Zoning & Subdivision
Review Committee
Meeting Minutes
Tuesday – June 19, 2001 –
7:30 p.m.
MCRPC Offices, 2491 Highland Road – Hermitage, PA
|
Members
Present
|
Others
Present
|
|
Samuel
Scott, Chairman
|
Dennis G.
Puko, Executive Director
|
|
James Rollinson, Vice-Chairman
|
Peggy
Heldorfer, Assoc. Planner
|
|
Jim
Hogan
|
Fred
Frank, Planner - MCRPC
|
|
Clifford
McCandless
|
Barbara
L. Conroy, Springfield Twp.
|
|
Ron
Faull
|
David
L. Swartz. Springfield Twp.
|
|
Burroughs
Price
|
Atty.
Robert Kochems, MCRPC Solicitor
|
|
Fred
Brenner
|
|
Mr. Scott, Chairman, called the
meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. A quorum was present. Mr. Scott noted that the
Minutes of the May 15, 2001 meeting were mailed prior to tonight’s meeting and
there being no additions, corrections, or deletions, the Minutes stand approved
as mailed.
N E W B U S I N E S S
1. Proposed Springfield
Township Zoning Ordinance Review –
Mr. Puko noted that this item should have been listed on the agenda prior to
mailing, but was omitted. He stated that this would be the only opportunity for
MCRPC to comment on Springfield’s first proposed zoning ordinance since their
public hearing is scheduled prior to the next Committee meeting. He noted that a
number of years ago, Springfield Township adopted a Subdivision and Land
Development Ordinance, which they now administer. In the mid 1990’s, the
Township started working on the zoning ordinance and now has a draft ordinance
complete, and moved into the adoption process. The adoption process includes the
referral to MCRPC for review and comment, pubic hearing by the Springfield
Township Supervisors and then their action.
Mr. Puko distributed copies of
the most pertinent sections of the ordinance to Committee members, which
included the Community Development Objectives, and the four zoning districts. He
noted that the ordinance is very compact with a lot of tables and charts. The
four basic zoning districts are: C-1, C-2, Village and Rural Development.
The Rural Development District
covers the bulk of the Township and is meant to be a low-density zoning
district. There is a minimum acre and a half of lot area required for both uses,
single-family developments and other similar types of uses. The Rural
Development District is an open district in terms of the fact that it is not
restricted to single-family use - agriculture and some small business uses are
permitted.
He noted that the C-1 District is
the broader, most general/permissive commercial zoning district which provides a
variety of commercial-type uses, and permits them without restriction to size.
The C-1 District is established to provide for businesses that require
significant infrastructure and access to interstate interchanges.
The C-2 District is established
to provide for businesses which have lower infrastructure needs than the C-1. It
encourages smaller commercial uses, but allows larger ones on a condition that
they meet several performance standards including some rather rigid buffering
and screening requirements.
The Village Zoning District
provides a variety of mixed uses, but at a higher density where both residential
uses and compatible small-scale businesses can thrive. Overall, the zoning
ordinance is pretty user friendly with a lot of tables, permitted uses and the
lot, yard, and height requirements are neatly shown together. He also noted that
there are a lot of Conditional Uses in the zoning ordinance, which are detailed
in tables as well.
Ms. Barbara Conroy, Code
Administrator for Springfield Township noted that a lot of time and effort has
been put into the ordinance. Many visioning workshops and hands on workshops
were held with the community to find out where the community wanted to head and
to try to put together mapping boundaries. She stated that since Springfield is
a community that had never been zoned, they held a lot of hands on workshops
because of all of the development pressures. Ms. Conroy stated that the public
had been involved intensively in developing/discussing this draft zoning
ordinance. She stated that the citizens of the Township have accepted this
ordinance very well. She also stated the C-1 & C-2 districts are large, but
about one third of that area is undevelopable due to wetlands. She noted that
when they were establishing zoning districts, they followed lot lines because
they did not want to cut a piece of property in half.
Attorney Kochems questioned the
area around Route 19 and I-80 if it was another targeted growth area for the
County under the M.C. Comprehensive Plan? Mr. Puko stated no, not under the
County Comprehensive Plan. He questioned this because there is a proposal for a
sewer plan on the Springfield Township side of I-80 and he has concerns for the
Rural Development District in the future. Also, he questions the landfill, which
would be another adjoining Industrial Use.
Mr. Puko explained that Mercer
Borough, Findley, Coolspring, East Lackawannock, Springfield and possibly
Jefferson Township’s are participating in a joint regional sewer study, which
has just begun and could include a scenario for a sewer plan as Attorney Kochems
mentioned above or it could also include a sewer plan further south around
Leesburg. Mr. Puko felt that this might be an area, which Springfield might want
to look at the rezoning again. Ms. Conroy said there had been discussions of an
Industrial zone up there, but the Township felt that without the infrastructure,
they were too far from the interstate. Right now, as far as Springfield’s
participation in the joint Neshannock 537 Plan, is considered a long-range
outlook. They are not anticipating the sewers to be extended for at least 10
years.
Ms. Conroy stated that concerning
the landfill issue, Mr. Ed Vogel of Tri-County Industries spoke with her about
possibly zoning some areas to Industrial in Springfield Township. Again, because
they do not have full infrastructure, they did not feel it was appropriate to
zone for Industrial heavy uses, when they could not support it with the
infrastructure.
Ms. Conroy noted that in
Springfield Township’s Subdivision and Land Development Ordinance, they have a
very comprehensive storm water management plan. They have no storm sewers, but
everything is done with storm water retention ponds on site. Those facilities
would then have to meet the 1, 2, 5, 50, and 100-year flood events.
Mr. Scott asked if there were any
further discussions. There being none, a motion was made by Mr. Hogan and
seconded by Mr. Price that we recommend approval of the proposed Springfield
Township Zoning Ordinance. The motion passed.
2. Review of Draft Mercer
County Subdivision and Land Development Ordinance
– Mr. Puko distributed copies of the most pertinent sections of the draft
proposed amended Mercer County Subdivision and Land Development Ordinance to the
members for their review. He noted that Graney, Grossman, Ray and Associates
were hired under contract to work with the Planning Commission in updating this
ordinance. The Commission did not receive the draft copy until the day before
the meeting, so the staff has not had the opportunity to review it in detail. He
asked the Committee if they would review the handout material and reschedule
another meeting to review this item only. Messrs. Puko and Frank briefly
explained the sections that have changed throughout the ordinance and noted that
these items would be reviewed in full detail at the next meeting. It was noted
that the next special meeting of the Zoning & Subdivision Review Committee
would be held on Monday, July 9th, 7:30 p.m. at the MCRPC Offices.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business
to conduct, the meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Dennis G. Puko,
Executive Director
Mercer
County Regional Planning Commission
2491 Highland Road, Hermitage, PA 16148
mail@mcrpc.com www.mcrpc.com
home
about mcrpc planning
projects community
development transportation
zoning
subdivision
