Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Trustees debate zoning map amendment for Mullins property after neighbors raise traffic, runoff and short‑term rental concerns
Summary
West Chester Township trustees heard resident objections to a zoning map amendment for the Mullins property, citing traffic safety, stormwater runoff and potential short‑term rentals; trustees recorded multiple opposing votes during the second reading of ZMA325.
Trustees of the West Chester Township Board of Trustees considered a second reading of a zoning map amendment for the Mullins property (case ZMA325) after residents raised safety and drainage concerns.
The item on the agenda was “resolution 10 20 25, approving zoning map amendment for case number ZMA325 Mullins Property.” Resident Judith Ulmer told trustees the site sits adjacent to Lakota schools and said a 10‑acre plan for roughly 65 condominiums could add “65 cars minimum,” increase traffic on Tylersville Road and exacerbate existing crash risks. She also raised stormwater concerns, saying portions of the parcel are built up with landfill and that neighbors already see heavy runoff into yards.
Scott Boehm, who lives on Westchester Road, said traffic frequently backs up near the site and welcomed a planned roundabout but said safety risks remain for school traffic. During public comment, neighbors also asked whether short‑term rentals would be allowed; trustees clarified that short‑term rentals (Airbnb/other transient rentals) are not permitted in the zoning categories that would apply to this project.
Staff noted the township contains several other transitional properties and pointed to nearby examples of multifamily or institutional transitions. During trustee discussion, several trustees said they were concerned the proposed multifamily use may not fit the surrounding single‑family character.
At roll call during the second reading, the transcript records Missus Becker voting No, Mister Wong voting No and Mister Welch voting Yes; the transcript does not capture Trustee Jones’s recorded vote in the available audio excerpt. The motion on the second reading was therefore recorded with at least two No votes and one Yes vote.
The board moved on to other business after the vote; no further action or specific direction to staff on amendments or mitigation measures is recorded in the available transcript.
Neighbors were advised earlier in the meeting that the public hearing on the case had closed at the prior meeting; trustees and the law director said additional public comment on the final reading would require reopening the public hearing.
