WoodlAwn Trustees

Concord Township Planning Commission members still aren’t ready to recommend yea or nay on the development proposed for the Woodlawn Trustees property.

Following another three-and-a-half-hour meeting on Oct. 20, township solicitor Hugh Donaghue told a crowd dominated by opponents of the plan that the commission would announce its decision on Nov. 17.

John Jaros, the attorney for the applicant, agreed to give the township another 30-day extension. This means that the earliest the board of supervisors could vote on the plan would be December.

If the commission recommends approval and the supervisors agree, 229 acres of a 325-acre property — from the Delaware state line to Smithbridge Road, and in between Route 202 and the Concord border with Chadds Ford Township — would be developed with 160 homes on half-acre lots with 124 acres of gross open space, 97 acres after netting out rights-of-way and stormwater management areas. The development would be known as Vineyard Commons.

The 160 lots represent a reduction from 171 homes when the plan was presented in August. An original plan that was withdrawn in May 2013 called for more than 300 single-family homes, 120 townhouses, and an area for commercial development.

In announcing the delay, Donaghue said the commission wants the township sewer authority to review the sewage plans for the project on or before Nov. 5. The commission also needs time, he said, to study the Oct. 20 comments made by the township’s land-planning consultant and the Oct. 14 comments from the township engineer.

Donaghue added that the commissioners want township consultants to review a letter from Jaros relating to requested waivers. They also want to know, in writing, what the applicant intends to do with six historic sites on the property.

Jaros said one Class 1 historic structure would be kept, but that anyone who wanted the remains of the five Class 3 structures could have them free of charge.

One of the other concerns for those who oppose development of the Beaver Valley property is that the walking and equestrian trails would disappear.

Dennis Glacken, a land planner for the applicant, said slightly more than three miles of the original eight miles of trail would remain and another two-and-a-half miles would be added. There would also be six miles of paved sidewalks bringing the total walkable distance to more than 11 miles.

“People could still walk from point A to point B,” he said, “there would just be a different alignment.”

As for landscaping, the perimeter would be tree-lined, with a total of 4,600 new trees planted throughout the development.

Jaros said the current plan is a by-right option with the clustering permitted in the R2D Zoning District, but he was challenged on that point.

Julie Von Spreckelsen and Jack Michael represented residents who don’t want the development.

Von Spreckelsen said the application was deficient and did not comply with a variety of zoning, subdivision and land development ordinances as well as stormwater ordinances.

She gave the commission a letter citing 17 areas where the application is noncompliant, citing a few during her address.

She said the plan shows six cul-de-sac streets that far exceed the allowable length and that two of the six waiver requests were not in writing. She also argued that 54 acres would be clear-cut, that several of the lots were on steep slopes, which is against the code, and that others were too small to be code compliant.

Spreckelsen added that all of the required zoning variances had to be granted by the Zoning Hearing Board before the Planning Commission could recommend approval. She also said the applicant would need a variance to get rid of five of six historic structures.

She called the plan “fundamentally deficient,” adding that the violations must be dealt with before preliminary approval can be recommended and requested that the recommendation be denied.

Michael, who is also representing a resident, made a PowerPoint presentation that also cited the number of trees lost, specifically trees of 12-inch diameter or greater that are considered significant, and the loss of historic structures that he said, “represent our connection to the past.”

Jaros countered Michael’s and Von Spreckelson’s arguments by saying that township, county, state and federal regulatory bodies had reviewed the plans. They all commented favorably, he said, and recommended the plan go forward.

“Mr. Michael doesn’t want this development here,” Jaros said, “but there are property rights that let you do what you want as long as it’s legal.”

The audience, comprised of many people from the Save the Valley group who want the plan shut down, raised green cards when Von Spreckelsen and Michael made their points, while holding up red cards when Jaros and his witnesses made theirs. They also applauded for their side and jeered, booed or made other calls when the applicant’s representatives spoke. At one point, Donaghue told audience members not to shout out or they would be asked to leave.

To accommodate the large audience, the meeting was held at the Garnet Valley Middle School. The Nov. 17 meeting is also scheduled for the school auditorium at 6 p.m.

Woodlawn Trustees owns the property, but Eastern State Development Co. and McKee Concord Homes are equitable owners.

A rezoning plan that could have led to a controversial development of 325 acres in Concord Township has been withdrawn and a hearing into the matter is closed. Another application is in the works.

Cheers and applause erupted from the more than 650 people attending the May 14 hearing, held at Garnet Valley Middle School, when Concord Township solicitor Hugh Donaghue read letters from the principals saying they were withdrawing their application. The applause turned to boos when Donaghue read they would be filing new applications.

The plan — had it gone through to approval — would have rezoned an area from the Delaware state line north to Smithbridge Road and from Route 202 west to Concord’s border with Chadds Ford Township.

The land includes Brandywine Summit Camp Meeting, Penns Woods Winery and a number of horse farms and trails.

There are currently three different zoning districts in that area. Applicants wanted the entire acreage rezoned into a PRD-4 that would have allowed for a mix of residential and commercial use, while still maintaining open space.

Donaghue also acknowledged petitions signed by more than 5,000 people opposing the application. They object to the rezoning because they don’t believe there would be any open space.

Woodlawn’s Chief Executive Officer Vernon Green said during a hearing last October that current zoning would allow 209 apartments, 249 townhouses, develop 20,000 square feet of commercial space, but provide only 15 to 20 acres of dedicated open space. Under the proposal, he said, there would be more housing, but 209 acres of permanently preserved open space.

“We’ve heard that argument before,” said Concord Township resident Anne Mueller. “They promise open space, but it’s only a few trees. We want a natural wooded area.”

Laurie Curl, another Concord resident, said she’s upset that township supervisors would even consider such a proposal.

“It’s disgusting, a shame. Why not just leave it alone? Concord Township should buy the property and keep it open space. They should do it proudly,” Curl said.

Chadds Ford Township residents Deborah Reardon, Valerie Hoxter and Frank Murphy also attended.

Speaking before the hearing began, Reardon said her concern was on how the development might affect infrastructure and its possible impact on Chadds Ford.

Reardon, Chadds Ford’s Open Space Committee chairman, said, “This is a regional issue. It has to do with protecting resources that are valuable and it also has to do with infrastructure in that there is no way that any report or study could support this kind of overwhelming development. I personally call for a moratorium on any kind of development from Route 202 at Naamans Road, all the way up.”

She also discounted Green’s assertion that there would be more open space with the different zoning.

“That may be true,” Reardon said, “but if you look at the proposed homes for development, if you look at the business side of the development, the overwhelming traffic issues, infrastructure issues, when you look at water and when you look at the roads, we’re looking at an over-burdening situation.”

She said she wants a moratorium so that other resources can be brought in to prevent any development.

Woodlawn’s CEO did not directly address the reason for withdrawing the application, but alluded to it by saying Woodlawn was founded to provide affordable housing, preserve open space and develop some of the land to pay for the first two purposes.

Green said such development should take place in a “planned and responsible manner, while at the same time providing publicly accessible open space.”

He said the withdrawn plan would have required open space and maintaining the current trails used for walking, cycling and horseback riding.

“It’s our sincere hope that these facts about the mission of Woodlawn will lead everyone to better understand the important interconnection between this development and preservation as a result of the new application,” Green said.

Also withdrawing were housing developers Eastern States Development Co. and the McKee Group, and commercial developer Wolfson Verrichia Group.

All the principals will be filing a new application.

Donaghue said that application would be posted on the township Web site once the township gets it and that it will be at least 60 days before the start of a new hearing.