A beautiful part of southeastern Pennsylvania

December 2, 2006     December 12, 2006   CHARLESTOWN TOWNSHIP PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION Saturday, December 2, 2006 Present: Andy Motel, Chairman, Mike Allen, Vice Chairman, Rick Reis, Michael Churchill and Tom Comitta. Call to Order: 12:15 PM Announcements - none Ordinance Review Traditional Neighborhood Development Ordinance The Planning Commission continued its review of the proposed ordinance with a discussion of the layout of TND-2, and whether to decrease or increase the size of the area. There was additional discussion on the residential uses in TND-2, the types of these uses and where to locate them. They discussed the ordinance text for TND-3 and its permitted and conditional uses. Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 2:15 P.M. The next meeting is scheduled for December 12, 2006, 7:30 P.M. at the Great Valley Middle School. Respectfully submitted, Andy Motel     CHARLESTOWN TOWNSHIP PLANNING COMMISSION GREAT VALLEY MIDDLE SCHOOL, 7:30 P.M. December 12, 2006 Present: Andy Motel, Chairman, Mike Allen, Vice Chairman, June Gorman, Sarah Peck, Wendy Leland (arrived later), Michael Churchill, Rick Reis, Tom Comitta, Linda Csete, Township Administrator and those on the attached list. Call to Order: 7:50 PM Announcements Mr. Motel was pleased to announce that Chester County awarded the Township a grant for the Muldoon easement in the amount of $275,000. These funds will act as a match for the DCNR grant of $295,000. Approval of Minutes November 14, 2006, November 28, 2006 & December 2, 2006 minutes Ms. Peck moved to approve the minutes from November 14, 2006, November 28, 2006 and December 2, 2006 and Gorman seconded. Mr. Motel called for discussion, and there being none, called the vote. All were in favor. Presentation - Pasture Management Mr. Motel said the Planning Commission is just gathering information this evening on horse acreage requirements. Marcia Solda, Merlin Road, asked why the Planning Commission decided to look into this now. Mr. Motel said he began to think about it in the context with the properties the Planning Commission was reviewing earlier this year and what appeared to be the effect of too many horses on the land. He noted that the issue is not straightforward, as some horses are put out in the field more than others depending on the specific operation. Cheryl Fairbairn from the Penn State Cooperative Extension gave a presentation on pasture management to provide the Planning Commission with information to consider when reviewing the proposed ordinance amendment on the number of horses permitted on a property. Ms. Fairbairn explained that the Penn State Cooperative Extension is an educational arm of the University and does not regulate use; rather they make themselves available to provide information and answers. She complimented the Township on their diligence in seeking facts before considering an ordinance change. A copy of her power point presentation is attached to the minutes. Ms. Fairbairn said that a new state Nutrient Management Law will be effective on January 1, 2007 according to the Chester County Conservation District (CCCD), and it's not onerous on the farmer. In general it will permit 2 animal units per pasture acre, with an animal unit the equivalent of a 1,000 pound animal. If more animals are on the land, the property is subject to a nutrient management plan, which the CCCD will help the farmer develop. Township ordinances and regulations will not be able to supersede the state law. (Mrs. Leland arrived at this time.) Ms. Fairbairn said if a farm is found to be non-compliant, the CCCD will step in to work with the property owner. In cases of continued non-compliance, they would go next to the DEP. The new law takes the onus off the local municipalities. Michael Desfor, Merlin Road, asked if a property owner already enacted a Best Management Plan, and the Township enacts a new ordinance that exceeds the state law, can the owner go to the state for relief? Ms. Fairbairn said yes, noting that Charlestown's present ordinance does not exceed the state law. The state law will provide that if an issue is brought to court, the loser will be responsible for all expenses. Mr. Reis asked for some idea of a percentage of property owners who abuse pasture management, and Ms. Fairbairn said they are very few, but tend to invite a great deal of negative publicity. Mr. Allen asked, if the Penn State Cooperative Extension recommends one animal unit per pasture acre, and the state law is twice this number, will that high a density destroy a field? Ms. Fairbairn said no, but the animals will need more supplemental feed and top notch management. Mr. Allen asked if they could get information on the new law, and Ms. Fairbairn said it's available from the CCCD. Alix Coleman, Green Lane, asked what the new law assumes as to how many hours per day the horses are out. Ms. Fairbairn said it assumes they are out 24 hours a day. She said it's not just the grazing that affects the pasture, but the feet. The law will not break down usage by the number of hours the animals are in the pasture. Mr. Desfor asked what the best resources are for the landowner, and Ms. Fairbairn said the Penn State Cooperative Extension has a lot of specialists to provide information, and for specific nutrient management issues, the CCCD is the best resource. Mrs. Solda thanked Ms. Fairbairn for the information presented, and Ms. Fairbairn noted that she's somewhat preaching to the choir this evening. Mrs. Solda said she and the others present are doing their best with regard to pasture management, saying that weed and feed lawn companies do more harm to the