CENTRE REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA6AD7E2DC-ECE4-41CD-B8E1... · 2014-10-28 · Please note,...

Serving the Townships of College, Ferguson, Halfmoon, Harris, Patton and the Borough of State College

A Bicycle Friendly Community

CENTRE REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA

Centre Region Council of Governments Office Building

2643 Gateway Drive

Thursday

November 6, 2014

7:00 p.m.

1. CALL TO ORDER – Mr. Watson will convene the meeting

2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES – September 4, 2014 regular meeting of the CRPC 3. CITIZENS’ COMMENTS – For items not on the agenda

4. CONSENT AGENDA

a. Patio House Ordinance – College Township b. University Planned District (UPD) Amendment – Subdistrict 7 to Subdistrict 8

College Township c. Amendments to the Open Space, Recreation, and Conservation Ordinance – College

Township d. Rezone Parcel from PA to CP2 – State College Borough

5. ACTION AGENDA

a. North Atherton Rezoning Application – Ferguson Township b. Amend Building Heights for Public School Buildings – State College Borough

6. REGIONAL INTEREST ITEMS – Commission members report on activities (time

permitting) 7. CRPA ACTIVITY REPORT – Mr. Jim May will report on items of interest from the CRPA

Activity Report (time permitting)

8. ADJOURNMENT OF CRPC MEETING AND CALL TO ORDER OF THE JOINT CRPC AND COG TLU COMMITTEE MEETING

9. OTHER BUSINESS

a. Matter of Record - CRPC Comment Letters from September meeting:

Please note, CRPC meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. Joint

meeting follows.

http://www.crcog.net/vertical/sites/%7B6AD7E2DC-ECE4-41CD-B8E1-BAC6A6336348%7D/uploads/Activity_Report_10-2014.pdf

http://www.crcog.net/vertical/sites/%7B6AD7E2DC-ECE4-41CD-B8E1-BAC6A6336348%7D/uploads/Activity_Report_10-2014.pdf

November 6, 2014

CRPC Meeting Agenda

of 11

1. College Township – Keeping of Chickens 2. College Township – Stormwater Ordinance 3. Harris Township – Recreational Resort Ordinance 4. Patton Township – Conditional Uses in the R1 Zoning District

http://www.crcog.net/vertical/sites/%7B6AD7E2DC-ECE4-41CD-B8E1-BAC6A6336348%7D/uploads/College_Township_-_Keeping_of_Chickens_090414.pdf

http://www.crcog.net/vertical/sites/%7B6AD7E2DC-ECE4-41CD-B8E1-BAC6A6336348%7D/uploads/College_Township_-_Stormwater_Ordinance_090414.pdf

http://www.crcog.net/vertical/sites/%7B6AD7E2DC-ECE4-41CD-B8E1-BAC6A6336348%7D/uploads/Harris_Township_-_Recreational_Resort_Ordinance_090414.pdf

http://www.crcog.net/vertical/sites/%7B6AD7E2DC-ECE4-41CD-B8E1-BAC6A6336348%7D/uploads/Patton_Township_-_Conditional_Uses_in_the_R1_Zoning_District_090414.pdf

November 6, 2014

CRPC Meeting Agenda

of 11

ITEM 4.a

PATIO HOUSE ORDINANCE – COLLEGE TOWNSHIP –

presented by Mark Holdren, AICP

This item provides the CRPC information related to a proposal to define a patio house including revisions to regulations related to setbacks and building materials. THE ISSUE A property owner in the R-3, Multifamily Residential District would like to build patio homes. However the current ordinance only permits patio homes if each patio home is on its own lot and built to one side lot line. The applicants have requested the Township consider an amendment to allow patio homes to be built on a single-lot with a homeowner’s association maintaining all areas around the patio homes. OTHER INFORMATION Staff has drafted an ordinance that amends the definition of patio homes to not only include homes built to a side lot line but to also include those types of homes where multiple homes are built on a single lot with the individual home owners, owning the home and a homeowners association owning and maintaining the rest of the lot. A few other minor changes were needed to ensure that proper spacing the homes was maintained. However, these changes will not result in an increase in permitted density or a decrease in building separations. PREVIOUS ACTION The CRPC has not previously reviewed this item. RECOMMENDATIONS CRPA staff recommends that the CRPC support the request and provide any comments or recommendation to the College Township Council for their consideration. ATTACHMENTS

1. Ordinance O-14-12, Patio Houses Ordinance

COLLEGE TOWNSHIP

CENTRE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA

ORDINANCE O-14-12

PATIO HOUSES ORDINANCE

PROPOSED ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE COLLEGE

TOWNSHIP CODE, BY REVISING THE DEFINITION OF PATIO

HOUSES TO ALLOW MULTIPLE PATIO HOUSES ON A

SINGLE LOT.

BE IT RESOLVED AND ORDAINED, by the College Township Council, Centre County, Pennsylvania and the authority of the same, does hereby adopt, made this 20th day of November, 2014, by amending the Code of the Township of College, Pennsylvania with the amendment of Chapter 200 as follows:

Strikethrough = deletion Bold Italics = addition

SECTION 1

Amend § 200-7, Definitions with the following amended definitions: “PATIO HOUSE (ZERO LOT LINE)— A building which is designed for one dwelling unit with setbacks on three sides and one side built on a side property line (zero lot line house). Patio houses may be attached to adjacent dwellings with walls or fences to the side property line. Noncombustible material must be used when buildings are separated by 10 feet or less. A single-family home located on a lot where it is setback on three

sides and one side built on a side property line or a single-family home built amongst a

group of other single-family homes on the same lot where each patio home is owned by

a different homeowner and a home owner’s or condominium association maintains the

majority or all of the land around the homes. (See the supplemental regulations in § 200-38.3.)” SECTION 2 GENERAL PROVISIONS

Amend § 200-12A, Minimum lot size and lot width as follows:

"A. Minimum lot size and width. All lots created after the effective date of this chapter shall be no less than the minimum lot size and width requirements stipulated for each use in the zoning district regulations or as noted below:

College Township Ordinance O-14-12 Patio Houses Ordinance Page 2 of 4

(1) Minimum lot size and width for single-family houses in the rural districts may be reduced in accordance with § 200-38.1, Rural preservation design standards.

(2) Minimum lot size and width for uses proposed within a planned residential development shall be designed in accordance with the standards set forth in Chapter 145, Planned Residential Development.

(3) For those lots in zoning districts which specify a minimum lot width at the building setback line in addition to that at the street line, the following shall apply: The lot width at building setback line shall be measured at a distance equal to that specified for the minimum front yard setback as measured from the front lot line.

(4) Minimum lot size for lots which have two or more single-family or patio houses located on them shall be calculated as the minimum lot size required by the zoning district regulations multiplied times the number of proposed units. The acreage for determining the number of single-family or patio houses to be built on a lot shall be exclusive of required parkland/open space, stormwater facilities and/or public rights-of-way.”

