Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Phoenixville council denies extensions and two long-dormant development plans
Summary
Council denied extension requests and the underlying development applications for Filmore/Fillmore West and Franklin Apartments after reviewing consultant letters and planning‑commission recommendations, citing unresolved deficiencies in plans filed years earlier.
Phoenixville Borough Council voted on March 10 to deny extension requests for two long‑dormant subdivision and land‑development applications and then denied the associated plans after staff and the planning commission highlighted remaining deficiencies.
Council denied the Filmore West extension (application first filed December 2013) and the Franklin Apartments extension (filed 2017). Because the Filmore West extension request was denied, council then addressed the Filmore West preliminary/final subdivision and land‑development application for a 9.43‑acre site at 209 Fillmore Street proposing mini‑warehouses and retail; the council voted to deny that plan, with the motion citing outstanding consultant review items and the planning commission’s conditional recommendation to deny. The vote to deny was recorded 8–0.
Separately, council denied the Franklin Apartments preliminary/final subdivision and land‑development plan for 520 and 524 Franklin Avenue (proposed lot‑line adjustment and a six‑unit building), again following unanimous planning‑commission concern about unresolved review deficiencies; the council vote was 8–0.
Applicant representatives asked council to reconsider and requested 30 days to allow newly retained counsel to review materials and attempt amendment. Borough staff and council cited case law and the applicant’s long interval without resubmission — including multiple dormant‑project notices and six years without substantive filings — and said the borough would welcome resubmission as a new application but was not required to grant further extensions.
Council members said the denials reflect multiple outstanding technical and zoning deficiencies documented in consultant review letters and the need to keep the borough’s development review process moving.
