Concord Township approves Penwoods Winery land‑development plan with limits on parking, hours and outdoor music

Concord Township Council approved a preliminary/final land‑development plan for Penwoods Winery on June 3, 2025, imposing 32 conditions that set parking limits, require state and local permits, and restrict certain outdoor activities tied to the winery’s expansion.

The measures matter because neighbors had urged the council to block the project over traffic, noise and alleged violations of steep‑slope and parking rules, while the applicant and its consultants said the operation fits within existing, lawful uses and offered engineering changes and design details to address town concerns.

Attorney Michael D. Fiorentino, who said he represents seven nearby residents, told the council the expansion would be “very detrimental to the public interest,” listing traffic, parking overflow, safety for people walking along Beaver Valley Road, and loss of quiet enjoyment as chief complaints. Fiorentino argued the plan places a proposed seepage bed and other improvements on steep slopes and cited provisions of the township code he said were not met, including buffer, paving and parking standards. He also cited the township nuisance ordinance, saying amplified music from events has created a regular disturbance for his clients.

Resident Charlene Emblett presented photographs, drone images and counts she said document heavy use and parking on and adjacent to the winery property. Emblett told the council the aerial photos from a recent Mother’s Day event showed “316” vehicles on or adjacent to the site, and she said she had counted 65 music events listed on the venue’s schedule from May through October.

The applicant’s attorney, Mr. Petroza, and the project engineer, Michael Cio of Catania Engineering Associates, disputed some procedural points and asked the council to approve a revised plan. Petroza asked the council to remove a draft condition that would have required land‑development review for adding shade sails or outdoor seating, saying small additions should not automatically trigger land development. He also asked the council to adopt uniform hours of operation of 10 a.m. to 9 p.m. daily. Cio described how vehicles would circulate between proposed east and west lots and said the western lot would route cars back up to the main driveway rather than using a neighboring driveway.

Council members read the full draft resolution — marked Resolution 29 of 2025 — into the record. The original conditions (as read to the public) included requirements that the developer satisfy review letters from Pennoni, HRG, the township fire marshal and others; obtain PennDOT highway occupancy permits and PADEP approvals where needed; submit building elevations to the township design review committee; relocate trash storage away from the eastern property line; and execute an operation and maintenance agreement and a $11,208.80 contribution to the municipal stormwater control and BMP fund. The draft also limited hours in the text presented to the council and restricted certain kinds of outdoor amenities and parking layout.

After extended public comment and attorney presentations, the council amended several draft conditions before voting. Key elements the council incorporated or clarified in the approval include:

- A cap on total permitted parking for any event: under the approved conditions, no more than 246 vehicles may be parked for any event, and parking must occur only in the designated recorded areas. - A requirement that the site provide a combined total of at least 100 designed parking spaces across the eastern and western lots, with no single lot to exceed 60 spaces (one condition also requires the eastern lot to be entirely a crush‑stone surface and specifies maintenance expectations for crushed areas). - A limit on existing shade sails/umbrella shade structures: the council capped shade sails at the existing 16 coverings on the site; future buildings or expansions otherwise require land‑development and, where applicable, zoning hearing board approval. - Hours and amplified music: the council adjusted operating hours and conditions during deliberations. The council set indoor operating hours at 10 a.m. to 9 p.m. and left outdoor hours largely as drafted in the resolution; it also added a restriction that outdoor amplified music must stop by 7 p.m. and that no loud nighttime outdoor music is permitted. - Permits and final plan requirements: the developer must obtain all required external permits (including PennDOT and PADEP approvals as applicable), submit final architectural elevations for design review, provide deed corrections and survey monument certifications, and enter into development, improvement and security agreements prior to recording the plan.

The council also required final plan elements addressing pedestrian and vehicle signage, no‑parking signage (as permitted by PennDOT and the township), expanded buffering and landscape screening along Beaver Valley Road, and a condition that overflow parking on a designated remote grass area be prohibited during inclement weather.

Opponents emphasized traffic and safety worries for Beaver Valley Road near residential driveways and for children who walk to nearby properties. Fiorentino also cited township code sections and the Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code, contending that some waivers and modifications would have required written requests and a showing of undue hardship. The applicant’s team responded that the site includes an existing nonconforming agricultural/tasting operation; they cited section 210‑197 (off‑street parking can be provided on or near the lot) and argued the zoning hearing board and related court proceedings recognized long‑standing parking practices and allowed certain conditions to proceed.

Council members and township staff noted the public had limited time to review some plan revisions that were submitted on the afternoon of the meeting; the applicant said those revisions were produced after the planning commission hearing and in response to engineer and township requests. The resolution imposes the township’s conditions and reserves township engineer and fire marshal review prior to issuing a certificate of occupancy.

After the amendments were placed on the record, the council took a voice vote and approved Resolution 29 of 2025 as amended.

The plan’s approval does not foreclose further administrative or judicial review. Several speakers asked that materials submitted that day be fully incorporated into the record and noted the option of pursuing appeals or other legal remedies. The resolution itself requires submission of permits, survey and deed corrections, and completion of final engineering and design reviews before construction or building permits may be issued.