Amend § 200-13C, as follows:

"C. Where two or more dwelling units are proposed to be placed upon a lot in single ownership or upon two or more abutting lots under single ownership, the front, side and rear yard setback areas shall be regulated as follows:

(1) The front, side and rear yard setback areas stipulated in the district regulations are required only from the lot lines abutting the property of another.

(2) Those dwellings classified as townhouses or multifamily dwellings located on a lot that abuts a lot(s) owned by another, containing single-family houses, planned or existing, shall have a side yard setback equal to that required for the rear yard in the district regulations.

(3) The minimum horizontal distance between the closest point(s) of any two buildings located within a lot shall be no less than 40 feet. This distance may be reduced to 20 feet on no more than two sides of any given building. Patio houses shall be able to reduce the distance between

buildings on no more than two sides of a given building to no less than

15 feet in the R-2, Two-family Residential District and 10 feet in the R-3,

Multifamily Residential District.

College Township Ordinance O-14-12 Patio Houses Ordinance Page 3 of 4

(4) The minimum horizontal distance between the closest points of a building with facing walls shall be no less than 20 feet with the exception of single-family houses whom need not comply with this minimum distance.”

Amend § 200-38.3, Patio Houses as follows: “Patio houses, as defined in § 200-7 are permitted, provided that:

A. The side yard shall be either zero or the minimum distance as provided for in the district regulations.

B. Where a dwelling unit is located on a lot line, an easement shall be provided for permanent access by the adjacent property owner or homeowners association to maintain the exterior portion of the dwelling unit wall along the zero lot line. Overhang of roof eaves shall be permitted, provided that no more than two feet of overhang encroaches into the easement on the zero lot line side of the dwelling unit.

C. Doors, windows or other access openings are prohibited on the zero lot line side of the dwelling unit.

D. Exhaust vents (laundry, bathroom, etc.) are prohibited on the zero lot line side of the dwelling unit.

E. Noncombustible material must be used when buildings are separated by 10 feet

or less.

F. Patio houses may be attached to adjacent dwellings with walls or fences to the

side property line.”

SECTION 3 SEVERABILITY

If any sentence or clause, section or part of this ordinance is found to be unconstitutional, illegal or invalid, such findings shall not affect or impair any of the remaining parts of this ordinance. It is hereby declared to be the intent that this ordinance would have been adopted had such part not been included.

SECTION 4 EFFECTIVE DATE

This ordinance shall take effect five (5) days after enactment.

ENACTED AND ORDAINED, this 20th day of November of 2014, by the College Township Council, Centre County, Pennsylvania.

College Township Ordinance O-14-12 Patio Houses Ordinance Page 4 of 4 ATTEST COLLEGE TOWNSHIP COUNCIL

________________________________

Secretary Council Chair

November 6, 2014

CRPC Meeting Agenda

Page 4 of 11

ITEM 4.b

UNIVERSITY PLANNED DISTRICT (UPD) AMENDMENT – SUBDISTRICT 7 TO

SUBDISTRICT 8 COLLEGE TOWNSHIP – presented by Mark Holdren, AICP

This item provides information related to a proposal to amend the University Planned District (UPD) Subdistrict Map to change a portion of University-owned land in the UPD District from Subdistrict 7 to Subdistrict 8. THE ISSUE Penn State is in the process of upgrading the campus water system including a new water filtration treatment plant. Penn State wants to locate the facility on University property at the intersection of Tower and Big Hollow Roads where an old research building is located. This area is designated as UPD Subdistrict 7, to which the regulations are geared to open space and conservation uses. Penn State is requesting that this area be designated as UPD Subdistrict 8, which not only adjoins the area on two sides but is also has regulations that are geared towards utility and other University support operations. OTHER INFORMATION The intent of the UPD District is to allow for uniform regulations across municipal boundaries. Given the large size of the UPD District and varying nature of the different areas of the University, the UPD is broken into several subdistricts, each of which have their own unique bulk, height and setback requirements. The change in Subdistricts is necessitated based upon the fact that the most practical location for the water filtration/treatment plant is an area which is not in the proper UPD Subdistrict, but is surrounded on two sides by UPD Subdistrict 8. This request will have minimal impact to the adjoining property owners or the Township. The location is internal to the campus, in an area where the general public does not frequent. In addition, the nearest adjoining property owner is well over a quarter mile away and even further for any student residing on campus. There will be a slight increase in the amount of buildable area and impervious surfaces but given the overall size of the two affected subdistricts and the UPD as a whole, the increase will not be noticeable. PREVIOUS ACTION The CRPC has not previously reviewed this item. RECOMMENDATION CRPA staff recommends that the CRPC support the request and provide any comments or recommendation to the College Township Council for their consideration. ATTACHMENTS

November 6, 2014

CRPC Meeting Agenda

Page 5 of 11

1. Ordinance O-14-16, University Planned District Rezoning – Subdistrict 7 to Subdistrict 8

Ordinance. 2. Memo, dated October 8, 2014 regarding the UPD Rezoning request.

COLLEGE TOWNSHIP CENTRE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA

ORDINANCE O-14-16 UNIVERSITY PLANNED DISTRICT REZONING –

SUBDISTRICT 7 TO SUBDISTRICT 8 MAP AMENDMENT

AN AMENDMENT TO THE COLLEGE TOWNSHIP ZONING MAP TO REZONE A 4.5 ACRE PORTION OF COLLEGE

TOWNSHIP PARCEL 19-003-,100-,0000- FROM UPD 7 TO UPD 8

BE IT RESOLVED AND ORDAINED, by the College Township Council, Centre

County, Pennsylvania and the authority of the same, does hereby, made this 20th

day of

November, 2014, amend the Code of the Township of College, Chapter 200, Zoning,

Section 200-10, Zoning Map as follows:

UREZONE THE FOLLOWINGU: Rezone a portion of parcel 19-003-,100-,0000- from University Planned District,

Subdistrict 7 to University Planned District Subdistrict 8 as shown on Exhibit A as

attached.

0BUEFFECTIVE DATE


ENACTED AND ORDAINED, this 20h day of November, 2014, by the College

Township Council, Centre County, Pennsylvania.

