Despite the worries of neighboring property owners, Penn Township commissioners on Monday approved the rezoning of a Hyland Road property that would be the site of a proposed housing complex for people ages 55 and older.
Commissioners voted 4-1, with Paul Wersing opposed, to change the zoning of Donald and Carol Adams' 19.7-acre property from business and agricultural use to R-3 residential. CSW Financial LLC is interested in the property to build between 180 and 220 apartment units in a four-story building.
Some neighbors testified at an October hearing that the proposed apartment building would be incompatible with the rural character of their area in Penn Township. Some attended Monday's meeting but did not comment before the vote.
Township Solicitor Les Mlakar has described zoning district changes as “discretionary.”
He told the commissioners last month that they couldn't require an applicant for a rezoning to present a plan for the property, and they couldn't set conditions for a specific use of it.
The township's newest police officer has worked in neighboring Manor for more than four years.
Commissioners last week unanimously hired Robert Broome, pending his passing of a physical and drug and psychological testing.
Broome became a full-time officer in Manor in March after serving the borough on a part-time basis.
Penn Township will receive $25,432 for the sale of surplus asphalt millings to Tresco Paving Corp. of Plum.
Tresco, which had the township's road-paving contract in 2012, was the highest of three bidders for the materials.
Chris Foreman is a staff writer for Trib Total Media.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.