Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Planning Process topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board backs streamlined plan checklist and tighter consistency wording with outside permits
Summary
Planning board reviewed an August 2024 draft reorienting preliminary and final plan requirements into a concise checklist, added a requirement that plans be consistent with versions approved by the board, and discussed court precedent and PennDOT HOP timing that can force plan approvals even when outside permits are pending.
Unidentified Speaker 4 walked the board through revisions to Article 4 (plan requirements and procedures), highlighting a reoriented preliminary‑plan checklist that groups required items by sheet (cover sheet, existing conditions, proposed conditions, plan profiles, supplementary reports). "Instead of just having a hodgepodge... let's narrow it down so... these are the requirements that affect you the first page," Unidentified Speaker 2 said in support.
The draft adds a highlighted clause that all plans submitted for permits or approval "shall be consistent with the version of the plan under review and/or approved by the board of supervisors." Speaker 4 emphasized the clause would give the board leverage to require resubmissions if outside permits (such as PennDOT highway‑occupancy permits) later force design changes that make the approved plan inconsistent.
Board members discussed a Commonwealth Court case reported by Speaker 4 in which a township was required to approve a plan even though the developer lacked a PennDOT HOP; the court allowed adding a plan note but not withholding approval indefinitely. Board members agreed checklist language and clearer required notes could reduce opportunities for 'gamesmanship' where external consistency letters (MPDS/DEP) cover only stormwater rather than full plan identity.
The board agreed to request copies of outside‑agency permits and as‑built records where practical and to consider requiring recorded stormwater plans and maintenance agreements in the township file.
No formal vote was recorded; the board directed staff to revise the draft checklist and required‑note language and return with edits.