ATTEST: COLLEGE TOWNSHIP COUNCIL


Big Hollow Rd

Tower Rd

472 feet

410

feet

I1 in = 200 ft

0 400200Feet

EXHIBIT AUPDSubdistrict8

Big Hollow Rd Tower Rd

University Drive Park Ave

Servi

ces R

d

Bigler Rd

Area to be Rezoned

UPD 11

UPD 8

UPD 7

UPD 7

UPD 9

UPD 5

LegendMunicipal Boundaries

UPD Sudistrict Boundaries

SUBJECT AREA

UPD Boundary (inset)

Sudistrict Boundaries (inset)

1 in = 2,000 ft

UPDSubdistrict7

SUBJECT AREA

Ordinance O-14-16

Serving the Townships of College, Ferguson, Halfmoon, Harris, Patton and the Borough of State College

CENTRE REGIONAL PLANNING AGENCY

2643 Gateway Drive, Suite #4 State College, PA 16801

Phone: (814) 231-3050 Fax: (814) 231-3083 www.crcog.net

TO: College Township Council FROM: Mark Holdren, AICP

Sr. Planner DATE: October 8, 2014 RE: UPD Rezoning Request

Please find attached a request and supporting documentation to request a change in subdistrict designation for a 4.5 acre portion of the University property. The subject area is located at the intersection of Tower and Big Hollow Roads and includes an area known as the mushroom test facility. It is adjacent to the numerous university support services and not too far from the Law School and Arboretum. The process for changing boundaries between zoning districts is similar to that of a rezoning elsewhere in the Township. The following is a review of the University Planned District, what it means to change subdistricts and what the potential impacts of doing so might be. The vast majority of the University owned property in State College, Patton and College is zoned University Planned District (UPD). The UPD is essentially shared among these municipalities as the zoning district is primarily the same across municipal boundaries covering approximately 3,372 acres of land in the three municipalities. College Township’s portion of the UPD represents approximately 2,218 acres. Given the size of the area covered by the UPD and the varied scope of services and activities provided by the University, a one size fits all Zoning District is not practical. As such, the University Planned District is broken into 16 different subdistricts. A map of the entire UPD district and its subdistricts is attached. Under the University Planned District, land uses are broken into two categories: general uses and designated uses. General uses include classrooms, dormitories, dining halls, parking, university offices and other facilities generally associated with educating of it students. Those uses classified as general uses are permitted throughout the UPD regardless of subdistrict designation. Designated uses on the other hand are those which are related to university activities but are not fundamental to the core mission of education students and by their very nature require special consideration. Examples of such are stadiums, arenas, utility facilities, airports, hospitals, non-university offices, testing facilities, commercial businesses, etc. Designated uses, unlike general uses vary from subdistrict to subdistrict as to whether they are permitted or not.

http://www.crcog.net/

of 3

Items such as parking regulations, plan submission and procedure requirements, landscaping are the same throughout the UPD. However, items such as setbacks, impervious coverage, floor area ratios and height requirements also differ from subdistrict to subdistrict. The boundaries of the subdistricts of the University Planned District were largely drawn up by the University and ultimately approved by the municipalities. Under the UPD, this is known as the UPD District Plan. In order to have the boundaries of the subdistricts changed, the University must file a request to amend the District Plan through a process virtually identical to that of a rezoning. The exception to this is that the College is required to notify the other municipalities who have adopted the UPD. The purpose of reviewing the amended plan for subdistricts is to determine if the “…amendment is consistent with the efficient development and preservation of the entire UPD District … and would not adversely affect the use and enjoyment of land abutting the UPD District.” (§ 188-12B(1)) Specific to the request, UPD 7 is intended to be an area encompassing mostly natural areas and designated as such to house the arboretum and its future phases. The intent of the UPD 8 on the other hand is to house the University’s support services. This can be seen in the types of designated uses permitted in each subdistrict as shown below.

Subdistrict 7 Subdistrict 8

Arboretum Permitted

Child-care facilities Permitted

Conference Facilities Permitted

President's residence Permitted

Restaurants open to the public Permitted1 Permitted2

Retail Sales Permitted1

Telecommunications structures Permitted

Transportation facilities Permitted

Utility uses, facilities and structures Permitted

Notes: [1] permitted only as an accessory use; [2] limited to 10,000 sqft

PERMITTED DESIGNATED USES

In addition the density, impervious coverage and maximum building height requirements differ between Subdistrict 7 and 8 as shown below:

Subdistrict 7 Subdistrict 8

Maximum Impervious Coverage 10% 60%

Maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) 0.02 0.5

Maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of designated uses 0.01 0.5

Maximum Building Height 45 feet 90 feet

Subdistrict Regulations

of 3

What this means in terms of a potential impact, is that there will be some potential increase in impervious coverage and development in the area. For example the Floor Area Ratio will increase from 0.02 to 0.5 thereby leading to a potential increase in of ~94,000 square feet of building space. In addition, the proposed rezoning could potentially lead to an additional 1.8 acres of impervious surfaces in the UPD. Lastly, height of structure could be twice as high (up to 90 feet in height) if the rezoning were approved. When put in context, the potential increase in gross floor area or impervious coverage is not that great. Together, Subdistricts contain 507 acres of land. Currently there is 33 acres of impervious coverage in the two subdistricts, 32 of which are located in Subdistrict 8. The potential increase in impervious coverage represents an additional 2% of potential impervious coverage if the rezoning were approved. The relative size of the proposed change can be seen on the attached UPD Map. No impacts are expected to any adjoining property owner. As can be seen on the attached aerial map, the nearest property owner is 1,500 feet away. Furthermore, the area in question is directly adjacent to an area of the University that already contains numerous utility facilities and other support operations. In addition, much of the subject area has contained an existing structure and associated parking for some time. The area in question is directly adjacent to Big Hollow Road. This, and the nearby intersecting street of Tower Road are both owned and maintained by the University. Access to the nearest public street would be either at Bigler Road and Park Avenue or University Drive and Park Avenue. Big Hollow Road also does access Fox Hollow Road quite a distance from this site. If there are any improvements needed to any of these intersections as a result of development in the subject area, it will be up to Penn State to make said improvements. All utilities including water and sewer are available and will be provided by Penn State. Similar to potential traffic improvements Penn State will be responsible for any necessary improvements. It is staff’s recommendation that the Township approve this request to designate 4.5 acres on Penn State’s campus from UPD Subdistrict 7 to UPD Subdistrict 8. There will be increase in development potential. However, the request is minimal in size when compared to the overall size of the affected subdistricts and even more so when considering the overall size of the University Planned District (subject area only represents 0.1% of the overall land area of the UPD). Staff finds that the proposed amendment to the UPD District Plan will continue to promote the efficient development and preservation of the UPD and not have any adverse impact on lands abutting the UPD as the District regulations requires the Township to find, prior to adopting any amendment. At the upcoming Council meeting, staff will be asking members to comment on the proposed rezoning and potentially set a date for a public hearing. The earliest available date is November 20th.

