West Sadsbury Township
Planning Commission Meeting
August 25, 2015
Planning Commission members in attendance were Barry Edwards, Ed Haas, Jeff Sosack, Darren DeVoe, and Dave Markward.
Also in attendance were Ernest and Nancy Oppenheim and Marvin Beiler.
The meeting was called to order at 7:30 PM. With nothing on the agenda, the July meeting was postponed. A Motion to accept the June 23, 2015 Minutes as written was made by Dave. Seconded by Jeff. The Motion passed.
Regional Planning Commission
No report.
OLD BUSINESS
None
NEW BUSINESS
None
ZONING HEARING BOARD UPDATES
· Update on the proposed new structure to be erected by the Donald Kaufman Poultry Operation just off Strasburg Road. Austen Steffy of Red Barn Consulting, Inc., the Kauffman’s designer for this project, presented a letter dated June 23, 2015, that addressed each of the items previously identified in the Becker Engineering letter. The Planning Commission reviewed the letter from Red Barn and compared its content to the issues identified in the Becker Engineering Review Letter. With the exception of documentation from Keystone Valley Fire Co. all items have been resolved. Keystone had requested a wrap around drive vs. a center drive for accessing property. The Kauffman’s declined fire company recommendation and have written a letter accepting fire companies position of not being able to offer full protection under final design.
· Planning Commission discussed the application of Mervin J. Beiler that seeks a variance to install a 484 SF Horse Barn on a property he plans to purchase that is located at 61 Amy Drive, Gap, PA. The proposed location of the horse barn would be within the required setbacks for the property. Additionally, Mr. Beiler is requesting a variance to keep one (1) horse on the 1.1-acre property which is smaller than the 2 acre minimum required by the Zoning Ordinance to keep a horse in a residential district. The existing home on the property would be occupied by Mr. Beiler and his family and the horse would be used as their sole means of transportation. The Planning Commission reviewed the entire Application, including the attached sketches of the lot which showed the proposed location of the horse barn. Mr. Beiler was in attendance at our meeting and was able to clarify some issues and to participate in our discussions. Our discussions are summarized as follows:
o Mr. Beiler is not currently the owner of the subject property: however, he has made an offer to purchase it and has deferred the settlement date until after it is determined whether he will be granted the requested relief.
o The lot is 167’ wide: therefore, it would be physically impossible to place the horse barn anywhere on the property that would be 100’ from both side the east and west lot lines.
o The entire property slopes significantly from front to rear. The winding path of the driveway is necessary to reduce its grade to a manageable slope.
o The ground under the northern side of the existing driveway area was built up several feet with fill in order to create a level surface adjacent to the existing garages that are internal to the house
o Beyond the northern edge of the driveway there is a steep dropoff where the fill ends and the natural slope of the property resumes. The Applicant proposes to construct the new horse barn at the north edge of the existing driveway area. The foundation for the new structure will require walls that are several feet high in order to keep the floor of the horse barn even with the paved driveway surface.
o Although not shown on the sketches that were part of the Application, Mr. Beiler stated that the existing well is located in the front yard area in southeast quadrant of the property. He also stated that the septic system drain field is in the rear yard, maybe 75’ behind the existing house. The proposed location for the horse barn will not interfere with either of those systems.
o The proposed horse barn will be 22’ wide by 22’ deep for a total square footage of 484 SF. The maximum size for a horse barn that is allowed by the Zoning Ordinance is 1200 SF, so the proposed horse barn is quite modest in size.
o The proposed horse barn would be placed approximately 131’ from the edge of Amy Road and would be much lower than the road surface elevation. It would not be easily visible to passing traffic or to neighbors on the other side of Amy Drive.
o The Applicant proposes that the horse barn be located 25’ from the eastern property line: however, the minimum Side Yard Setback distance in the RLD District is 30’. Together with Mr. Beiler, the Planning Commission explored various options that might bring the side yard setback distance back into compliance with the ordinance requirement. It appears that the proposed location for the horse barn is the only viable spot on the property on which the horse barn could be placed.
o NOTE: In order to permit the horse barn to be built in the proposed location that is only 25’ from the side property line, the Application will need to be amended to also request relief from Section 321 of the Zoning Ordinance (Area and Bulk Regulations for Existing Development) which requires a Minimum Side Yard setback distance of 30’ for structures in the RLD Zoning District
o Along the eastern boundary of the property is a heavily wooded strip that would provide a visual screen to block the view of the horse barn from the neighboring dwelling
o Because the subject property is surrounded on all three sides by heavily wooded lands, the presence of a horse barn that houses a single horse should not alter the essential character of the neighborhood nor would it impair the use or development of adjacent properties.
Comments:
A significant part of our discussions dealt with exploring other locations for the horse barn that would create less of an infringement on the required setback distances. No viable options were found. The size of the proposed horse barn is minimal compared to the 1200 SF maximum size allowed by the Ordinances.
The Application complies with the criteria listed in Section 1504.1.A thru E that describe the criteria that must be met in order for the Zoning Hearing Board to grant relief:
· There are physical circumstances (the significant slope throughout the property) that limit the available locations in which the horse barn can be placed
· Because of the heavily wooded areas surrounding the subject property, and because its location will be 131’ from the roadway, the proposed horse barn will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood.
· Because of the minimal size of the proposed horse barn, the variance – if authorized – will represent the minimum variance that will afford relief and will represent the least modification possible of the regulation in issue
· Similarly, the rural nature of the property and the fact that it is surrounded by heavily wooded areas on all sides led us to believe that the housing of one horse on the property would not create an unfavorable impact on the surrounding neighborhood.
Recommendations:
Based on the discussions and comments noted above, the Planning Commission makes the following recommendation:
We recommend that the Zoning Hearing Board take the following actions:
· Modify the Application to also request relief from Section 321 of the Zoning Ordinance (Area and Bulk Regulations for Existing Development) which requires a Minimum Side Yard setback distance of 30’ for structures in the RLD Zoning District
· Grant the requested variance to permit the keeping of one horse on a property that is less than two (2) acres in size
· Grant the requested variance to allow the installation of both the 22’x22’ horse barn within the minimum setback distances specified in the Zoning Ordinance
The Applicant should also be reminded that all other requirements of the Township Ordinances must be followed, including the need to manage the runoff of animal waste from the proposed barn and the need to provide for appropriate stormwater management.
MISCELLANEOUS
· The Brandywine Conservancy has reached out to the township offering Ordinance Assessment for Forested Riparian Buffer Protection by way of letter dated January 5, 2015. Cory led discussion and exchange of ideas on how size of buffer setbacks impact water quality and land owners. The Planning Commission, with Cory’s guidance, will inquire on availability of spokesperson to visit and offer additional insight.
· The Planning Commission will continue meeting to consider modifications to sections of the existing Zoning Ordinances to more clearly define the intent and scope of regulations regarding construction of horse barns and the keeping of horses in the Township. Discussion will continue as Planning Commission members gather data.
· Barry advised Planning Commission members on the latest “Multimodal Transportation Study” noting the Route 30 Corridor Vision project outlining current status of business and traffic studies along business 30 and how future projects could impact our area.
· Jeff Sosack has announced his resignation from The Planning Commission effective at the end of 2015.
A Motion to adjourn the meeting was made by Jeff and seconded by Barry. The motion passed and the meeting adjourned at 9:10 PM. The next meeting will be Tuesday, September 22, 2015 at 7:30 PM.
Respectfully submitted,
Dave Markward
Recorder