse Road. The existing barn and outbuildings could be rehabilitated for use as community facilities. A Town Green at the end of the entrance boulevard is a park that will connect to the future Fillippo community, with a symmetrical formal look and traffic calming features. Enlargement of the large oval open space. Homes around it are not shown on both sides of the street so they each have a good view of the oval. Perspective Entry Sketch showing the bowing of the road and the pavers. Streetscape Perspective shows the character of the homes and streets. The sides of the units are designed to look like the fronts. Wrap around porches on some units adds to this effect. Details such as picket fences, raised porches, and sidewalks bring the architecture to the street, and the proximity of the houses to the street enhances the walkability of the community. Unit Mix Plan shows the garages and patios, and how they were positioned to take into consideration the way people live in the units and provide some privacy. The plan shows the interspersion of the unit types and how the alleys are hidden. Mr. Mosteller said some units were positioned as shown to work with the topography or to allow them some buffer from the meat packing plant. Sketch of the single family homes showing the position of the decks, garages, buffering from less desirable views, and their relation to the other homes. Sketch of a single home lot for a home with a detached garage, trellis, and courtyard with extra parking in the alley for guests. Sketch of carriage home. Ms. Peck asked if there is any parallel parking on the main road, and Mr. Morgan said there could be, but it's not shown. Sketch of townhouse with an attached garage. Two detailed sketches of the entries to the sub-villages showing pocket parks and the three unit types with descriptions. Mr. Morgan said the layout was driven by the topography and the critical dimensions of the roads and unit spacing. Discussion followed. Ms. Peck asked how this plan relates to the larger TND district, in particular, the location of the municipal office. Mr. Morgan showed the area for the municipal complex, located near the present position of the Post Office but toward Devault Lane to the east. Mr. Townes said they allowed for the possibility that the road system can link to the municipal complex area with another access point. Mr. Motel asked if the large oval green is level, and Mr. Morgan said more or less yes, adding that it can be made level. Mr. Morgan said in his opinion, the outbuildings to Spring Oak Farm aren't worth saving and recommended they be leveled. He said the stone barn may be usable. Mr. Mosteller said stone from the outbuildings can be re-used for some entry features. Mr. Allen said he doesn't want the Whitehorse Road entrance to appear too grand, eschewing architecturally clever design. Mr. Mosteller said he has other pictures that depict a more understated elegance, and welcomed the commission's feedback. Mr. Motel agreed he didn't want a "them vs. us" feel to the entrance but wanted it to have a general welcoming look. Mr. Motel told the presenters that the Planning Commission has backed away from considering a traffic circle for Whitehorse Road since they aren't pedestrian friendly. Mr. Allen asked if the on street parking will be minimal. Mr. Morgan said there's some ability to put parallel spaces in some areas, but they aren't shown on the plans. He suggested they be sporadically placed throughout the plan and not on both sides of the road or in all areas. Mr. Churchill said there are good views toward the common facility and the general interspersion of unit types is good. He questioned how much alike they should look, or whether there should be more variety. Mr. Morgan said that when speaking of uniformity he was speaking more to the character of the units and the level of architectural detail. Mr. Townes said common threads in the architecture should be carried through in all the housing types. Mr. Reis asked for the percentage of impervious surface in the plan, and Mr. Morgan estimated it would be in the 20's. Ms. Peck asked if kids from Whitehorse @ Charlestown can access the development to use the large oval recreation area, and Mr. Townes said they can access it through the sidewalk system. Mr. Motel asked if there was any obstacle to mixing the unit types with regard to property maintenance. Mr. Mosteller said there would be one Homeowners Association to maintain all the common areas. It's imperative that there be one HOA to leverage the overhead among all the units. Mr. Mosteller began the second portion of the presentation, which focused on the design elements of the homes and other features. He distributed a set of sketches and pictures that included examples from this area, Virginia, Maryland, and Doylestown, Pa. Some of the pictures are the same as those in the proposed TND ordinance's Exhibit B of design guidelines. He said the examples are provided for discussion and can be changed according to the Planning Commission's preferences, as this is a dynamic process. Ms. Peck asked if he will review the Township's proposed TND ordinance and provide an evaluation. Mr. Mosteller said he's already begun this process. He went through the following sketches and pictures from the handout: Units: p.2 Townhouses - 40% have porches and all have some brick p.3 Carriage Homes - range from 2,700 - 3,000 square feet p.4 Village Singles - 38-42 feet wide, details of 2-car garage shown p.5 Manor Home - 60 feet wide, with attached recessed garage Community Features: p.7 Upgraded street lighting p.8 Playgrounds with example of tot lot p.9 Upgraded street trees and landscaping p.10 Belgian block curb throughout p.11 Brick pavers at crossings and rumble strips p.12 Upgraded street signs p.13 Stone walls in front of selected homes/streets Linking Elements throughout: p.15 Dual entry features at the Whitehorse Road entrance p.16 Wooden horse fence along Whitehorse Road frontage p.17 Brick application on end of townhomes p.18 Fenced front yards p.19 Front porches p.20 Brick or stone fronts p.21 Detached Garages p.22 Roofline Articulation p.23 Miscellaneous upgrades. Mrs. Gorman said Charlestown Oaks has a tot lot in a small wooded area that the residents feel is very special and a great favorite with children and parents alike. She suggested the members check it out. Mr. Motel said he likes the features shown on p. 15 of the Whitehorse Road entrance. He said the garages and alleys shown on p. 23 are unattractive. Ms. Peck said if the garage doors were painted to match the units rather than as shown in white it would look much better. Mrs. Gorman asked if the items referred to as upgrades are extras or standard. Mr. Mosteller said they are standard. Mr. Churchill asked if conditional use approval will be needed for some of the single homes that appear to be close to slopes. There was no response. Mr. Theurkauf asked who will be responsible for maintaining the infrastructure. Mr. Loew said the roads would be public. The alleys, sidewalks and other