LegendMunicipal BoundariesUPD University Planned DistrictUPD Special DistrictsUPD Transitional ZonesUPD Sudistrict BoundariesSUBJECT AREA

I

1 in = 2,000 ft0 2,0001,000

Feet

UNIVERSITYPLANNEDDISTRICT

UPD14

UPD9

UPD8

UPD7

UPD14

UPD5UPD5

UPD10

UPD6

UPD 2UPD 4

UPD15

UPD16

AREA PROPOSEDTO BE REDISTRICTED

LegendSUBJECT AREAUPD Sudistrict BoundariesMunicipal Boundaries

I1 in = 2,000 ft

0 2,0001,000Feet

UPDAERIAL

MAP

UPD14

UPD9

UPD8

UPD7

UPD14

UPD5UPD5

UPD10

UPD6

UPD 2UPD 4

UPD15

UPD16

AREA PROPOSEDTO BE REDISTRICTEDUPD11

Williamsburg Square || 1975 Waddle Road || State College, PA 16803-‐1639 T: (814) 237-‐7111 || F: (814) 237-‐5692 || E: kshellenberger@bh-‐ba.com

www.bh-‐ba.com Pennsylvania I Florida I Louisiana I Maryland I Mississippi I New Jersey I Tennessee I Virginia I West Virginia I Germany

August 15, 2014 College Township 1481 East College Avenue State College, PA 16801 Attn: Mark Holdren RE: Pennsylvania State University Request for Zoning Subdistrict Boundary Change PSU Project No. 05-92438.00 BH Project No. 76812-00 Dear Mr. Holdren: The Pennsylvania State University is planning to construct a new water treatment plant that will treat water from their existing groundwater wells. The new treatment plant is proposed to be constructed in the location of the current Mushroom Test Demonstration Facility located on Big Hollow Road. The site location is in University Planned District (UPD) Subdistrict 7, and “utility uses, facilities, and structures” such as water treatment plants are listed as a designated use that is not permitted in UPD Subdistrict 7. That designated use is permitted in UPD Subdistrict 8, which is adjacent to the proposed site. As shown on the enclosed Zoning Exhibit, the University is requesting a change in the boundary between UPD Subdistricts 7 and 8. The proposed change would involve approximately 4.5 acres in UPD Subdistrict 7 becoming part of UPD Subdistrict 8. There are multiple reasons for requesting this boundary change including the following:

• The water treatment plant is proposed to be constructed in an ideal location relative to existing distribution piping and the existing groundwater wells in Big Hollow.

• The new water treatment plant is necessary to meet requirements of the Department of Environmental Protection.

• The original delineation of the boundary between UPD Subdistricts 7 and 8 had placed the Mushroom Test Demonstration Facility in Subdistrict 7, which seems to have been inconsistent with the intent of the Subdistrict descriptions.

• The existing Mushroom Test Demonstration Facility will be demolished to allow for construction of the water treatment plant. This will reduce the amount of new impervious area in that area compared to construction of a facility in an existing undeveloped area.

August 15, 2014 Page 2 of 2

www.bh-‐ba.com Pennsylvania I Florida I Louisiana I Maryland I Mississippi I New Jersey I Tennessee I Virginia I West Virginia I Germany

• The University has a vested interest in minimizing the environmental impact of the project and in continuing to protect the groundwater that supplies the wells in Big Hollow.

The proposed change in subdistrict boundaries would result in changes to floor area ratio (FAR) and impervious coverage in both subdistricts as summarized in the table below. Please note that the values for proposed conditions account for the changes in FAR and impervious area as a result of the proposed water treatment plant. The maximum FAR and impervious coverage values listed in the table are from the University Planned District Plan (Chapter 188 of College Township Code). UPD 7 UPD 8 Maximum Floor Area Ratio 0.02 0.5 Maximum Impervious Coverage % 10% 60% Existing Subdistrict Area (acres) 395 112 Existing Subdistrict Area (SF) 17,206,200 4,878,720 Existing Floor Area (SF) 41,849 338,390 Existing Floor Area Ratio 0.002 0.07 Existing Impervious Coverage (SF) 442,609 995,663 Existing Impervious Coverage % 2.6% 20.4% Proposed Subdistrict Area (acres) 390.5 116.5 Proposed Subdistrict Area (SF) 17,010,180 5,074,740 Proposed Floor Area (SF) 27,939 376,640 Proposed Floor Area Ratio 0.002 0.07 Proposed Impervious Coverage (SF) 406,609 1,083,663 Proposed Impervious Coverage % 2.4% 21.4%

Please consider this request for changing the boundary between UPD Subdistricts 7 and 8, and please contact us if you have any questions or if you require additional information. Very truly yours, BUCHART HORN, INC.

Karl Shellenberger, P.E. Project Engineer cc: Steve Watson, PSU Enclosure

WASTE PUMP STATION

OVERLOOK

12'W PLANNEDARBORETUM TRAIL

5%

2%

X

2%

X

X

XX

X

X

X

4'Ø STORMSEWER MANHOLE

12"Ø STORM WATER PIPE

12"Ø STORM WATER PIPE

VISITOR/STAFF PARKING(10 SPACES)

GENERATOR

EMERGENCYGENERATOR

TRANSFORMER

1150

LANDSCAPING AREA

STORMWATERBIORETENTIONAREA

4'W LANDSCAPING AREA

ROOF LEADER

ROOF LEADERCONNECT TO EX. STORM

ROOF LEADER

ROOF LEADER

ROOF LEADERCONNECT TO STORM

STORM INLETINV. OUT 1146

STORM WATER PIPEENDWALL

SPLITTER BOX

STORM INLET

PROPOSEDZONING LINE

DRAWING NO.

TH

E P

EN

NS

YL

VA

NIA

S

TA

TE

U

NIV

ER

SIT

Y

WA

TE

R T

RE

AT

ME

NT

P

LA

NT

PS

U P

RO

JE

CT

#

05

-9

24

38

.0

0

C

DRAWING SHALL NOT BE SCALED.

DRAWING INTENT IS TO INDICATE GENERALARRANGEMENT, DESIGN AND INTENT OFWORK AND IS PARTLY DIAGRAMMATIC.

Buchart Horn, Inc.

