Politics & Government

Middletown Twp. Council Tables Elwyn Development Plan Until Oct.

The township council agreed the land development applicant must address an issue of building atop unsteady ground before it can make a decision.

A proposed land development plan that would bring a townhouse development to was tabled and will be continued at the township council’s next meeting in October.

Elywn Inc., the applicant for the development, brought the plan to council at its Monday meeting along with ordinance amendments that would coincide with the land development plan.

The proposed development would bring 120 units to the more than 28 acres of land along Baltimore Pike opposite School Lane, Joseph Riper, the attorney for the applicant, said.

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

The proposed ordinance amendments included changing the zoning of two of the 28 acres the development would sit on, from R1 residential to SU-2, Special Uses and then to permit single family, attached dwelling units under the SU-2 ordinance. SU-2 currently only allows for mobile home use, Riper said.

The proposed 120 units would include twin and townhomes, with three types of two-car garages, some garages in the rear of the unit, some inside the unit and others in the front.

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

The proposed plan also included a 30-foot wide roadway throughout the development with parking spaces on one side of the road in some sections, three interior courtyards for multipurpose fields and tot lots and a traffic signal at the Baltimore Pike entrance. The traffic signal would need to be approved by the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation however since it is a state road, Charles Olivo, the engineer for the applicant, said.

Olivo explained that the proposal would also call for extensive cut and fill since the land is on a steep slope. Some of the units could sit on anywhere from 12 to 28 feet of fill, Olivo said.

Township Council and members of the public were most concerned with the properties sitting atop that much fill and becoming a danger years down the line.

Bringing in "fill," which can be dirt, sand, rock and stone, is often used to create artificial, elevated and level land for building property and to prevent flooding in low lying areas. However, as fill settles over the years, empty pockets could occur and result in property damage. Often times property foundations will be built below the fill, on steady ground.

David Sharbaugh, a resident and vice chairman of the township planning commission, said disturbing the slopes in that area would negatively impact the proposed properties.

"It would be premature to approve this tonight," he said. "When you build homes on fill you’re asking for problems."

The Township Engineer Art Rothe also agreed that building on such high fill would be dangerous and the foundations would need to go down several feet.

Olivo agreed with council and the public and said they would not build on fill and a geotechnical study would be done prior to anything being built. There are options for building foundations below the fill line, he said, or they could even eliminate those proposed units.

"We will not build on fill, I completely agree with that," Olivo said. "A geotechnical study will be done and we may need to eliminate or change those units along the high-fill lines."

The Township Solicitor Joseph D’Amico suggested the council table the discussion and continue it at the Oct. 24 meeting so the applicant can address these concerns.

"These issues need to be addressed now before council can make an informed decision," he said.

Council unanimously approved the continuation of the proposed land development plan until its Oct. 24 meeting. The usual Oct. 10 township council meeting is canceled due to the Columbus Day holiday.

The proposed ordinance amendments were also tabled until the next meeting.


Get more local news delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for free Patch newsletters and alerts.

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