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

Politics & Government

Marple Zoning Hearing Board Approves Property For Use As Office Space

The Zoning Hearing Board approved 401 S. Parkway Drive for use as office space at the April 20 meeting.

BROOMALL—In a unanimous 6-0 vote, the Marple Zoning Hearing Board approved a variance proposed by Ara G. Yeramyan of Gap International Inc. on April 20 that will allow the consulting firm to use its 401 S. Parkway property for office space.

Yermyan, the executive vice president of Gap International Inc., presented the proposal alongside Co-Chief Operating Officer Robert Rothman and Manager of Facilities Susan Vaughan. 

The company has owned the building since 2004 with the intention of using it for office space, Vaughan said.

However, the 401 S. Parkway property is currently zoned I-Light Industry District, meaning that its permitted uses do not include office space, Township Solicitor Lee Gershenfled said.

“Originally—from the 1950s until 1997—offices were allowed there. In 1997, we took the office variance out of the code,” Gershenfled said.

The property, however, was built with the intention of being an office—never a warehouse, Vaughan said.

The exact number of employees who would relocate to the 401 S. Parkway property from Gap International’s other two office buildings, were the variance approved, was uncertain, Rothman said. Likely, it would be one department, and each department averages between five and 10 people.

“They need a quiet, private space to do the work that they do rather than the building we occupy at 700 Old Marple Rd.,” Rothman said. “That’s the spirit of this request.”

After a closed meeting following the hearing, the Marple Zoning Hearing Board granted the variance request.

Other applications addressed by the Board on April 20 were three homeowner-related matters. The board approved two variances for home additions and denied one homeowner’s request for an above ground pool due to the pool exceeding the property’s statuary limit on impervious coverage.

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?