UN

IV

ER

SIT

Y P

AR

KP

EN

NS

YL

VA

NIA

R

PROPOSED ZONING LINE

SPECIALZONE LINE

November 6, 2014

CRPC Meeting Agenda

Page 6 of 11

ITEM 4.c

AMENDMENTS TO THE OPEN SPACE, RECREATION, AND CONSERVATION

ORDINANCE – COLLEGE TOWNSHIP - presented by Mark Holdren, AICP

This item provides information related to proposed amendment to the Open Space, Recreation, Conservation District to require that all recreation structures be limited to use for passive recreation and that community centers must be open and/or utilized by the general public. THE ISSUE During the rezoning process for the Hilltop area of College Township, the Township elected to have some areas rezoned to Open Space, Recreation, Conservation District (OSR). While this district permits uses that are primarily benign in their nature and impact to adjoining property owners, a couple of the uses permitted could be impactful, especially when an area zoned OSR is not owned by a public entity. Township Council requested staff to amend the OSR District to remove uses that may be problematic. OTHER INFORMATION The intent of the OSR District is primarily to provide for open spaces and conservation areas in the Township. The district also permits public access to such areas. The attached ordinance clarifies the intent of the District by adding new definitions for “conservation” and “passive recreation” uses to the Zoning Ordinance. In addition, the chart of permitted uses was amended to remove uses which might otherwise be considered a potential nuisance or impactful to open spaces and natural areas. Specifically, community centers are still permitted but must now be open to the general public, educational and research activities must be related to conservation uses, and recreational structures are only permitted if they are for passive recreation. PREVIOUS ACTION The CRPC has not previously reviewed this item. RECOMMENDATION CRPA staff recommends that the CRPC support the request and provide any comments or recommendation to the College Township Council for their consideration. ATTACHMENTS

1. Ordinance O-14-17, Amendments to the Open Space Recreation Conservation District Ordinance

COLLEGE TOWNSHIP

CENTRE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA

ORDINANCE O-14-17

AMENDMENTS TO OPEN SPACE RECREATION CONSERVATION

ZONING DISTRICT

PROPOSED ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE OPEN SPACE

RECREATION CONSERVATION ZONING DISTRICT TO REDEFINE

THE LIST OF PERMITTED USES TO REFLECT THE OVERALL

INTENT OF THE DISTRICT

BE IT RESOLVED AND ORDAINED, by the College Township Council, Centre County, Pennsylvania, and the authority of the same, does hereby adopt, made this 20th day of November, 2014, by amending the Code of the Township of College, Pennsylvania, with the amendment of Chapter 200, as follows.

Strikethrough = deletion Bold Italics = addition

SECTION 1 DEFINITIONS

Add the following new definitions to § 200-7, Definitions:

“CONSERVATION USES – Areas for the conservation of open space, water, soil, and

wildlife resources. Such areas include nature centers and preserves, wildlife

sanctuaries, and other areas that preserve natural and environmentally sensitive

features in their natural state.

PASSIVE RECREATION – Recreational activities that are commonly unorganized

and noncompetitive, including, but not limited to, picnicking, bird watching, kite flying,

bicycling, and walking. Site amenities for such activities include, but are not limited to,

picnic tables, photo stands, open play areas where substantial clearing is not required,

rest rooms, boardwalks, paved paths, pathways, benches, and pedestrian bridges and

appurtenant structures. This is to specifically not include swimming pools, BMX

tracks, skate parks, sports facilities, and the like.”

College Township Ordinance O-14-17 Amendments to the Open Space Recreation Conservation (OSR) District Page 2 of 4

SECTION 2 OPEN SPACE RECREATION CONSERVATION DISTRICT

REGULATIONS

Amend § 200-17.1B Open Space Recreation Conservation District, as follows. B. District regulations. Only the uses listed below shall be permitted in the Open Space

Recreation Conservation District. All uses must conform to the lot, yard setback, and maximum height regulations stipulated herein, as well as other appropriate requirements of this chapter. [Replace Attachment 4:1 with the following table]


Min

imu

m S

ize

Min

imu

m

Wid

th (

fee

t)

Ma

xim

um

Co

ve

rag

e

Fro

nt

Ya

rd

(fe

et)

Sid

e

Ya

rd

(fe

et)

Re

ar

Ya

rd

(fe

et)

(1)

Arb

ore

tum

s,

gard

ens a

nd o

ther

landscaped a

reas

(2)

Bandshells

and o

pen-a

ir a

mphitheate

rs

(3)

Com

munity c

ente

rs o

pen t

o t

he g

enera

l public

(4)

Conserv

ation u

ses

(5)

Educational and r

esearc

h a

ctivi

ties r

ela

ted t

o c

onserv

ation u

ses

(6)

Equestr

ian t

rails

(7)

His

toric s

ites,

str

uctu

res a

nd m

onum

ents

(8)

Pastu

re u

ses

(9)

Recre

ational str

uctu

res for

passiv

e r

ecre

ation u

ses a

s d

efin

ed h

ere

in

(10)

Food s

erv

ice u

ses c

om

patible

with t

he a

bove

(11)

Custo

mary

uses a

ccessory

to t

he a

bove

, essential serv

ices

(1)

(2)

ZO

NIN

G

200 A

ttachm

ent

4

To

wn

ship

of

Co

lle

ge

Cri

teri

a a

nd

Sta

nd

ard

s fo

r th

e O

pe

n S

pa

ce

Co

nse

rva

tio

n D

istr

ict

PE

RM

ITT

ED

US

ES

Lo

t R

eq

uir

em

en

ts

Th

e f

oll

ow

ing

lo

t re

qu

ire

me

nts

sh

all

be

me

t fo

r e

ach

pri

ma

ry u

se:

Ma

xim

um

He

igh

t

(fe

et)

100-y

ear

floodpla

in b

oundaries a

s identifie

d b

y F

EM

A m

appin

g.

Ya

rd S

etb

ack R

eq

uir

em

en

ts

Th

e f

oll

ow

ing

ya

rd

req

uir

em

en

ts s

ha

ll b

e m

et:

In o

rder

to m

eet

the o

bje

ctive

s o

f th

is d

istr

ict,

off-

str

eet

park

ing s

hall

be p

rovi

ded in a

ccord

ance w

ith t

he r

egula

tions in §

200-3

8 w

ith t

he follo

win

g e

xception:

Park

ing a

reas s

hall

be p

erm

itte

d

to u

se a

ppro

ved p

erm

eable

mate

rials

and a

ll-w

eath

er

mate

rials

, w

hic

h inclu

des c

rushed s

tone,

asphalt,

concre

te o

r oth

er

hard

surface m

ate

rials

Build

ings

Off-

Str

eet

Park

ing a

nd D

esig

n S

tandard

s

La

nd

an

d s

tru

ctu

res

ma

y b

e u

sed

fo

r o

nly

th

e f

oll

ow

ing

:

Pri

ma

ry U

ses

30

One a

cre

All

deve

lopm

ent

activi

ties r

ela

ted t

o t

he e

xis

ting u

se m

ust

main

tain

a m

inim

um

rip

arian b

uffe

r of 100 feet

from

top o

f:

Wetlands a

s d

ete

rmin

ed b

y t

he U

.S.

Arm

y C

orp

s o

f E

ngin

eers

and/o

r by a

qualif

ied s

oil

scie

ntist;

and

35

Acce

sso

ry U

ses

See p

rim

ary

use t

o w

hic

h it

is a

ccessory

100 a

t th

e

build

ing

setb

ack lin

e;

50 a

t th

e

pro

pert

y lin

e

20%

(build

ings)

30%

(to

tal

imperv

ious)

20

20


SECTION 3 SEVERABILITY

If any sentence or clause, section, or part of this ordinance is found to be unconstitutional, illegal or invalid, such findings shall not affect or impair any of the remaining parts of this ordinance. It is hereby declared to be the intent that this ordinance would have been adopted had such part not been included.

