Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

We're slowly getting there.

Okay, we are live on YouTube. Okay. All right. I'd like to call the Franklin Township Planning Commission to order on 707 on October 7th, 2025. Um, looking at the agenda, first item is public comment. Is there any public comment? I'm not hearing any. So, we're going to jump to the next item. Approval of minutes. Planning Commission meeting minutes June 5th, 2025.

I wasn't at that meeting and I was kind of laid up after that meeting. Uh Stacy put together the minutes and put those out to I think Dave and Paul Deassi. Um I had not seen anything. So I sent Dave a note a couple days ago asking, you know, what the status was. And um Dave said he was going to look into it. I looked at the minutes and the minutes seemed they seem representative or what I thought they should be. Um, but I don't know if there's any comments from from Zach or uh Chuck or yourself about them.

No, they it seemed like a a pretty accurate representation um once they were attached. Yeah. I don't have any comments. So, should I make a movement so we approve them? Sounds good to me. Okay. Do we have a second? I second. Okay. All in favor say I. I. I.

Right. Great. Rolling right along here. All right. Next order of business. Uh 1829 New London Road lot consolidation plan. So before we even talk about it, I just had a quick question. If I read things correctly, it sounds like this lot, these two lots were already glued together by the county and we're sort of backending it because it was never came before us. Is that what we're going what's going on? So, u if if nobody minds, I will comment and Yeah, please. I can I just I wasn't quite 100% sure how this happened.

Yeah. So there is a process that can be accomplished through the uh recorder of deeds through the filing of a of a deed that consolidates two lots by eliminating a lot line. The applicant in this case did that and comes before us with a single lot as a matter of fact uh and as recognized by the county. It has always been my position and I just as a just as a a position to take that the definition of subdivision includes the elimination of a lot line and because what we're really looking at here is a subdivision to the elimination of a lot line. I thought it made sense for the integrity of our process that the applicant submit a subdivision application that it go through the the uh the review process and then a presentation to to the board of supervisors. The first step of course being the PC. I reached out for my colleague Mr. Foley who represents the property owner, the applicant. He didn't have any issue with with doing that. So that's what we did. Uh but as a matter of fact and as recognized by the county, uh this is is one lot and I'm trying to um achieve a result that accommodates the the practical aspect of what the property owner is trying to do

while at the same time not jeopardizing our process and perhaps giving other property owners the idea or the notion that they can simply work with the recorder of deeds and sort of endrun on uh the township's ordinances. So that's sort of where we are. I mean I and and I and I and I engaged Mr. Foley and I don't think he he and I sort of see it the same way or or he's in a very cordial way deferring to the way I see it. But it's that's basically what we have. Yeah. This is Ed Foley. I'm here on behalf of Candace Burkowitz and her family and I I concur with what guy just laid out.

Okay.

And we understand the townships and his position that uh you would like to not set precedent that folks can automatically combine lots without township review. And so we're um I won't say we're happy to be here because it cost a little bit of money, but we're certainly willing to uh uh facilitate that review by you guys. Okay, thank you. I appreciate that. I mean, I appreciate the respecting the process because again, traditionally, yeah, we would at least talk about these things before they would be recorded. So, again, I very much appreciate the applicant and yourself, you know, coming forward and saying, you know, so we can work through this. Um, again, I think it's this is more of a formality than anything, at least from my uh standpoint from looking at things. Um, so all right, I'm looking at uh the letter that was from Penoni. Um, and there's a couple of comments. I don't know if anybody I can just run through them quickly and anybody can jump in if they want to. Um, looks like on the um, if I'm just going to run through them, uh, zoning um, looks like on the map on the plot itself, it's got the wrong zoning. It should be um, LDR, not R2. Um and obviously that affects with the area in bulk um and the setbacks which I'm assuming there's no issues there. It's just simply a matter of fixing the uh the actual um plot plan. Um and uh subdivision and land development right away and pendult ultimate rightway needs to be added to the plans. Again, that seems pretty self-evident. Anybody have any comments on those three points?

No. Sir had no objection from the applicant. Great. Um provide co in a general provide copies of recorded common driveway easement and consolidated deed. Now I understand that there is something about the driveway easement that's not an issue just simply something that needs to be clarified. If you could walk walk me through that.

Yeah actually uh this is Ed Foley again. Um actually it kind of makes Guy's uh point uh underscored that as a result of the review process it was pointed out to us that uh our deed of consolidation neglected to include the language regarding the recorded driveway easement that served what was originally three lots and will now serve uh the combined lot and what what's uh still known as lot number three to the south. And so, um, the, uh, we provided Nate with a copy of our recorded deed of consolidation and we provided him with a copy of the original subdivision plan that created the three lots. That was back when Kent Baldwin and Lillian Russell owned the property.

