Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Deed Restrictions topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Green Tree council tables request to remove 1994 deed restriction at 978 Greentree Road
Summary
Councilarians voted to table a property owner’s request to lift a 1994 deed restriction that bars onsite alcohol sales at 978 Greentree Road (tenant: Chipotle) while staff follow up with the seller’s attorney and research legal options, neighborhood notice and potential amendments.
Council members on Feb. 2 tabled a request from the owner of 978 Greentree Road to remove a deed restriction that, since 1994, has prohibited the sale, storage and warehousing of alcoholic beverages at the site.
The solicitor told the council the restriction was placed when the borough previously owned the property and that the owner asked the borough to voluntarily rescind it so a tenant could offer alcohol. Solicitor Jay/Jacob said the alternatives are a voluntary waiver or a court petition to set the restriction aside, and he recommended getting more information from the seller and their attorney before acting.
“Because the borough was the entity that placed the restriction, the borough can voluntarily agree to waive it,” the solicitor said, summarizing the legal options and the limits of counsel’s current information.
Council members noted that nearby residents and sensitive uses — including the library and adjacent homes — had been notified within 200 feet and urged more complete fact‑finding. One councilor proposed an intermediate compromise allowing sealed alcoholic beverages to be sold “to go” while preventing indoor service; others noted amending a deed restriction could be legally complicated and might not satisfy a title company.
Council President Ray cited the need for more documentation and proposed tabling the measure so staff could reach the seller’s attorney, clarify whether the buyer and tenant plan on on‑premises service or off‑premises sales, and research whether an amendment (rather than total rescission) is feasible under Pennsylvania law.
The motion to table passed. The council did not vote to remove the restriction; if the council ultimately denies the request the owner could pursue relief in court, the solicitor advised.
What’s next: staff will attempt to contact the seller’s attorney and report back with options, including whether a corrective deed or limited amendment is feasible and what impact that would have on closing/title. The item will return for further consideration once the borough has additional documentation.
Provenance: topicintro SEG 1136, topfinish SEG 1413.
