Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Subdivision topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners postpone Stratton Park townhomes decision after traffic and geology concerns
Summary
CPY Properties’ 19-unit Stratton Park Townhomes plan was postponed to March 4 after commissioners and residents pressed for more review of sight-distance, firefighting access and a geotechnical certification; developer said PennDOT granted technical HOP approval but will grant a short extension.
CPY Properties’ proposal for the Stratton Park Townhomes in Upper Allen Township was postponed to the board’s March 4 meeting after commissioners and residents raised safety concerns about a single entrance onto West Lisburn Road and requested fuller geotechnical certification.
Attorney Ash Mccomi, representing CPY Properties, told the board the developer has obtained technical approval from PennDOT for the highway occupancy permit and that the team has provided turning templates and a fire-department-approved turning radius. Traffic engineer Jared Neil described the site as meeting PennDOT’s safe stopping sight-distance standard and said the chosen driveway location was the “optimal location” after evaluating alternatives.
Commissioner concerns centered on sight lines over a crest, potential glare from the sun, and the ability of large fire apparatus to turn within the proposed cul‑de‑sac. One commissioner said the cul‑de‑sac is large enough for fire apparatus based on submitted turning templates but noted that parked vehicles could block maneuvers; the developer said parking around the cul‑de‑sac would be prohibited and signage will be posted. Resident and former commissioner Jim Cochran asked how enforcement of parking restrictions would work on a private street.
The board also asked for a formal professional-geologist certification addressing the township’s carbonate geology criteria (items A1–A6). Mccomi said ECS (the geotechnical firm) has the necessary data and would submit a signed report from a professional geologist in the coming days; developers agreed to a short extension if needed.
Because this meeting represented the board’s last available hearing date under the review timetable, commissioners discussed the procedural constraints: a postponement requires the developer’s agreement to extend review timelines. The developer indicated willingness to grant a short extension and the board voted to postpone final action until March 4 to allow township staff, the solicitor and the board’s planning consultants to review sight‑distance stakes, geotechnical certification and parking/enforcement plans.
The board recorded no final approval or denial at the Jan. 21 meeting and set March 4 as the new date for action unless the developer withdraws the extension or the parties reach a different agreement beforehand.
