Swarthmore Borough Planning Commission
March 21, 2007 7:30pm
Swarthmore Borough Hall Council Room
Meeting Minutes


Attending: Joe Foglio, David Grove, Tim Kearney, Chair, Tom Shaffer, Leslie Price, Laura Memeger, Al Federico arrived during the MMCP discussion. Mary Lou Parker attended on behalf of Borough Council.

Tim Kearney called the meeting to order at 7:30pm.

1. The February 21, 2007 meeting minutes were approved as revised.

2. The first order of business was further discussion of Borough Council’s questions regarding a demolition ordinance. Susan Wright commented with regard to a question raised at last month’s meeting that Pennsylvania case law has clearly established that designating a structure as historic is not a taking under the Pennsylvania Constitution. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court and the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court have both upheld ordinances precluding demolition.

Responding to David Grove’s question regarding the legal context of the discussion, Susan cited the Pennsylvania Constitution which states that historic resources are a public benefit. The Municipalities Planning Code which requires a plan regarding historic preservation in Sec. 301 and that the zoning ordinances shall provide for preservation of historic resources under Sec. 603,4,5. The Pennsylvania legislature has also created a structure for historic preservation in Act 167. The Swarthmore Town Center Revitalization Plan calls for the Borough to investigate adoption of historic designation as Goal C 7 and adoption of design guidelines providing for consistency with existing architecture under Strategy B 17. The Delaware County Planning Commission has recommended Swarthmore adopt a demolition ordinance.

The discussion then focused upon the lack of a conclusive list of what resources should be considered historic. The introduction to the survey of historic resources states that it is not a comprehensive list but rather a representative cross-section. There are other historic resources “intentionally or unintentionally omitted”. Susan suggested that referred to the need to update the list periodically by the Community to reflect changes in values, culture, taste, etc.

Tim commented that the aspect of taste makes it difficult to dictate what can be done with a property.

Susan suggested one could distinguish between contributing and non-contributing structures, perhaps with a public hearing.

Laura stated that the “arbitrary and capricious clause” makes it a concern to designate the whole town as historic.

Susan replied that was why the recommendation was to use the resources identified in the survey.

In response to Tim’s concern about a lack of criteria for determining what’s historic, Tom Shaffer agreed to find examples of ordinances other boroughs and towns were using.

Although several members of the Commission commented on the fact that changes to a building can be as detrimental to its historic nature as demolition, Mary Lou Parker suggested we limit our discussion to demolition. Tom pointed out that most towns that have a demolition ordinance have a HARB under Act 167 but Mary Lou said Borough Council had decided a while ago they did not want a HARB.

David Grove stated that just because something is old, it’s not necessarily historic and conversely there are some structures that deserve to be protected even though they’re not old, like a Frank Lloyd Wright house, if one existed in Swarthmore.

David reiterated the sense of the meeting from last months meeting that the Planning Commission is in favor of an ordinance requiring a delay in demolition rather than one precluding demolition to enable the Borough to alert the property owners of the significance of their property.

Tim Kearney will report to the Planning and Zoning Committee of Borough Council the substance of the Commission’s discussions.

3. The rest of the meeting was spent discussing how to prioritize and resolve the various land use, traffic and transportation recommendations in the proposed Multi-Municipality Comprehensive Plan. Planning and Zoning would like recommendations from the Planning Commission regarding what changes should be made to the BA ordinance. Mary Lou suggested we might want to engage Tom Hylton who’s been involved in Pottstown’s efforts, or someone else. Perhaps the Borough could obtain a grant for that purpose. Laura pointed out that Mr. Hilton is not writing the zoning ordinance for Pottstown. Leslie Price agreed to provide a short context for looking at the BA ordinance, based on the discussions of the Task Force.

Planning and Zoning also asked the Commission to look at the diversity of housing for rental in the Borough and to examine why renters leave. Phil Jefferson has volunteered to help with this. Jane Billings has a list of people who’ve left town.

In his absence Al Federico was suggested as the best person to head up the traffic calming suggestions which include establishing criteria for when it’s appropriate. Penn DOT has a traffic calming manual. Al arrived in time to agree to take this on and to look at Publication 383 which describes what warrants traffic calming.

It was agreed that the six items under Land Use should be considered first with emphasis on the BA zoning. The need for a comprehensive review of the Swarthmore zoning code for consistency with what Swarthmore considers important could be a very time consuming project. David Grove recommended getting information on as many of the individual items as we can before we develop an action plan. It was also suggested that we take advantage of Tom Shaffer’s biking expertise while he’s still on the Commission. Al suggested we take a look at what the Ardmore Preservation Group is doing.

The meeting was adjourned at 9:10 PM.

Respectfully submitted,

Leslie Reid Price
March Secretary