By Richard L. Gaw
Staff Writer

Just as it has at several recent New Garden Township public meetings, the issue of the township’s zoning plans consumed a large chunk of its Board of Supervisors meeting on March 17.

In a one-hour presentation before about 50 residents, township Manager Christopher Himes turned over every stone of the township’s extensive process to redraw its zoning map, a presentation that was followed up by a second hour of public input.

“We are providing this [presentation] to address a lot of the points that have been brought up and also to show where we are at in the process and what this all means,” Himes told the audience. “We’re hoping to use tonight not so much to alleviate residents’ concerns but to address their input.”

As he has reiterated at previous public meetings, Himes pointed to a key reason for the township to update its zoning map: to follow the recommendation of the township’s 2018 Comprehensive Plan to pursue zoning map and ordinance changes to support land use outcomes and fulfill future needs for residential and economic development.

Upgrading the township’s zoning, Himes said, will also impact the township’s strategic goals: to increase its tax base to support local services; increase finding levels to pay for infrastructure and public safety; diversify revenues to limit increases in property taxes; attract new families and stimulate housing inventory and diversity of housing; and reimagine its commercial land use to spur economic growth and attract jobs. 

Slow to adopt, slow to upgrade

Himes said that another reason for the township to upgrade its zoning map is because it has been very slow to do so for many years. In 1968, he said, Act 247 created the Pennsylvania Municipal Planning Code (MPC) that established the procedure for a locality to adopt a zoning ordinance, but New Garden did not adopt its first zoning ordinance until 1987. 

“When you think about that timeline, what happened in that time frame that could have changed and altered outcomes that you see today?” Himes said. “If you have a vision but are not actively reconditioning your zoning, you are never going to get to that ultimate outcome.”

Himes also brought up a topic of concern expressed by residents at recent public meetings: by-right use of property. Currently, 70 by-right uses are listed across 10 zoning districts within the Township. The problem is that many of them are vastly outdated and have remained in effect in the township since the adoption of its zoning ordinance in 1987. Further, many current by-right uses are vague and subject to interpretation, but the township’s proposed re-zoning will be able to better define uses in a future business district. 

The March 17 conversation about zoning in New Garden is nothing new. Collectively, 18 zoning task force and staff meetings have been held to date, as have three public outreach events with one more scheduled for May, as well as Planning Commission meetings. Most recently, the township held a Draft Zoning Map & Districts open house on Feb. 26 that elicited input about the municipality’s long-term zoning and planning concepts and its work with Michael Baker International – a leader in engineering, planning and consulting services. Working with township officials, the company is redefining the concepts and proposed changes to the township’s ten zoning districts: innovation; mixed use corridor; village gateway; village center; residential flex, medium density and low density; airport; enterprise; and parks and open space.  

The township’s multi-tiered process to redraw its zoning map is now in Phase 3 and will continue through the summer. A final zoning ordinance is expected to be finalized by late fall.

Public comment

During the public comment portion of the meeting, several residents expressed their concerns for the township’s rezoning plans, largely for their potential to dramatically alter its “livability” factor.

“People chose to live in this township because of its rural nature,” one resident said. “[Rezoning] brings in transient people, more policing and more traffic, but it doesn’t seem to benefit the residents of the township.”

Former township supervisor Barclay Hoopes expressed his concern for what he called “the maintenance of the quality of life.” He called for infrastructure improvements along the township’s roads, particularly on Gap-Newport Pike.

“Until we address that, I don’t see how we’re going to improve our roads that we’re expecting to have [to accommodate planned growth] that we can’t handle now,” he said. “We know the problems, but no one addresses the real problem, and that is infrastructure, and when we get that right, the rest will come.”

Township resident Peter Mrozinski expressed his concern for how the planned redrawing of the township zooming map will impact the Limestone Road-Route 7 corridor, particularly at the Route 41 exchange. He said that the zoning plans for Limestone Road do not meet the vision of the township’s 2018 Comprehensive Plan.

“If you put any kind of traffic in there, like a gas station or a convenience store, you’re going to have people making left-hand turns, and it’s going to be a nightmare,” he said. “I oppose zoning the Limestone Road corridor the same as Route 41. It’s a very different situation. You’re going to have to look at the value of businesses that are going to go there.”

Throughout his presentation and during public comment, Himes continued to state the township’s intention to “redraw” its future and incentivize its potential growth areas.

“One common question I have received has been ‘If we zone this, what does this means in terms of an outcome?’” Himes said. “We want to make sure that we are addressing that because you want to understand what the potential is here and [determine] that potential in line with what we’re trying to do as a township - and in line with our Comprehensive Plan.” 

To learn more about New Garden Township’s zoning update, visit www.newgarden.org/443/Zoning-Ordinance-Map-Update.

To contact Staff Writer Richard L. Gaw, email [email protected].