SECTION 4 EFFECTIVE DATE


ENACTED AND ORDAINED, this 20th day of November, 2014, by the College Township Council, Centre County, Pennsylvania.

COLLEGE TOWNSHIP COUNCIL:

ATTEST:

________________________________


November 6, 2014

CRPC Meeting Agenda

Page 7 of 11

ITEM 4.d

REQUEST TO AMEND THE ZONING MAP FROM PA TO CP2 –

STATE COLLEGE BOROUGH - presented by Anne Messner

This item provides the CRPC information on a request to amend the zoning map for the property located at 721 Bellaire Avenue in State College Borough from PA to CP-2. THE ISSUE This is a landlocked property adjacent to commercial land uses and the Penn State Wastewater Treatment Facility. The proposed zoning map change would allow for future development of the property with an adjacent property owned by the property owner.

PREVIOUS ACTION The CRPC has not previously reviewed this item. RECOMMENDATION CRPA staff recommends that the CRPC support the request and provide any comments or recommendation to the State College Borough Council for their consideration. ATTACHMENTS

1. State College Borough Memo 2. Location Map

Borough of State College MEMORANDUM

To: Jim May, AICP

Centre Regional Planning Agency From: Anne D. Messner, Planner Subject Proposed Zoning Map Amendment Date: October 24, 2014

I. Text Amendment Request and Background

At the October 6, 2014 Borough Council meeting, a request was received to rezone the property located at 721 Bellaire Avenue from PA to CP-2. Borough Council referred this request to the Planning Commission to review. The applicant, Loridian, LLC, the property owner of 721 Bellaire Avenue, submitted the request to rezone this parcel from PA to CP-2, which is identical to the use on the adjacent property. Loridian acquired this property on April 15, 2013 from the Borough following a public sale. During the October 9, 2014 Planning Commission meeting the request was discussed. The Commission voted to recommend the map change be made.

II. Current Policy and/or Practice

At this time the property is zoned PA and is vacant land.

III. Other Background Information

The proposed map change would allow for future development of the property with an adjacent property that is also owned by Loridian, LLC. The PA district provides for limited uses. The CP-2 district allows for medium density commercial and mixed uses. Permitting more flexibility for redevelopment. An aerial and section of the zoning map.

Bellaire Avenue property

November 6, 2014

CRPC Meeting Agenda

Page 8 of 11

ITEM 5.a

FERGUSON TOWNSHIP REZONING REQUEST FOR PROPERTIES ALONG NORTH

ATHERTON STREET – Presented by Maria Tranguch, Ferguson Township This report provides information related to a request by Ferguson Township to rezone several properties along the western side of North Atherton Street between Blue Course Drive and North Hills Place. THE ISSUE Ferguson Township received a request to rezone property located at 1308 North Atherton Street from Office Commercial to General Commercial. The purpose of this request was to provide zoning that would allow a restaurant to be established, which is a use by right in the General Commercial Zoning District but not in the Office Commercial District. The Ferguson Township Board of Supervisors forwarded the request to the Ferguson Township Planning Commission for their review and comment. OTHER INFORMATION Based on comments received on the original request, Ferguson Township staff recommended that additional properties that front on North Atherton Street be included in the rezoning request. The original property that requested the rezoning is directly adjacent to General Commercial zoning, namely the Northland Center. If this one property were to be rezoned, there would be only six other properties left on the western side of North Atherton Street that were zoned Office Commercial and they would be split by the subject property. After further discussion with Ferguson Township staff and regional planning staff, it was decided that all six properties fronting North Atherton Street on the western side and one property fronting Blue Course Drive be considered for rezoning from Office Commercial to General Commercial. This change would create a consistent zoning pattern for the entire block that is bounded by North Atherton Street, North Hills Place, Martin Street, and Blue Course Drive. Currently, this area is a mix between Office Commercial and General Commercial. The primary impact that would occur from this zoning change would increase the number of uses that are allowed by right in this corridor. As noted in the rezoning analysis, however, all the uses currently allowed by right in the Office Commercial District are allowed by right in the General Commercial district with the exception of the residential uses, which would become legal non-conforming uses. Currently there are no plans to redevelop any of the properties that are currently occupied. The only land development proposal that has been discussed with Ferguson Township is for a restaurant on the original vacant parcel, which initiated the rezoning request. The expanded request for rezoning will create a more consistent zoning pattern this block along North Atherton Street. Changing the zoning may provide opportunities for a more cohesive redevelopment plan that could incorporate multiple parcels and consolidate access points on North Atherton Street or even eliminate them by identifying rear access to the properties. These

November 6, 2014

CRPC Meeting Agenda

Page 9 of 11

properties are identified as commercial on the Ferguson Township Future Land Use Map that is included in the 2013 Centre Region Comprehensive Plan update, and the request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. PREVIOUS ACTION The CRPC has not taken previous action on this item. RECOMMENDATION CRPA staff recommends that the CRPA support the request and provide any comments or recommendation to the Ferguson Township Board of Supervisors for their consideration. ATTACHMENTS

1. Ferguson Township Rezoning Report 2. Map outlining the properties included in the rezoning request

TO: Ferguson Township Planning Commission FROM: Maria Tranguch, Director of Planning & Zoning RE: Rezoning Analysis of Properties on south side of Atherton St. between Blue Course Drive and North Hills Place Parcel Numbers: 24-012-023 24-012-018 (original rezoning request) 24-012-022 24-012-016 24-012-021 24-012-012 24-012-020 DATE: August 5, 2014 Origin of Request The Township received a request for a rezoning of 1308 North Atherton Street (parcel number 24-012-018) to be rezoned from Office Commercial to General Commercial and the Board of Supervisors subsequently requested that the Planning Commission evaluate the request. After further researching the request, staff and regional reviewers have suggested the expansion of the scope to include six more parcels on the south side of Atherton Street. Review The properties in question consist of 6.68 acres located along the south side of North Atherton Street between Blue Course Drive and North Hills Place. Currently the parcels are zoned Office Commercial and are occupied by four office space structures, National Penn Bank, and two residential structures. The property for which the rezoning request was originally submitted is currently vacant; however a restaurant was depicted on the application. It is important to note that a rezoning of these properties would mean that the two offices and National Penn Bank would remain as conforming uses while the residences would be classified as non-conforming uses. As with all rezoning requests, it is important to note the potential positive and negative outcomes. A table below illustrates the possible impacts of rezoning these seven parcels. Briefly, the largest potential impacts are increased traffic and volume of individuals in general, which will be accessing more intense uses. These more intense uses have the potential to create more noise than the current uses. The fact

