This post was contributed by a community member. The views expressed here are the author's own.

Health & Fitness

Residents are right about the C-R Amendment

"The board is doing what the public wants, but it's poor planning for the township," according to Board of Supervisors' Chairman Joe Catania. In my view, however, and in the view of the hundreds of residents who have attended the many meetings as well as the members of the Delaware County Planning Commission , the C-R amendment was the poor planning.
Mr. Catania failed to acknowledge that the C-R amendment was ill-conceived, poorly written and clearly should have been abandoned long ago. The residents have been saying this through many meetings, emails and conversations with the Supervisors.

Last night, the Supervisors FINALLY determined the C-R amendment was done.

Thank you, the dedicated residents of Newtown, who have provided communication and have attended the many meetings. I sincerely appreciate all their involvement in this issue. There is no doubt, in my view, that without this community's good sense and the public pressure this C-R zoning would have been approved.  

Before the Board of Supervisors finally put an end to the misery this proposal has visited on the residents,Mr. Catania and Mr. Partridge  did attempt to salvage an approval by discussing changes they thought would make C-R more palatable.  Not only was that impossible, but Mr. Partridge's long discussion on berms was more confusing than illuminating.  And the notion, as proposed by Mr. Partridge that limiting hours of operation from 6AM to 12AM would make any material difference in the adverse impact on the neighborhoods from this zoning was, in my view, ridiculous. And neither of these Supervisors seemed willing to seriously entertain the notion that this amendment should prohibit restaurant use. Why were Mr. Catania and Mr. Partridge seemingly so set to move this amendment forward?  

The many issues with the proposed ordinance were pointed out by residents and members of the Delaware County Planning Commission.  They included:

The amendment should NOT be adopted as written and that CR area #1,West Chester Pike and other adjacent parcels that were part of this area, should be omitted from the proposed rezoning.  That area is currently zoned residential and is the gateway to the Newtown Heights neighborhood. 

Mr. Catania persists in saying that this is commercial property but it's not commercial. It's residential. There are currently residences on this property and those residences are occupied.   Mr. Catania also persisted in trying to argue that since this area is across from Commercial properties, it should be commercial.  So, in his logic, that would mean home along West Chester Pike in Newtown that are across from Commercial properties should all be commercial.  How will that be viewed by the many other homes on West Chester Pike across from commercial properties? How is that good planning?

Find out what's happening in Marple Newtownwith free, real-time updates from Patch.

Area #2, Winding Way to Rte. 252, was inconsistent.  The text specifies that St. Albans’ Episcopal Church is part of the rezoned area.  The map, however, excludes the Church.  Is the Church in or out?  I’m guessing the Church and their members would like to know.

In talking about the CR Area #3, Rhoads Avenue area,the apartments are very well established.  In the course of Mr. Catania's remarks last night, he indicated that the Rhoads Avenue properties are not likely to be redeveloped.  So, why does he think that these need rezoning right now?

Find out what's happening in Marple Newtownwith free, real-time updates from Patch.

Newtown has work to do on the body of the amendment-- including clarification of permitted uses, maximum property widths, buffers from residential neighborhoods and outdoor dining among other issues. The Delaware County Planning Commission thought types of businesses included in C-R zoning should be more specific. As examples, they mentioned including professional service businesses and boutiques. 

Let's hope this amendment, as proposed and discussed last night, is gone for good.  Let's hope that the Supervisors are good to their word and that comprehensive planning will replace this attempt at spot zoning.  Let's hope that this planning has as a basis the preservation of the existing neighborhoods, not the favoring of developers.  Let's hope, but let's be vigilant and continue to hold the Supervisors accountable. 

 



  
We’ve removed the ability to reply as we work to make improvements. Learn more here

The views expressed in this post are the author's own. Want to post on Patch?