Home Feedback Search

 Residents: Leave Sadsbury Alone
 

                                      

Township News
Public Notices
S.O.S.
The Developers
In The News
Message Board
Zoning Tutorial
Demographics
Local History
Neighbors
Township Meetings
Other Links

Bajeerah Lowe , Staff Writer 

December 4, 2003 

SADSBURY -- As change and growth occur throughout the western part of the county, dozens of residents told supervisors Tuesday they want their township to remain unchanged.

The standing-room-only crowd at times spilled outside onto the road. They spoke out in opposition to proposed zoning changes that would allow higher-density residential development, office and commercial development in several areas of the township that are currently zoned for minimum two-acre lots.

"We’ve got to stop the sprawl. We’ve got to stop the new residents," said Erik Brecht, a resident and volunteer firefighter for the two companies serving the township.

"Leave it the way it is," said resident Eric Knight.

Tammy Pawling, another township resident, said she and others fear the zoning changes, which are concentrated to parcels along Business Route 30 and a small parcel along Route 10, because of the further growth they predict it will bring. "If you run public water and sewer west, which will be required for the proposed changes," she said, "it will leave that area wide open for people to come in and develop. ..If you allow it to remain rural and residential without sewer and water, town homes don’t even become an issue."

But Wayne Grafton, Sadsbury’s land planner, told supervisors and the public that the proposed changes attempt to create a zoning plan that will leave the rural residential zoning as the underlying zoning but allow for overlays that are more compatible with surrounding communities, eliminate abrupt changes between the zoning districts and create clear definitions for residential, business and commercial areas.

"We are trying to bring about some continuity," he said.

The proposed changes are a result of two years of work, said both Grafton and township Solicitor Vincent Pompo. In October 2001 the township adopted a new zoning ordinance. But at that time some residents voiced concern about the changes. "We promised to revisit the issues," said Pompo. A township zoning feasibility committee was created and public meetings were held from the summer of 2002 to the beginning of 2003. A draft of the ordinance amendment was prepared by Grafton and approved by the feasibility committee in June of this year. It was also reviewed by the township and county planning commissions.

The amendment calls for zoning changes to six areas in the township.

The small parcel on the east side of Route 10 north of Route 30 is proposed for a commercial overlay to match up with the commercial zoning across the street in West Sadsbury. While land to the north and east of the parcel is zoned for rural residential, or minimum two-acre parcels, Grafton said there is a natural barrier of wetlands that would prevent any future commercial property from directly abutting any residential structure.

A triangular piece of land set between Business Route 30 and Route 30 Bypass is also proposed to receive a limited commercial overlay. This, said Grafton, seemed to make the most sense because of the road grid.

Two other parcels, one that is south of the eastbound bypass on the ramp and north of Holstein Drive, and the second that is south of Business Route 30 and north of Quaker Lane, are each proposed to receive overlays that would allow either residential units at a rate of one per 30,000 square feet or office buildings not to exceed two stories and 2,000 square feet.

Grafton said the office buildings will be limited to the Route 30 frontage while residential units will be permitted behind.

The final area under consideration is land just to the west of the village of Sadsburyville along Business Route 30. The land on the northern and southern sides currently zoned rural residential. It is proposed for an overlay that would permit three uses: residential, office and limited commercial. Like the other overlays, office and commercial space would be limited to two stories in height and could not be more than 300 feet from Business Route 30.

Because the board of supervisors limited public comment to 45 minutes on Tuesday, it decided to delay a vote on the amendments until it has time to receive letters from residents expressing their opinion on the proposal.

İDaily Local News 2003 

Reader Opinions: 

Name: Cindy Mammarella

Date: Dec, 05 2003

I read with interest Paula Rucker's comments. She states that she will be moving to Quarry Ridge in April. I wonder, Ms. Rucker, from where are you moving? Do you currently live in the Sadsbury or surrounding areas? The reason I ask is that it seems that "newcomers" are always anxious to move into this part of Chester County and then are quick to want to change it, i.e., adding walking trails and sidewalks. If this area does not suit you, then perhaps you should look elsewhere for a dwelling.

 

Name: Paula Rucker 

Date: Dec, 04 2003

In my opinion, the proposed changes to the zoning code in Sadsbury Township will not have a great effect on the landscape. It will leave the surrounding area "rural residential" while bringing development and the improvements by developers that have been proposed. (Although this issue was not discussed in this article, it was highlighted in an article a few months back.) I think it would ultimately benefit the residents of Sadsbury Twp. to have improvements such as walking trails and sidewalks along Business Route 30. One of the drawbacks of a rural community is that one must get in the car to do virtually anything. It would be wonderful to safely walk into "town" for a hot dog or what-have-you. My husband and I are moving to Quarry Ridge in April and would appreciate walking trails leading up to Rte. 30. I think that it is unreasonable to expect that no further development take place, given the rate of development in other parts of the county. I also think that smaller lots can benefit the community - more housing is provided while still maintaining open spaces and preserving farmland. Once development occurs, the land will never again be farmed. So why not conserve the land by building more homes on smaller lots, rather than imposing a 2 acre minimum? I think that in the long run, residents will appreciate the proposed developments, especially when they see an increase in their property values.

İDaily Local News 2003 

 

Send mail to webmaster@sadsburyville.com with questions or comments about this web site.
Last modified: 12/01/07