WHITPAIN TOWNSHIP PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 2020
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
WHITPAIN TOWNSHIP PLANNING COMMISSION
JUNE 2020
The fifth meeting of the Whitpain Township Planning Commission for the year 2020 was held on
Tuesday, June 9, 2020 as a video conference using Zoom video technology. Chair Kenneth Corti
presided with Planning Commission members Vice Chair Richard Shorin, Secretary Cathy
McGowan, Joe Habboush, Joseph Fay, Kent Conway, John O’Hara and Alternate members Kurt
Zintner, John Miller and Natalie Macy. Township Engineer James E. Blanch, P.E., Township
Manager Roman Pronczak, Zoning Inspector Conor McCann, IT Director Nicole Leininger and
Recording Secretary Courtney Clemmer were also present. Township Planning Consultant E. Van
Rieker was absent.
Chair Corti called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. Chair Corti introduced the members of the
Planning Commission and Township Staff introduced themselves to the public that were present.
IT Director, Nicole Leininger, explained how to use the Zoom technology for the meeting.
1. Approval of Minutes
Chair Corti called for any comments or questions on the May 12, 2020 meeting minutes from
the Planning Commission, Township Staff or the audience. There being none, Vice Chair
Shorin made a motion, seconded by Mr. O’Hara to approve the minutes of the May 12, 2020
meeting of the Planning Commission. The motion passed 7-0.
2. Review current Zoning Hearing Board cases:
a. NO. 2230-20: CLARENCE Z. AND PATRICIA W. WURTS request a variance from
Article XXVIII, Section 160-216.B relating to Flag Lot Requirements, to allow Applicant
to subdivide their property located at 170-190 Plymouth Rd., Blue Bell, PA in the
Township’s R-5 Residential District into three separate lots. Applicant’s requested relief,
if granted, will allow the minimum lot size for lot 3 to be 88,926.30 square feet when the
Ordinance requires a minimum lot size of 97,500 square feet and will further permit Lot 3
to be 1.368 times the minimum lot area when the Ordinance requires it to be 1.5 times the
minimum lot area.
Present for the Applicant: Bob Blue, P.E., Robert E. Blue Consulting Engineers, P.C.
Vice Chair Shorin shared his concern about the collection of water and recommended the
Applicant carefully consider an effective drainage plan. Mr. Blue said that he will work
with the Township Engineer regarding proper stormwater management requirements. Vice
Chair Shorin also recommended that there should be safe sight lines when accessing the
proposed driveway. Mr. Blue said he will comply.Whitpain Township Planning Commission
June 9, 2020
Page 2 of 8
Chair Corti asked if Plymouth Road is a County or Township owned road. Mr. Blanch said
it is a state road. Chair Corti asked if the Applicant would need a HOP. Mr. Blue said yes.
Mr. Blue confirmed there will only be one shared driveway.
Audience Comments
Sandy Nolte, 890 Lantern Lane - Ms. Nolte explained that her property is in the
Wissahickon Watershed and is adjacent to the property in discussion. Ms. Nolte said that
there are major concerns regarding the stream along the property and she shares the concern
for the extra accumulation of water. Ms. Nolte said that she is extremely opposed to the
proposal.
Mr. Blue explained there is a piece of Township floodplain to the rear of proposed Lot 2,
which will be donated to the Wissahickon Watershed. Mr. Blue said that the runoff of water
from the additional two homes will be regulated by the Township and the Department of
Environmental Protection (DEP). Mr. Blue said that Mr. Wurts has donated land in the past
to the Wissahickon Watershed and is sensitive to the care of Whitpain Township.
David Keleher, 810 Lantern Lane – Mr. Keleher said that he lives behind the proposed Lot
3. Mr. Keleher has observed flooding on his property that appears to be flowing from 170-
190 Plymouth Road and is concerned that the proposal will further intensify the problem.
He asked how he could get further information on the proposed types of houses, pricing,
and stormwater management. Chair Corti asked Township Engineer Jim Blanch if Mr.
Keleher could request these details during the Planning Commission meeting. Mr. Blanch
explained that the Township requires a demonstration of clear and safe sight distances and
that the Applicant is currently only looking for zoning relief for the size of the proposed
lots. If they are approved, they would need to submit subdivision plans and obtain approval.
In which case, the Applicant would need to adhere to all subdivision and stormwater
regulations.
