PLANNING
COMMISSION
The Planning Commission of Chadds
Ford Township met in the Township Hall on
There was
no public comment.
Upon motion and second (Reiter,
Joseph
Farrell of
Comment 2: Proof of
notification to abutting land owners is necessary. Mr. Farrell stated that he had return
receipts from certified mailings to abutting landowners and would retrieve same
from his car. After further review of
the plan, Mr. Matson asked that an additional neighbor at 106 Keepsake Lane
also be notified and that another notice be sent to the current owner of Camp
Sunset Hill, either the Girl Scouts or Toll Brothers.
Comment 3: An
original seal and signature must be added to the plan.
Comment 4: A DEP Form
certifying that the lot line change involves no new building must be executed
through the Township’s Sewage Enforcement Officer.
Comment 5: The
location of the surveyor’s pin placement needs to be added to plan and
physically installed at the site.
Comment 6: New legal
descriptions need to be generated. Mr.
Farrell replied that same is being done.
The plan
has not yet been revised pursuant to comments made by Commission members and
the Township Engineer at the August 11th meeting. Mr. Matson asked if any comments or
objections had been received by the Township.
Mrs. Furlong replied that she knew of none and there had been no
comments at the August 11th Planning Commission meeting.
Planning
Commission
Page
Two
Mr. Matson suggested that although none of the issues were
serious enough to delay Planning Commission’s suggested approval to the Board
of Supervisors, it would be beneficial for Mr. Farrell to make the necessary
revisions and then appear at the October 13th Planning Commission
meeting for final review.
James
Fritsch of Regester Associates appeared for the
applicant Brandywine Conservancy and presented a revised plan regarding on-site
parking at
Mr. Fritsch
explained the revised proposal and commented on Township ordinances as might
pertain to same.
Commission
members questioned the applicant’s engineer as follows:
·
In response to a question by Mr. Reiter, Mr. Fritsh stated that the existing shed will be removed;
·
Mr. Taylor asked if the occupant of the building in
the back, a residence, will use the new driveway. Mr. Fritsch suggested that it be designated
that the resident continue to use the current access and not the new driveway,
and
·
Mr. Todd questioned the turnaround area for the back
parking lot. Mr. Fritsch sufficiently
addressed those concerns.
Additionally, Mr. Fritsch stated
that a note will be added to the plan stating that the
existing well will be abandoned and that
the same type of lighting as exists at the maintenance shed will be used. Mr. Matson questioned the size of the parking
spaces and Mr. Fritsch confirmed that the spaces will be 9’ by 18’.
Mr. Fritsch
will revise the plans as discussed and appear at the next meeting.
James
Fritsch of Regester Associates was present to
represent applicant Bryan Hoffman of
Mr. Reiter
questioned how much of the driveway will be shared and how wide it will
be. Mr. Fritsch replied that just a
small section in the front will be shared and that the width of the common
portion will be eighteen feet (18’) at its narrowest point.
Neighbor
Bob Hobbs questioned the stormwater management plan
being proposed. Mr. Fritsch briefly
reviewed the plan. Mr. Hobbs suggested
utilizing existing ponds in the
Mr. Hobbs
asked that the sewage bed be moved further back from the property line to avoid
runoff into his pond in case of failure.
Mr. Matson added that Township Ordinance 104 includes references to reparian buffers that might come into play in the project
and suggested that Mr. Fritsch review the newly adopted ordinance.
Planning
Commission
Page
Three
Mr. Matson commented that a lot
with no street frontage must have a twenty foot (20’) wide driveway. The Township engineer also questioned the
proximity of the sewage system on
Kevin
Matson of Kelly Engineers, representing applicant
·
Mr. Matson stated that it had been necessary to have
a bog turtle analysis performed to insure that the endangered turtles were not
present at the site. The report had come
back negative;
·
Highway occupancy plans will be submitted to PennDOT to permit access onto Ring Road;
·
On site water is proposed, but there has been some
talk of tying into Chester Water Authority lines in conjunction with the
Brandywine Battlefield;
·
Proposed lighting will comply with Township
ordinances;
·
Parking calculations have been based on the entire
square footage of building, not just public areas. Fifty-three (53) parking spaces are planned;
·
An existing gas main runs along Route 1 and
diagonally across the site. Mr. Reiter
suggested that it is the Columbia Pipeline.
Mr. Matson will check into the positions of both the pipeline and the
CWA line;
·
A General permit for earth disturbance will be
necessary from DEP and Delaware County Conservation District;
·
Permits appropriate for wastewater treatment plants
will be sought from DEP;
·
Revised legal descriptions will be necessary;
·
Externally illuminated signs are proposed for both
Route 1 and Ring Road, and
·
Some existing culverts need to be rerouted so that
rainwater is discharged around the building.
Planning Commission members
commented as follows:
·
Mr. Vernon questioned the location and number of
spaces for overflow parking with Mr. Daniels also suggesting as much designated
parking as possible;
·
Mr. Todd said that some definition of fire lanes is
necessary and asked if fire lanes will be marked with either signs or
stripping;
·
Mr. Taylor asked if designated parking spaces will be
marked at sewer plant;
·
Mr.
·
Commission members suggested diversion of all
disturbance around the existing sycamore tree;
·
Zoning relief will be needed and specifics were
discussed;
Planning
Commission
Page Four
·
Mr. Taylor asked if any improvements are planned for
a deceleration lane at the intersection of Route 1 and Ring Road, and
·
Mr. Taylor also questioned the ability of sewage
trucks to negotiate the entrance to the site from Ring Road.
Mr. Todd suggested that the review
process was being bypassed and that the application should be reviewed by an
impartial engineer. Mr. Matson replied
that the Township would be receiving review comments from
Adjourned at
Respectfully submitted,
MARYANN D. FURLONG
Planning Commission Secretary