TOWNSHIP OF FERGUSON 3147 Research Drive • State College, Pennsylvania 16801 Telephone: 814-238-4651 • Fax: 814-238-3454 www.twp.ferguson.pa.us

that these properties are already bordered by General Commercial minimizes the potential of conflicting uses. Where the parcels are bordered by a street, the street serves as a separation between districts. On the north side of Atherton Street is Office Commercial. On the east side of Blue Course Drive there is a small portion of multi-family residential, which already abuts a General Commercial district. With regard to traffic impacts, 1308 North Atherton Street has the asset of a rear access, which will minimize any large impact to traffic along North Atherton Street as the Township and PennDOT would likely stipulate this as the main access to the parcel. National Penn Bank also has the right to use this access which may help minimize the impact of any higher traffic changes that could accompany a use change. The four most western parcels in the analysis would likely need to have a primary access from Atherton Street. The greatest benefits to rezoning are the opportunity to provide a wider array of amenities to the community by allowing for more uses. This is especially important for this site because of the close proximity to denser residential areas such as the multi-family residential, two-family residential, townhomes, and denser single family residential nearby. If a rezoning were to occur it would be important to emphasize pedestrian and cyclist connections in order to leverage the proximity of the general commercial to denser residential development, therefore variances and modifications that discourage pedestrian and cyclist activity are strongly discouraged for future development of this area. Office Commercial and General Commercial Land Analysis

OC and GC Land Assessment

Use

Current Proposed

Acres % of Land Ferguson

% of Land in

RGB Acres

% of Land in

Ferguson % of Land

in RGB

Office Commercial 17.6 0.06% 0.36% 10.92 0.04% 0.22%

General Commercial 251 0.83% 5.12% 257.68 0.85% 5.25%

Ferguson 30,175.30 100.00%

RGB 4,903.73 16.25%

As shown in the table above, the 6.68 acres under review represent .06% of land in the Township and .36% of land inside the Regional Growth Boundary (RGB). If the proposed zoning change were to occur, .22% of the land in the RGB would be Office Commercial while 5.25% would be General Commercial. Notably, the ability to use land as Office Commercial space is not lost because all uses allowed in Office Commercial are also allowed in General Commercial. Vacant OC and GC Land According to the 2014 Centre Region Development Capacity Report Update data there are currently four acres of Office Commercial that are vacant within the Township and 15.54 acres of General Commercial that are vacant within the Township.

Impact Comparison Table The table below provides a comparison between development under the current zoning and development under the proposed zoning. Please note that there are limitations to using this as a tool for evaluation of the complex issues associated with a rezoning request.

Comparison Table for Atherton Rezoning Request

Description Existing Conditions

Potential Development Under Current Zoning

Potential Development Under Proposed Zoning

Acreage 80% impervious coverage under current

zoning

80% impervious coverage under proposed zoning 24-012-012 0.38

24-012--18 3.44

24-012-016 0.98

24-012-020 0.57

24-012-21 0.46

24-012-022 0.36

24-012-023 0.49

Total 6.68

Zoning Office Commercial

Office Commercial General Commercial

Current/Proposed Use

Some office/bank uses. 1308 N Atherton is currently vacant. 2 residences

Office-type uses (see below)

More intense uses that generally generate more traffic, serve more individuals, and provide for a wider array of uses.

General Uses permitted

Banks and finances offices, businesses and professional offices, clinics and medical and dental offices, mortuaries, radio and TV studios, place of assembly, forestry uses, group homes

All permitted primary uses in the Office Commercial, retail establishments, ambulance services, bus passenger stations, automobile service stations, eating and drinking establishments hotels/motels, garages for storage of vehicles, taxi and limo service, communication towers, studios, storage and display of motor vehicles, printing establishments, pet stores, pet day care facilities, vet office/clinic, tutoring and study center, forestry uses

Relative to Proposed Growth Boundary

Within

Compliance with Comp Plan

Listed as Commercial

Generally consistent with Comprehensive Plan.

Also, generally consistent with Comprehensive Plan and Future Land Use maps.

Relationship to Official Map

Reflects the parcels and road network as they are.

No impact to the official map

Would likely only impact the official map if parcels were consolidated and possibly accessed from the rear.

Impace on Sewer Service

N/A Some sites currently are connected to sewer service although they would likely have a lower overall impact than most General Commercial uses.

UAJA is confident they can provide sewer service to the properties in question based upon a General Commercial zone.

Impact on Water Service

Current structures have public water

If the one vacant parcel were developed they would use public water, but this would not have a large impact on overall water.

The nature of the use being more intense would likely require more public water usage.

Impact on Transportation Infrastructure

Current impact is traffic generated by small offices and National Penn Bank, which has access from side and rear.

See trip generation attachment in Township Engineer memo for 1803 North Atherton.

As evidenced by the trip generation comparison provided by the Township Engineer, the traffic generation has the potential to be significantly greater. The Township Engineer is confident that review of a Traffic Impact Study upon submission of a Land Development Plan will address traffic concerns.

Parking Requirements N/A 1 space per 250 sq ft of GFA (general business, professional, and financial office requirement)

1 space per 50 sq ft of Gross Floor Area for eating or drinking establishments.

Impact on Existing Drainageways

N/A This will be addressed by a stormwater Management plan associated with development

This will be addressed by a stormwater management plan associated with development

Impact on Floodplain No Floodplain Identified

Impact on Adjacent Properties

Residences on northeast side of Atherton St. have a larger buffer between General Commercial zoning with current use/zoning. This buffer will be smaller with proposed new zoning.

Residences on northeast side of Atherton St. have a larger buffer between General Commercial zoning with current use/zoning. This buffer will be smaller with proposed new zoning.

All properties in question abut a current General Commercial zone unless they are separated by a street. The largest impact to adjacent properties will be increased traffic on access streets. Blue Course Drive and Atherton Streets, as well as the Office Commercial on the north side of Atherton Street provide a buffer from other potential negative impacts to surrounding properties.

Impact on wetlands no wetlands identified

Impact on sinkholes Ferguson Township is almost entirely underlain by carbonate geology, which presents a sinkhole risk, however there are no known

sinkholes in this area. Impact on Woodlands Existing

woodlands would remain as they were likely a part of landscape plans.

Existing woodlands could be disturbed although development would still need to comply with landscape buffer ordinance

Existing woodlands could be disturbed although development would still need to comply with landscape buffer ordinance

Relationship to Transit Service

Transit generation associated with offices and bank.

Would likely increase transit slightly if all parcels were developed

Would likely increase ridership on the G and V routes as they are the closest stops located on Atherton at North Hills. General commercial uses are more likely to be destinations as they represent a wider array of potential community assets.

