County planner asks Lower Salford to consider moving R1A area to secondary growth; board begins data‑center zoning discussion

Eric Gerald of the Montgomery County Planning Commission briefed Lower Salford supervisors on the regional comprehensive‑plan update and a proposed future‑land‑use change affecting a triangular R1A area near the turnpike and Castle Road sketch plan.

Gerald explained the regional plan’s land‑use categories (rural resource, designated growth, secondary growth and borough conservation) and said future‑land‑use maps are intended to reflect municipal zoning and infrastructure (particularly sewer and water). He identified a portion of the township where public sewer and water exist and asked whether the township wants that R1A area reclassified to secondary growth to avoid later, ad hoc rezoning requests. Gerald said the LPOD (land‑preservation overlay) concept would permit cluster development while protecting open space, but the overlay typically requires public sewer and water and therefore aligns with growth‑area designation.

Supervisors asked about the practical effects of such a comp‑plan change. Gerald said moving the area to secondary growth would clarify policy and reduce uncertainty for developers and the regional commission; if the board intends to preserve the area at low density, the comp plan can retain the rural designation, but if the board expects higher density (including age‑qualified residential at higher per‑acre yields) it should move the area now.

On data centers, Gerald recommended that municipalities likely to be targeted by data‑center proposals (including Lower Salford, due to available lots and infrastructure) should consider adopting ordinance standards that regulate siting, lot size, backups, noise, buffering, water and energy use rather than leaving the township unregulated. Board members discussed a draft concept that would focus data‑center zoning along Mold Road in industrial areas, require large lot minima (planning commission recommended five acres), require on‑lot backup systems and limit on‑site power‑generation installations or treat them as restricted uses.

The planning commission’s recommendation on the comp‑plan change was moved and seconded at the meeting and put to voice vote; the transcript records vocal aye/nay responses. Staff said the planning commission will bring draft comp‑plan and zoning changes back for further review and that the planning commission will hear the LPOD ordinance amendment and the 110 Castle Road sketch plan later in the month.

No final rezoning or ordinance passage occurred at the session; supervisors signaled they would review the draft materials and the planning commission will proceed with its public review process.