East Vincent Township supervisors opened a conditional use hearing Thursday, August 20, on a proposal to build 52 new single-family homes on a Stony Run Road property commonly known as the Ruth Farm.
AQ Dev, LLC is seeking approval for a 53-home development, including the existing farmhouse, using the township's open space design option and transferable development rights. The two parcels involved are located in the township's Low Density Residential District.
The first night of the hearing focused largely on procedural matters, party status, and recommendations from the township's environmental advisory council (EAC) and planning commission. The applicant did not begin presenting witness testimony before the hearing was continued.
Supervisors granted party status to resident group East Vincent Advocacy and several neighboring property owners.
Before testimony began, Township Solicitor Joe Clement also raised several issues requiring clarification, including ownership of the two-parcel tract, references to an expired previous conditional use plan, the project's proposed use of public sewer, and documentation supporting its transferable development rights calculation. The applicant's attorney said those matters would be addressed through evidence and testimony.
Township Panels Raise Concerns
EAC Chair Molly Wagle spoke on behalf of the council, outlining concerns involving sewer availability, streams and riparian buffers, hydric soils, stormwater management, and potential flood hazards.
The EAC also recommended against two stormwater-related waivers identified in the project materials. Earlier in the hearing, however, the applicant said it was not asking supervisors to act on subdivision and land development waivers as part of the conditional use proceeding.
The planning commission recommended that supervisors deny the conditional use application in its current form.
Commission member Elaine Milito said the application lacked information needed to determine whether the proposal complies with township requirements. The commission identified unresolved issues involving ownership, sewer and water service, stormwater management, riparian buffers and streams, roadway access and circulation, transferable development rights, and other conditional use criteria.
Milito said resolving those issues could require substantial changes to the proposed locations and configuration of roads, lots, homes, stormwater facilities, and other improvements.
"At this stage, we believe that burden has not been met," Milito said before reading the commission's recommendation that supervisors deny the application and require the fundamental ordinance and site-design issues to be resolved.
Applicant, Opponents Outline Positions
Representing AQ Dev, attorney Charlie Gerbron said the applicant expects to demonstrate that the property can support what he described as a relatively modest development of 52 new homes while retaining the existing residence.
Gerbron noted that the property had previously received conditional use approvals for a 53-lot plan in 2023 and a 50-lot plan in 2004. He asked supervisors to keep an open mind and evaluate the current application based on the evidence presented during the hearing.
Carl Ewald, representing East Vincent Advocacy, said the organization intends to argue that the proposal fails to satisfy conditional use requirements involving sewer, water, stormwater, riparian buffers, streams, traffic, and emergency access.
East Vincent Advocacy is a volunteer-run, resident-based nonprofit that has been involved in local zoning and development issues for more than six years. The group — which works to protect the township's rural character and help residents participate in local government — has opposed prior development proposals involving the Ruth Farm property.
Bill Fields, a neighbor of the site who was granted party status, focused his opening remarks on drainage and groundwater conditions in the area.
Fields described the surrounding land as extremely wet and raised concerns that increased runoff from roads and other impervious surfaces could affect his property, including a pond he owns directly across from the proposed development.
The board ultimately decided not to begin direct testimony. Clement noted that the township engineer was unable to attend because of a personal matter and wanted to be present to hear the applicant's direct testimony.
The hearing was continued to Wednesday, September 16, at 6:30 p.m.
