Radnor planners tell board historic ordinance needs work

After spending about 30 minutes discussing a possible ordinance to protect the township’s historic resources, the Radnor Township Planning Commission said it needs more work.

In June, township commissioners voted to have the planners review a possible historic ordinance overlay covering the entire township.

Depending on what details would be included, a historic ordinance could regulate alterations or demolition of designated historic buildings.

This week, members of the planning commission discussed the proposal. Citing numerous problems with a potential ordinance, the planning commission decided to send the issue back to the commissioners, saying it needed more work.

Planner Lane Vines described the proposed ordinance as a “taking” of property and indicated potential legal costs for both property owners and the township.

Details of a possible ordinance were outlined at a planning commission meeting in November but with little input from the commissioners at that meeting.

This week’s meeting allowed commissioners to discuss the ordnance in detail.

The information sent to the planning commission was based on a sample ordinance in Haverford Township.

Among the topics raised in a possible Radnor ordinance was the creation of an overlay district that would cover the entire township. They also said a list of all historic resources would have to be created. A historic committee with appointed members would be put in place to review projects.

The township already has an ordinance for its Historic and Architectural Review Board. But the jurisdiction only applies to Radnor’s three historic districts of North Wayne, South Wayne and Louella Court.

This new commission would address historic properties outside any established districts.

The main factor Radnor officials wanted to address was the potential for historic properties to be demolished.

“The main scope would be to prohibit the demolition or alteration of historic assets without the board of commissioner approval and obviously some penalties for noncompliance,” M.J. Frumin, planners chairman, said.

Planner Matt Golas said Radnor might not need such an ordinance since its not losing many historic properties.

“I think it’s pretty simple, if we were losing 10 historic sites a year, we definitely would need a historic preservation ordinance. Are we losing 10 historic sites a year? Are we losing one historic site a year? I don’t think so. So maybe we are doing things right here. Maybe we already have the answer. So I’m not in favor of not ramrodding a boilerplate historic preservation ordinance on the township, and I really don’t like the overlay,” said Golas

Among other issues planning commission members had with the potential ordinance, was a need for more public awareness of a possible new ordinance.

Planner Skip Kunda said the elephant in the room is that the public doesn’t seem to know the township is even discussing a historic ordinance, since “there were 50 empty seats” at the meeting.

“Well, I think a number of us have said that because the public hasn’t been involved so far that that’s a recommendation we’re making to the BOC that the public has to be in the loop,” Kunda said.

Planner Christopher Brubaker said the commissioners should have a full ordinance ready before sending it to the planning commission for review.

“If the board wants to do this, they need to get it better in order, and I think the right step is then to send it to us for our review and comment before they open it up fully for public comment,” Brubaker said.