Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Saldo topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Warrington supervisors authorize drafting of broad zoning and SALDO amendments
Summary
The board voted to have staff draft and send a comprehensive set of zoning and subdivision/land‑development (SALDO) amendments to the planning commission for review, after detailed discussion of tree‑planting rules, minor land‑development thresholds, parking and lighting standards.
Warrington supervisors on Aug. 12 voted to authorize township staff to prepare ordinance language for a broad package of zoning and subdivision/land‑development ordinance (SALDO) changes and send the drafts to the planning commission for review and comment.
The package, summarized by Township Manager Angela (speaker 7), includes new definitions (notably a minor land‑development category), revised impervious‑surface language, new emergency‑access requirements, amended lighting standards (changing certain color‑temperature guidance), updated parking standards and an amendment limiting forest removal. Angela told the board staff and the Bucks County Planning Commission had reviewed the recommendations and that a redline version and summary had been provided to supervisors.
Why it matters: the proposed changes would alter submission requirements for small projects, adjust how and where developers may plant or pay in lieu for required trees, and affect permitted uses in several districts — actions that can change development patterns, environmental protections and requirements for local businesses and property owners.
Several supervisors pressed for clarifications and edits. One concern centered on the committee proposal to remove a cash buy‑out option for required tree replacement; planning staff said the draft would require on‑site planting or planting at township‑designated locations and that the developer would bear maintenance responsibility. Supervisor questions also produced consensus to revisit a minor‑land‑development threshold to avoid applying a percentage‑of‑floor‑area test that could yield excessive allowances for very large retail properties.
Other adjustments flagged for attention included limits on temporary, seasonal outdoor storage (a supervisor suggested a one‑time per calendar‑year cap to prevent perpetual 60‑day renewals by large retailers), a reduction in the share of compact/subcompact parking stalls from 25% toward 10% for large lots, and tightened language so drive‑throughs may neither enter nor exit adjacent residential lots. Board members also asked staff to clarify generator noise standards measured at the closest property line and whether grid‑tied battery backup systems should be treated as generators for placement rules.
The board did not make final text edits at the meeting; instead supervisors instructed the solicitor and staff to prepare an ordinance reflecting consensus items and to forward it to the planning commission and Bucks County Planning Commission for review. Angela said supervisors would receive the draft before advertising and that further hearings and review would follow.
Board action: motion to authorize preparation of the ordinance in ordinance form and refer it for review — approved on voice vote.
What’s next: staff will prepare the ordinance draft and return it to the planning commission for review; supervisors said they expected additional discussion and possible adjustments after that review.
