Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Neighbors raise safety, tree and runoff concerns as 312 Hanover Street zoning appeal heads to hearing
Summary
A proposed townhouse project at 312 Hanover Street will be argued before the Zoning Hearing Board next week after the city's zoning officer concluded the site does not meet townhouse tract‑size requirements. Neighbors cited narrow alley access for emergency vehicles, removal of mature trees and increased impervious surface.
Neighbors and council members discussed a proposed redevelopment of 312 Hanover Street and were told the project is scheduled for review by the Zoning Hearing Board next week after an interpretation dispute over whether the proposal qualifies as townhouse development.
Laura Collins, director of Community and Economic Development, told council the developer initially submitted a plan more than a year ago, withdrew it, and later filed a new sketch plan that underwent internal review by planning, zoning, fire and engineering staff. The city’s solicitor reviewed an initial zoning interpretation and determined the proposal should be treated as a townhouse development for zoning purposes. That determination triggered a staff letter identifying dimensional requirements the developer would need to meet; the developer is appealing that zoning officer letter and the appeal is set for the zoning hearing board.
Neighbors who have emailed council and staff raised several concerns, including that the alley (Roche Street) used for parking access is just 12 feet wide and may be too narrow for fire trucks if the project proceeds; they also cited the removal of trees that community members say are more than 80 years old and a jump in impervious cover from 14% to 63% in the sketch plan. Collins clarified that the specific zoning appeal before the board concerns tract‑size and dimensional requirements rather than the fire‑access standard; fire code compliance and other technical issues will be reviewed, if and when, the applicant files full land‑development plans.
Collins said the solicitor’s office will send Assistant City Solicitor Matt Deschler to the zoning hearing board to defend the city’s zoning interpretation. If the applicant prevails on the zoning interpretation, the project would next proceed to full land‑development review, at which point departments including fire and engineering will examine access, tree protection and stormwater requirements.
No action was taken by council; the item was a staff report describing the status of the application and the upcoming zoning hearing.