infrastructure would be maintained by the Homeowners Association. Mr. Theurkauf asked about the stormwater management. Mr. Townes said they have an existing NPDES permit that has no expiration date. It allows for a dam structure to be built over the wetland area, with the employment of Best Management Practices. Rob Loose, 16 Great Woods Lane, asked how close the proposed houses will be to Rees Road. Mr. Morgan responded, about 150 feet. Mr. Loose said he'll be seeing the backs of houses and wants good vegetative screening. Mr. Townes said they will be able to work on this. Mr. Loose asked about organized sports and the large oval recreation area. Mr. Allen said there is no intention to allow organized league activity at this location. For the third portion of the presentation, Jack Loew distributed calculations on density to the Planning Commission. He explained that his company joined with Dewey Homes, which will probably build the project for them. He said it could be a showcase project, but they have economic considerations. They have an existing right to build 126 units, and although they agree a TND would be a better project, they need to obtain a comparable financial result. His calculations compared the costs of a Residential Cluster development to a Traditional Neighborhood Development as presented this evening and determined they would need 183 units to achieve the same financial result. He requests that the Township allow them to construct 190 units. He provided detailed calculations, but indicated they are estimates. The numbers change whenever there are changes to the plan. He said the TND averages 3 units per gross acre. Mr. Loew said there are three elements contributing to the higher cost of building a TND: the amount of roadway, the community features, and the design features of the homes. For an RC plan, he used Toll Brothers' Charlestown Meadows as a model to estimate costs. Mr. Loew first showed lists of the increased development costs for TND development, including community upgrades of an additional $2.5 million and home upgrades of $4.1 million. To reach a cost per unit for the upgrades, he took into consideration that the homes in a TND will be higher priced. Mr. Loew then showed a comparison of land value with and without TND zoning, with the land value of the TND estimated at $29 million, and for an RC, $15.5 million. After taking the upgrade costs into consideration, the net land value for either an RC or TND is approximately $15.5 million when the number of units is increased to 183 for the TND. He said 183 units is the balancing point. He proposes 190 units to allow flexibility to add and change features as the plan evolves. Mr. Churchill asked why he shows some of the TND townhouses at a lower sale price than the RC townhouses. Mr. Loew said some have less desirable locations, backing up to the meat packing plant. Mr. Kuhn said he understands the developer is looking for some assurances because a TND is a greater risk, and he acknowledges they need some consideration on density to be successful. However, the Township equates density with infrastructure, and asked what benefit is a TND to the Township. Mr. Motel said one value-add is that the Township looks better with a TND. Mr. Loew said the TND plan is a beautiful product but represents a tremendous risk to the building and lots of upfront cost. Mr. Theurkauf asked why the calculations assume the TND unit product is equated with the RC product when the design is so much more desirable. Mr. Loew said it's due to the small lots and proximity of the other units in a TND. Ms. Peck said the absorption rate for a TND will be slower, although Mr. Allen said according to current literature this seems to be changing. Mr. Schrock said the first few years selling units in a TND is slower until a critical mass is reached. Half the community must be built for buyers to visualize it. Sales accelerate toward the end. Overall, the rate is a little slower, estimating that for a TND plan they would sell three units per month compared to four per month in a conventional development. The risk in building a TND is higher and there are higher up-front costs. He said he believes the pricing and estimated revenues shown by Mr. Loew are realistic. The numbers show the project would be successful, but not grossly successful. Mr. Allen asked what they estimate for a timeline to sell out the TND project, and Mr. Schrock said five to six years. Mr. Schrock said they needed to consider the entire TND zoning district and he feels they've done a good job of integrating their plan into it. Mr. Loew asked if there is any additional information the Planning Commission wants. Mr. Motel said he'd like to see more on the different unit types, and they may think of additional items as they reflect on the presentation. Mr. Churchill thanked the J. Loew organization for the effective and enjoyable presentation this evening. Mr. Motel said the Planning Commission needs to study the information presented this evening and meet prior to the May 8th meeting, both in their own work session and with the Supervisors. He said they will have feedback on May 8th. Discussion Approved Plans vs. Finished Construction The Planning Commission reviewed renderings on file for the Great Valley Pet Hotel and compared them to the partially completed project on Phoenixville Pike. Mr. Allen said he's disappointed with the project, which is much plainer than what was presented in the concept plans. Mr. Motel said he particularly misses the staggered roof line and stepped down front wall that were shown in the plans. Mr. Allen said he spoke to the architect and learned that the changes were made for financial reasons. Since there is no change in structural elements resulting in more impervious surface or other parameters under the Township's control, no approvals were needed to make the changes in the Pet Hotel design. He recommended that in the future, the Planning Commission make sure the design elements of a plan are included in any conditional use approvals to ensure that the end result will match what was depicted in the plans. Trammel Crow/Atwater Mr. Motel said that Trammel Crow has been purchased by CB Richard Ellis Co., so they now own the Atwater office development in Tredyffrin and East Whiteland Townships. CB Richard Ellis Co. has made a zoning change request of Tredyffrin Township to allow 500 apartment units and retail space at Atwater, proposing one access off Route 29 to Atwater Drive for the complex. Mr. Motel suggested that the Planning Commission send comments to Tredyffrin Township and attend their Planning Commission workshop and regular meeting when this matter appears on their agenda. Mr. Churchill suggested that they also speak with the County Planning Commission. Mr. Motel said another company, Mac Oil, is requesting a zoning change in Tredyffrin to allow 88 apartments that would be a transit-oriented development. Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 10:32 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.