Recommendation: Ferguson Township Staff recommends that the seven parcels of Office Commercial on the south side of Atherton Street between Blue Course Drive and North Hills Place be rezoned to General Commercial. Furthermore, staff does not recommend solely rezoning the currently vacant 1308 North Atherton St (the original rezoning request) to General Commercial without rezoning the Office Commercial east and west of the parcel because this would borderline the definition of spot zoning.

Township of Ferguson

µ

LegendConsideration for Rezoning

Ë Ë Ë

Ë Ë Ë Corridor Overlay District (COD)C (General Commercial)OC (Office Commercial)R1 (Single Family Residential)R4 (Multifamily Residential)

Ë Ë Ë Ë Ë Ë Ë Ë Ë Ë Ë Ë Ë Ë Ë Ë Ë Ë Ë Ë Ë Ë Ë Ë Ë Ë Ë Ë Ë Ë Ë



























BLUE C

OURSE DR

N ATHERTON ST

LINN ST

NORTHLAND CTR

W NORTH HILLS

PL

W CLINTON AVE

MARTIN ST

N ALLEN ST

JOHNSON TER

24-012-,023-,0000-24-012-,022-,0000-

24-012-,021-,0000-24-012-,020-,0000-

24-012-,016-,0000-

24-012-,018-,0000-

24-012-,012-,0000-

0 0.1Miles

24-012-023-000024-012-022-000024-012-021-000024-012-020-000024-012-018-000024-012-016-000024-012-012-0000

Parcels for Analysis OC to C

November 6, 2014

CRPC Meeting Agenda

Page 10 of 11

ITEM 5.b

AMEND BUILDING HEIGHTS FOR PUBLIC SCHOOL BUILDINGS – STATE

COLLEGE BOROUGH – presented by Anne Messner This item provides the CRPC information regarding a request review a text amendment to increase the permitted building height for public school uses in the CP-2 Zoning District. THE ISSUE The applicant, the State College Area School District, has requested that the amendment permit public school buildings to be similar to the building height as permitted in the adjacent P-O Zoning district, on the south side of Westerly Parkway. This proposal would change the permitted building height for public school uses to 55 feet with additional height permitted for certain percentages of the roof area. Currently uses are limited to 35 feet in height in the CP-2 zoning district.

OTHER INFORMATION The text amendment would allow for public school uses to have greater height allowance with limitations. As the site was being reviewed for the anticipated changes to the high school building, it was determined the current height limitations, topography of the site and modern educational needs would limit the feasibility for the future high school building. These factors necessitate a text amendment. At their meeting of October 16, 2014, the Borough of State College Planning Commission made a recommendation to enact the ordinance to the Borough Council. This request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and facilitates construction of a contemporary high school on the current campus. The request is further support by overwhelming community support for the project and by the successful referendum conducted by the State College Area School District. PREVIOUS ACTION The CRPA has not previously reviewed this item. RECOMMENDATION CRPA staff recommends that the CRPC support the request and provide any comments or recommendation to the State College Borough Council for their consideration. ATTACHMENTS

1. State College Borough Memo 2. Zoning Map CP-2 Zoning District 3. Draft Ordinance

November 6, 2014

CRPC Meeting Agenda

Page 11 of 11

4. South Aerial Photograph 5. Building Height Graphic

Borough of State College MEMORANDUM

To: Jim May, AICP

Centre Regional Planning Agency From: Anne D. Messner, Planner Subject Proposed Zoning Text Amendment Date: October 24, 2014

I. Text Amendment Request and Background

At the October 6, 2014 Borough Council meeting, a request was received to consider a text amendment for the CP-2 Zoning District which would increase the permitted building height for public school uses. Borough Council referred this request to the Planning Commission to review. The applicant, the State College Area School District, has requested that the amendment permit public school buildings to be similar to the building height as permitted in the adjacent P-O Zoning district. This proposal would change the permitted building height for public school uses to 55 feet with additional height permitted for certain percentages of the roof area. Representatives from the State College Area School District will discussed the State High project design and introduced the proposed text amendment during the October 9, 2014 Planning Commission meeting. The language the State College Area School District would like to be added to the CP-2 zoning district is attached to this memo. During the October 16, 2014 meeting the Planning Commission made a recommendation to Council the text amendment should be enacted. Attached to this memo is an aerial, a section of the zoning map, renderings of the State High proposal and a schematic plan of the State High redesign.

II. Current Policy and/or Practice

At this time the building height limit is 3 stories and 35 feet. Similar ordinance language is in the PO District.

III. Other Background Information

The text amendment would allow for public school use to have greater height allowance with limitations. As the site was being reviewed for the anticipated changes to the high school building, it was determined the current height limitations, topography of the site and modern educational needs would limit the feasibility for the future high school building. These factors necessitate a text amendment.

Location of CP-2 Zoning District on high school property

ORDINANCE____________

AMENDING THE STATE COLLEGE BOROUGH ZONING ORDINANCE (CHAPTER XIX PART D OF THE CODIFICATION OF ODINANCES) BY ADDING THE HEIGHT REGUIREMENTS IN THE CP-2 ZONING DISTRICT RATHER THAN BY REFERENCE AND ADDING PROVISIONS FOR PUBLIC SCHOOLS

Be it ENACTED AND ORDAINED by the Borough Council of the Borough of State College, and it is hereby Enacted and Ordained by authority of same, as follows:

Section I. Amend the Codification of Ordinances, Chapter XIX, Part D, Section 1503. Height., to read as follows:

Section 1503. Height. The maximum height permitted in this District shall be: a. Buildings 35 feet (not to exceed 3 stories) b. Buildings or portions thereof used for Public Schools............... 55 feet (not to exceed 4

stories), except as provided for in Section 1503.d. of this chapter. c. All Other Structures 35 feet except as provided for in Section 503.d(2). d. Exceptions, Additions and Modifications to Height applicable in the

CP-2 Zoning District:

(1) Public Schools may exceed the height limit by the following: a. 5 feet for roof areas that occupy less than 75% of the building’s roof area b. 10 feet for roof areas that occupy less than 50% of the building’s roof

area. c. 15 feet for roof areas that occupy less than 25% of the building’s roof

area.

ENACTED AND ORDAINED this _____ day of ___________________, 2014 ATTEST: BOROUGH of STATE COLLEGE ____________________________ By: _____________________________ Sharon K. Ergler Assistant Borough Secretary President of Council EXAMINED AND APPROVED as an Ordinance this _____ day of ______________, 2014. ______________________________ Elizabeth A. Goreham Mayor

High School South Building (Source: Google Maps)

Planning Commission Agenda October 9, 2014

Page 34 of 38

matt

Cloud

CENTRE REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA6AD7E2DC-ECE4-41CD-B8E1... · 2014-10-28 · Please note,...

Documents

Transcript of CENTRE REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA6AD7E2DC-ECE4-41CD-B8E1... · 2014-10-28 · Please note,...