Mr. Keleher asked if the Applicant were only proposing two lots instead of three, would
they need to seek relief. Chair Corti reiterated that the application is asking for a third lot
based on lot size and that the Planning Commission remains neutral on all Zoning Hearing
Board cases but can offer comments. Mr. Pronczak confirmed that one of the proposed lots
does not meet the size requirements, which is why the Applicant is seeking relief.
Mr. Keleher asked how long the entire process of seeking Zoning Hearing Board relief and
the subdivision process will take. Mr. Blanch said that this case will take an estimated six
months. Mr. Keleher asked how often the Township approves requests such as this
application. Mr. Pronczak said that residential setback requests are common, and each must
be reviewed by the Zoning Hearing Board.
Parviz Shamlou, 140 Plymouth Road – Mr. Shamlou echoed others’ concerns regarding
stormwater. Mr. Shamlou would like more detailed information on the application.Whitpain Township Planning Commission
June 9, 2020
Page 3 of 8
Chair Corti recommended that all residents with concerns should attend the Zoning
Hearing Board meeting to express their concerns. Vice Chair Shorin recommended that
residents with concern about stormwater should try to bring photos of the existing
problems. Mr. Pronczak requested that any exhibits for the Zoning Hearing Board meeting
should forward them via email to the Township prior to the meeting.
Mr. Blue said that anyone with concerns regarding the proposal can call his office to discuss
further.
Chair Corti stated that typically the Planning Commission remains neutral on Zoning
Hearing Board applications. The Planning Commission chose to remain neutral on the
subject application.
b. NO. 2231-20: WILLIAM PATTI requests a Special Exception pursuant to Article V,
Section 160-17 relating to Side Yards for Single Family Dwellings, to allow Applicant to
construct a single-family dwelling on his property located at 941 Greenbrier Drive, Blue
Bell, PA in the Township’s R-1 Residential District. Applicant’s requested relief, if
granted, will allow the Applicant to build a new single-family home having an aggregate
side yard of less than 100 feet as required by the Ordinance on a lot having a width of less
than 150 feet.
Present for the Applicant: Christen Pionzio, Attorney
Ms. Pionzio explained that the current dwelling is in poor condition and the Applicant
proposes to demolish the existing structure and construct a new home in its place. The
property measures only 144-feet in width and explained the Applicant is seeking a special
exception to allow for 90-feet instead of the required 100-feet.
Vice Chair Shorin said that the request seems nominal, but recommended precaution be
taken to avoid any issues with the neighboring properties because of the slope of the
property.
Mr. O’Hara asked if the Applicant has spoken with the neighbors. Ms. Pionzio said that
she recommends all clients of hers speak with neighboring properties.
Mr. Blanch said that the Applicant is required to submit a site plan and the Engineering
Department will review the plan for stormwater management and drainage.
Chair Corti stated that typically the Planning Commission remains neutral on Zoning
Hearing Board applications. The Planning Commission chose to remain neutral on the
subject application.
c. NO. 2233-20: MOPPERT BROTHERS AT BLUE BELL requests the following relief
for the property located at 880 Penllyn Blue-Bell Pike, Blue Bell, PA in the Township’s C-
Commercial District:Whitpain Township Planning Commission
June 9, 2020
Page 4 of 8
1. A special exception pursuant to Article XIX, Sections 160-119.R.2 relating to Use
Regulations. The requested relief, if granted, will allow Applicant to store autobody
parts and machinery in a new 624 square foot storage shed (“Storage Shed”) when the
Ordinance only permits such use by special exception; and
2. Variances pursuant to Article XIX, Section 121.F relating to Building Coverage and
Article XXIX, Section 160-225 relating to Expansion of Non-Conforming Use to allow
Applicant to remove a 150.22 square foot shed and replace it with the new 624 square
foot Storage Shed. The requested relief, if granted, constitutes the expansion of a non-
conforming use that exceeds 25% of the gross square footage of the principal building
or structure when the Ordinance prohibits same and will result in a total building
coverage on the property of 40.35% when the Ordinance permits a maximum building
coverage of 25%; and
3. A variance from Article XXVII, Section 160-214.C.1 relating to Required Green Area.
This requested relief, if granted, will allow Applicant to construct the new Storage Shed
on the property which will reduce the green area of the property from the present non-
conforming percentage of 14.96% to 12.92% when the Ordinance requires a minimum
green area of 35%.
Present for the Applicant: Steve Moppert, Applicant
Bob Blue, P.E., Robert E. Blue Consulting Engineers, P.C.
Chair Corti is concerned with the decrease in green space in the proposed application. Mr.
