Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Bristol Subdivision topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Warrington commission recommends preliminary and final approval for Bristol Road subdivision despite resident drainage concerns

Warrington Township Planning Commission · June 20, 2024
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Warrington Township Planning Commission voted to recommend preliminary and final approval for a subdivision at 2139 Bristol Road, granting several waivers (including a cul‑de‑sac length exception to 819 feet) and forwarding the application to the board of supervisors, after residents raised concerns about stormwater, sidewalks and construction impacts.

The Warrington Township Planning Commission voted to recommend preliminary and final approval for a major subdivision at 2139 Bristol Road, subject to compliance with professional review letters and conditional use approval for a flagged lot.

The recommendation followed a presentation in which the applicant requested three waivers: an exemption from curbing along the 50‑foot frontage of Bristol Road (sidewalks remain on the plan), an exception to the 500‑foot maximum cul‑de‑sac length and a partial waiver allowing some basin perimeter plantings to be located internally. Jennifer Flynn, speaking for the applicant, said, “We are requesting to exceed the maximum 500 foot length, for a total of 819 feet,” and described that the total includes an existing 175 feet of Bethel Lane and an additional 644 feet to be added as part of the proposal.

Why it matters: The requested cul‑de‑sac length and other waivers alter how the street and stormwater are built, issues residents said could affect local drainage and neighborhood circulation. During public comment, multiple neighbors urged caution on sidewalk and roadway reductions and asked who would be responsible if construction damaged existing neighborhood streets.

Commissioners and staff responded that construction and post‑construction responsibilities would be governed by a developer’s agreement and by the township engineer’s oversight. The chair told residents the township enforces construction and maintenance requirements: “The township engineer maintains surveillance of the project while it’s under construction, both as against the developer’s agreement and the ordinance,” and advised residents to call the police for reckless driving by construction crews.

After discussion the commission first voted to amend the agenda to allow simultaneous consideration of preliminary and final approval and then approved the recommendation to forward the subdivision to the board of supervisors, with the stated conditions that the developer comply with all professional review letters and obtain conditional‑use approval for the one flagged lot.

Next steps: The board of supervisors will consider the planning commission’s recommendation and the conditional‑use matter for the flagged lot; the project remains subject to the professionals’ outstanding comments and to any conditions imposed by the board or by the township engineer during the developer’s agreement and construction phases.