Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Planned Residential Development topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Marple residents press zoning board to reject plan to count noncontiguous Greenbank parcel toward PRD open space

Marple Township Zoning Hearing Board · March 18, 2026
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

Trustees seeking to develop nearly 50 acres asked the Marple Township Zoning Hearing Board to let a separate 4-acre parcel count toward required PRD open space and to grant a minor acreage variance; hundreds of residents opposed the request, citing deed restrictions, tree clearing and traffic and urging the board to deny the interpretation. The board reserved decision within 45 days.

Marple Township — Trustees for the Greenbank Farm tract asked the Marple Township Zoning Hearing Board on Tuesday to allow a noncontiguous 4-acre parcel to count toward the common open-space requirement for a planned residential development and to grant a de minimis acreage variance so the applicant could develop a 49.197-acre tract under PRD rules.

The applicant’s engineer, Dennis O'Neil, told the board the trust had acquired additional parcels since a 2023 filing and that counting the 4-acre lot would let the developer preserve more woodland on the main tract and lay out homes away from steep slopes. “We can provide the 50% open space of the 49.2 acres,” O'Neil said, noting the 4-acre piece is surrounded by township-owned dedicated open space and is deed-restricted to recreational or open uses.

Why it matters: A favorable interpretation would let the applicant credit land that is not contiguous with the proposed development, reducing the acreage the developer must set aside within the PRD and altering how density and layout would be calculated. Neighbors said that would undercut the ordinance’s purpose and could allow other developers to assemble scattered parcels into PRDs.

Opponents, many of whom sought party status, delivered strongly worded testimony and submitted documents on deed restrictions and past enforcement. Attorney David Skaggs, representing two nearby property owners, argued the ordinance’s phrase that “common open space shall be planned as a contiguous area” refers to contiguous open space within the site and warned that allowing noncontiguous credits would invite precedent. “Otherwise, people could just pick pieces of land all over the township and make it part of one subdivision,” Skaggs said.

Residents described repeated tree clearing and long-standing concerns about the owner’s stewardship. Marilyn Mackey, a resident and longtime neighbor, told the board she and others view the 4 acres as deed-restricted open space and said the property had been historically preserved. “There were stone walls that he took apart piece by piece…He has ruined everything he’s touched,” Mackey said, urging denial of the relief.

The applicant acknowledged the trust previously obtained a logging permit from the Delaware County Conservation District and said the PRD plan that was filed in September 2023 has been revised as parcels were added. O'Neil said the application could yield between about 60 and 73 units depending on layout, but emphasized the board’s current task was the narrow zoning interpretation and, if necessary, a dimensional variance.

Board members and counsel also clarified procedural limits: the Zoning Hearing Board can interpret the ordinance and decide on requested variances but does not itself change township ordinances or finalize land-development approvals; a separate hearing before the Board of Commissioners would be required if zoning relief were granted and a plan proceeded.

Next steps: After hours of testimony and dozens of public comments, the board said it would not decide the Greenbank Farm matter that evening and that it had 45 days to render a written decision. The hearing record includes exhibits submitted by the applicant and multiple residents’ written materials.

The hearing drew sustained public engagement, with residents citing traffic on narrow roads, potential stormwater and flood impacts on local creeks, deed restrictions on the 4-acre parcel, and past fines and enforcement actions involving the same owner. The matter remains unresolved pending the board’s written ruling.