Moppert said that the location where the proposed shed will be placed is currently stones
and they do not have drainage problems. Mr. Moppert explained that they have been
certified as a Tesla maintenance facility and need the additional storage space. Chair Corti
asked Mr. Blanch asked if this request for a reduction of green area would require the
Applicant to consider additional stormwater management systems. Mr. Blanch said it
would depend on the amount of impervious area added. Mr. Blanch also said that the
Applicant would have to meet the requirements of the watershed as well. Mr. Blue said
that they are adding 624 square feet of impervious surface. Mr. Blanch said that with that
number, the Applicant would not be required to add stormwater management but would
review the plan for drainage and grading.
Mr. Fay commented that the parking lot is typically full and questioned if they would have
to limit customers with the addition of the shed. Mr. Moppert said that he has additional
parking storage on another property and believes there would be enough room for parking
even with the shed.
Mr. Habboush asked if the location of the shed is measured from the property line or the
existing fence. Mr. Blue said that it is measured from the property line to the face of the
proposed shed. Mr. Habboush asked if there would be fencing between the shed and the
property line. Mr. Blue said he would speak with his client on alternatives to decrease the
size of the shed and increase the buffer.
Vice Chair Shorin commented that the property appears cluttered and sloppy on the
presented exhibits. Mr. Moppert said that there will always be a “dirty” area in the carWhitpain Township Planning Commission
June 9, 2020
Page 5 of 8
maintenance industry, but he makes every effort to make sure the facility stays clean. Mr.
Moppert said that with the addition of the shed, it will work as storage and will ultimately
decrease the clutter.
Mr. Conway asked if the Applicant would remove “Shed A” as marked on their exhibit.
Mr. Blue said yes.
Mr. McCann asked if “Shed C” would remain or be removed. Mr. Blue said that it is a
portable plastic shed and because it was too close to the property line, Mr. Moppert moved
it further. Mr. McCann said that if the shed is moved from its current location, it would
need Zoning relief.
Chair Corti stated that typically the Planning Commission remains neutral on Zoning
Hearing Board applications. The Planning Commission chose to remain neutral on the
subject application.
d. NO. 2234-20: JANET EASLEA AND MICHAEL KEMP request a variance from
Article XVI, Section 160-97C relating to Lot Development Requirements, to allow
Applicants to construct a one story addition, uncovered deck and a covered front porch
onto the west side of the existing residence on their property located at 640 Marigold Lane,
Blue Bell, PA in the Township’s R-9 Residential District. Applicant’s requested relief, if
granted, will allow the aforesaid improvements to the property to reduce the side yard
setback on the west side of the residence to 6 inches when the Ordinance requires a
minimum of ten feet.
Chairman Corti noted that the Applicant was not present for the meeting.
Chairman Corti commented that the application appears benign.
Mr. Habboush asked if the 6-inches is measured from the exterior wall or the foundation
of the dwelling. Mr. Habboush also asked if there is a restriction on the placement of the
windows on the house facing the adjacent property. Vice Chair Shorin said that he observed
the location and it appears all windows will be facing the woods and does not appear to
affect anyone.
Chair Corti stated that typically the Planning Commission remains neutral on Zoning
Hearing Board applications. The Planning Commission chose to remain neutral on the
subject application.
e. NO. 2235-20: RUSSELL AND ABBEY SARAULT. request variances from Article VII,
Sections 160-34 relating to Side Yards for One-Family Detached Dwellings, Article VII,
Section 160-36 relating to Rear Yards, Article XXVIII, Section 160-203 relating to
Residential Projections into Side Yards and Article XXVIII, Section 160-204 relating to
Residential Rear Yard Intrusions to allow construction of a 30’ x 30’ attached garage
addition and a 22’ x 26’ one story addition to the rear of their property located at 1501
Daws Rd., Blue Bell, PA in the Township’s R-2 Residential District. Applicants’ requestedWhitpain Township Planning Commission
June 9, 2020
Page 6 of 8
relief, if granted, will: (a) permit the attached garage to project into the side yard when the
Ordinance prohibits same; and (b) will permit one side yard to be 6 feet wide when the
Ordinance requires a minimum of 25 feet. In addition, if the requested relief is granted, it
will: (a) allow the proposed 22’ x 26’ addition to project into the rear yard when the
Ordinance prohibits same; and (b) will result in a rear-yard setback of 33.6 feet when the
Ordinance requires a minimum of 50 feet.
Present for the Applicant: Russell & Abbey Sarault, Applicant
Vice Chair Shorin recommended adding landscaping along the edge of the garage to act as
a buffer. Mr. Sarault said that he has spoken to their neighbor regarding their application.
