Planning Board approves smaller landscaping building, drops proposed apartments at Manheim Highway site

The Swansea Planning Board on Tuesday approved a site plan modification for property owned by John Lesser at Manheim Highway that removes a previously approved apartment building and reduces the landscaping-sales building to roughly 30 by 40 feet.

The change replaces the multiunit plan with a single smaller sales building and the same shop footprint behind it, a reduction of about 1,200 square feet from the earlier approval. The board voted in the meeting to treat the proposal as a site plan modification and approved it by voice vote.

Consultant John Newnan of Fieldstone Land Consultants summarized the applicant’s proposal: “Originally a group who was to have apartment building along this end of the building with the landscape business ... they are not going to pursue doing the apartments.” He said the modified plan would keep the landscaping sales in front and the shop behind and include bins for mulch and stone along the side.

The board and the applicant discussed site details the board had required in the original approval. Newnan said utilities — municipal sewer, municipal water and underground electric — remain aligned with the previously approved plan and that the stormwater basin constructed up front has functioned for over a year without issue. He also told the board the metal-panel building has been ordered and is expected to be installed in August.

Board members pressed for clarity on paving, parking and the location/materials for the new bins. Newnan said the rear portion will be gravel as previously approved and the front area will be paved consistent with the approved design; the proposed drive through the building area will be hard-packed surface rather than paved. On the bins he said some existing product bins sit on asphalt and the proposed additional bins will sit on packed gravel; the bins are intended for on-site generated compost, brush and stone rather than retail display.

The board discussed whether the changes required a new site plan or could be handled as a modification. After questions about the extent of added impervious surface, drainage and whether utilities already installed would need alteration, the board took a motion. Mark (last name on file) moved to approve the site plan modification and Brandon Selk seconded; the chair called for a voice vote and members responded “aye.” The board recorded the matter as a site plan modification and proceeded to ask follow-up questions about implementation timeline and conditions.

Discussion in the meeting also addressed the earlier one-year validity placed on the original approval and whether the site work constituted “active and substantial development.” Board members noted site-preparation work — the infiltration basin and other site work — had been completed and, while the main building had not yet been erected, the board considered the relief sufficient to treat this as a modification rather than require a new full site plan.

No additional formal conditions or permit changes were recorded in the public minutes beyond the board’s approval of the modification; the applicant was instructed to coordinate remaining utility and drainage work with town staff prior to final construction.