environment. Mr. Motel thanked Ms. Fairbairn for the informative presentation. Ordinance Review -Traditional Neighborhood Development Ordinance The Planning Commission continued its review of the proposed ordinance, which was revised following the December 2, 2006 work session by Tom Comitta with a revision date of 12/6/06. Mr. Comitta walked through the changes to the ordinance page by page. He noted that he received some feedback in response to Mr. Motel's email to the Planning Commission requesting additional pictures of various design features. In addition to the changes made in the new draft, the Planning Commission suggested the following: Page 22-6 2206.N.1 Street Edge Strips - Move this section to the Design Standards section and remove the requirement for "no less than 36 inches in width". Page 22-8 Mr. Allen said drawings are needed to depict the area and bulk regulations for the TND areas. Mr. Comitta said he's working on lot and block typicals, which will be added to the design standards section. Mr. Motel asked if this can be prepared for the January 9th meeting. Mr. Churchill said any one pictorial example may not be representative of other possibilities. Mr. Comitta said that for the Arcadia project, his firm supplied the developer with typical lot and block sketches, and they came back with the specifics. Mr. Motel suggested that Mr. Allen and the other members select those regulations that they feel need a supplemental drawing and transmit their list to Mr. Comitta. Page 22-9 2206.A.6.g. Remove "not to exceed 12,000 square feet of gross floor area" since Section 2206.6 already indicates no one use can be more than 12,000 square feet. Definitions Section: After some discussion, the Planning Commission decided to change the maximum number of bed and breakfast units to "8 or less". Page 22-9 Section 2206.6.f. Separate "offices" from "retail and personal service establishments." Mr. Comitta referred to the revised TND map, which shows a reduced Area 2 following discussions at the December 2nd work session. He then showed a sketch that takes Perry Morgan's sketch and reproduces the buildings shown on the south side of Whitehorse Road on the north side, for a mirror image that creates 32,000 square feet of space. This design avoids the constrained land close to the railroad tracks. The entire square footage for Area 2 is 60,000 square feet. Other buildings can fit in to bring the total to 60,000. The exercise was done mainly to determine if that amount of square footage would fit. Mr. Churchill said it does fit pretty well and allows a great deal of flexibility. Mr. Motel asked what will be shown where the traffic circle was previously located. Mr. Comitta said he left the geometry of the circle in place so this can be worked out later. Page 22-12 Section 2209.C.1. Hotel/Motel was added to conditional uses in Area 3 and as a permitted use in Area 4. There was some discussion about the size of hotels and whether a developer would be interested in building a 40-room hotel. Mr. Townes said it's highly unlikely, as most hotels are in the 80 room range. Mr. Motel said it might work adjacent to or as part of a conference center, which is also permitted in Area 4. Mr. Churchill said he doesn't want to create a minimum that makes the use unfeasible. Mr. Motel said that the suggestion of 40 rooms was obtained from the Solicitor's office. He asked Mr. Comitta for examples of recently built hotels. Mr. Comitta named the Hampton Inn in Media with about 90 rooms, which is their minimum. There are three proposals currently under review in West Chester, one a 40 room hotel next to the Turks Head Inn, and the other two for 100 rooms each. Mr. Reis asked how much land is needed for a hotel, and Mr. Comitta said about two acres. Mr. Motel asked for the height restriction in West Chester, and Mr. Comitta said 75 feet including a deck parking structure. Mr. Comitta noted that a 40-room hotel is referred to as a boutique hotel and can usually obtain a liquor license. Mr. Churchill said he's comfortable with increasing the number of rooms if that's needed to make the ordinance work. Ms. Peck suggested a larger hotel could be permitted by conditional use. Mr. Allen asked if Mr. Comitta can provide them with some additional hotel information before further consideration. Page 22-17 Section 2216.A.1. Ms. Peck suggested that a minimum lot size for multi-family units is unnecessary, and Mr. Comitta agreed. Page 22-17 Section 2216.A.2. Mr. Motel said there should be a maximum for square footage of commercial use. Page 22-17 Section 2216.G. Building Height - There was some discussion on whether the maximum height of principal buildings should be increased from the 50 feet as stated, largely to allow for more variety in roof pitch. For the present, they decided to leave the height at 50 feet. Mr. Motel said the Planning Commission should review Section 2217, Procedures for Approval of Development in the TND District, and place the ordinance on the January 9th agenda for further review, and possibly for recommendation. Ordinance to Amend the Official Map to Include the Pennsylvania Railroad Bed Parcels Mr. Motel said the Supervisors asked the Planning Commission to prepare an ordinance amending the Official Map to include the parcels owned by the Pennsylvania Railroad, in the event the railroad bed is officially abandoned and can be converted from rails to trails. Mr. Churchill moved to recommend the ordinance to amend the official map as drafted, and Reis seconded. Mr. Motel called for discussion, and there being none, called the vote. All were in favor. Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 9:50 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.