Vice Chair Shorin recommended bringing a letter from the neighbor to the Zoning Hearing
Board meeting stating her approval.
Mr. Blanch said that given the level of improvements proposed, the Applicant will be
required to submit plans for review of drainage, grading and stormwater management.
Chair Corti stated that typically the Planning Commission remains neutral on Zoning
Hearing Board applications. The Planning Commission chose to remain neutral on the
subject application.
f. NO. 2236-20: MATHERS ROAD, LP requests variances from Article XII, Section 160-
62 relating to Accessory Structures and from Article XXVIII, Section 160-202 relating to
Residential Projections into Front Yards to allow Applicant to construct a detached garage
on its property located at 299 Mathers Rd., Ambler, PA, in the Township’s R-5 Residential
District. Applicant’s requested relief, if granted, will allow the detached garage to project
12 feet into the front yard when the Ordinance prohibits same.
Present for the Applicant: Craig R. Lewis, Attorney
Mr. Lewis explained that his client is doing a complete restoration of 299 Mather Road and
owns the surrounding properties, meaning there are no immediate neighbors immediate
(i.e. adjoining property owners) affected by the construction. Mr. Lewis said that his client
is seeking relief to construct an additional garage on the property that projects 12-feet into
the front yard. Chair Corti asked if there are any neighbors that would be affected by the
development. Mr. Lewis said that there are no detrimental impacts to neighbors because
his client owns all neighboring properties.
Vice Chair Shorin asked if the use of the garage would be for personal vehicles or
commercial. Mr. Lewis confirmed personal vehicles. Mr. Lewis said that the upstairs of
the proposed garage allows for a bathroom and office space for the owner.
Chair Corti stated that typically the Planning Commission remains neutral on Zoning
Hearing Board applications. The Planning Commission chose to remain neutral on the
subject application.Whitpain Township Planning Commission
June 9, 2020
Page 7 of 8
g. NO. 2237-20: ANDREW AND TONYA MERRILL request variances from Article V,
Section 160-17 relating to Side Yards for Single Family Dwellings and Article XXVIII,
Section 160-204 relating to Residential Rear Yard Intrusions to allow construction of a 16
by 16 foot, one story addition to replace an existing deck and existing addition on their
property located at 943 E. Township Line Rd., Blue Bell, Pa in the Township’s R-1
Residential District. Applicants’ requested relief, if granted, will permit the aforesaid new
addition to intrude into the rear yard when the Ordinance prohibits same and to reduce the
side yard setback to 34 feet when the Ordinance requires a minimum of 45 feet.
Chair Corti noted that the Applicant was not present for the meeting.
Chair Corti stated that typically the Planning Commission remains neutral on Zoning
Hearing Board applications. The Planning Commission chose to remain neutral on the
subject application.
h. NO. 2238-20: ACTS RETIREMENT LIFE COMMUNITIES, INC. requests a variance
from Article XIII, Section 160-78.F relating to Special Regulations for Retirement
Communities, to allow 8 feet of the single family cottage located at 622 Farmhouse Circle,
Blue Bell, PA in the Township’s R-6 Agricultural/Rural Residence District to intrude into
the 100 foot perimeter setback. Applicant’s requested relief, if granted, will allow cottage
to be located 92 feet from the property lot line when the Ordinance requires it to be located
a minimum of 100 feet from the lot line.
Present for the Applicant: Joseph Hanna, P.E., Engineer
Chair Corti asked if the proposed cottage could be moved closer to the cul-de-sac. Mr.
Hanna said that the electrical contractor installed the electrical duct bank through this lot
so the relief being sought is so the duct bank would not have to be relocated. Mr. Hanna
said that there will also be a six-foot berm constructed and several evergreen trees. Chair
Corti asked what the distance is from the back of the home to Township Line Road. Mr.
Hanna said 92-feet to the ultimate right-of-way, which is approximately 20-feet from the
edge of the road.
Chair Corti stated that typically the Planning Commission remains neutral on Zoning
Hearing Board applications. The Planning Commission chose to remain neutral on the
subject application.
3. Review pertinent planning issues.
There were no pertinent planning issues to be discussed.
There being no further business to come before the Commission, a motion was made by Mr.
Conway, and seconded by Mr. O’Hara to adjourn. The motion passed 7-0. The meeting
adjourned at 8:10 PM.Whitpain Township Planning Commission June 9, 2020 Page 8 of 8 Respectfully submitted, Cathy McGowan, Secretary
You can also read