Oh, wow. and um uh it properly created a shared driveway um and properly created a cost sharing obligation among those three lot owners which are still a matter of record. Um, and that that recorded plan says that those provisions must be included in any subsequent deed to any of the lots. And therefore, we uh neglected to comply with that. And that was my recent email to all parties um showing that we will file a new deed of confirmation properly including the share driveway maintenance obligations as as required by the recorded plan. So, it it makes uh it makes Guy's point pretty well that um there are reasons

for the township to um have its hand in a review process um and to not have not have property owners just recording uh consolidation deeds without review. Got it. All right. Well, I can appreciate that. So essentially, if I'm understanding, since this property is owned by one entity at this point, there really shouldn't be any need for shared driveway covenants any longer. Correct. Well, actually, um, the the deed of consolidation combined lots one and two. Uh, but there is still a shared driveway easement serving lot three, which they Okay.

which they continue to own. Okay. And so the uh the the revised language that we will put in our deed of confirmation uh instead of referring to three lots sharing those costs, it will now simply refer to two lots. Two lots. Okay. I didn't realize lot three still existed. I thought it had already been folded in previously. No, not yet.

Okay. All right. Does anybody have any comments on that little item of interesting uh trivia? Okay, moving on. Um, and under general, we have a couple of uh housekeeping things. Uh, PA Pennsylvania D sewer uh facilities planning not required per Stan Corbett. That's great. Uh, Chester County Planning Commission review not required per township. Great. NPDES permit. I guess that's the one you look for. Uh uh turtles and things. Uh that's not applicable. PENDOT uh not applicable. Recreational fee inl not applicable. And transportation impact fee not applicable. So we've gone through six items that don't apply to this plan which is all great.

There are two more in the next two more. Yep. I flipped the page. Township grading permit since there's no grading going on. Not applicable. And a driveway permit because this is existing. Not applicable. So we have eight things all of which currently uh do not apply to this uh lot consolidation plan. Uh is there any concerns regarding these eight eight items that maybe we missed something or uh that anybody has any comments? I I think it's all appropriate.

Okay. So I assume since we've gone through the review letter, let me just see if there's anything else here. There's the plot plan. Um, are there any other considerations that the planning commission wants to think about or discuss this evening with this particular consolidation plan? Uh, it seems pretty straightforward. It seems very straightforward to me, but I wanted to get everybody a chance to comment if they had any thoughts. Can I just ask why?

Yeah, that's a great question. Thank you. Um the uh the property owners uh plan to install some solar panels and the the best location for those panels is uh on the slope uh between what used to be lots one and two. And um I believe the panels would have actually been straddling the property line between lots one and two. and your township properly requires that solar panels be located on the lot which they serve. And so, um, this family has no intention of selling off any of these three lots. Um, and so it was a simple solution to just eliminate the lot line that the solar panels were going to straddle. So, we're actually applying that solo ordinance that it took us a little bit of time to to draft, which I I think it's I think it's that's fabulous.

It's very good news. It's great news. But, yeah, it's an elegant solution to something that could be quite sticky. Just simply eliminate the lot line and then you can move forward with your your solar panel request. Sounds good to me. Beautiful. All right. Well, if there's no other discussion or concerns, I would entertain a motion if somebody wanted to throw one out there. Sure, I'll read it. Um, I make a motion that the planning commission conditionally approve the 1829 New London Road Lock Consolidation Plan dated September 19th, 2025.

I will second that. Can I offer a friendly suggestion? Sure. Sure. Last the the plan last revised September 29th, 2025. Okay, I'll read it again. Uh, make a motion that the planning commission conditionally approve the 1829 London Road lot consolidation plan dated 29th September 2025. And I second. Any discussion? All in favor say I. I. I.

Motion passes. Thank you folks. Thank you guy for your input. Oh, my pleasure. And thank you Ed for for your client's uh cooperation. Easiest planning commission meeting ever. Certainly the easiest one I've ever been to. Yeah, I like to preside over these type of meetings. Gentlemen, Mr. Foley, thank you. Thank you all. Now, always a pleasure to work with you guys. Is is there any other business uh that we need to discuss this evening? I'm not hearing any

public comment at this time. Not hearing anything. So I would vote to uh adjourn the meeting at 7:21 um on this Thursday evening uh the 2nd of October. Second. Great record time. Yep. Less than 20 minutes if you take our late start time to get going there. I just want this in the record books. Noted. I see chairmanship in your future. Yeah. Yeah. That was brilliant. I I can't imagine. Wow. You're right in line.

Okay. We'll we'll talk about it in January. Yeah. Anybody have anything else since we've adjourned? Thanks everyone. Appreciate it. All right. Thank you. Everybody see you guys. Jim, Jim, Jim and Nate, can you stay while everyone goes for like a minute? You You want me to hang on, Jeff? You want me to hang on, too? Absolutely. Oh, okay. We love Guy. Yep. I'm gonna sign off then. Yes, sir. All right. Thank you. Thanks everybody.