On the agenda: Westwhiteland meeting — Data Center (Mar 3)

WEST WHITELAND TOWNSHIP
Planning Commission
Agenda
Tuesday, March 3, 2026
7:00 P.M.

Etiquette for
hybrid meetings

Meeting will be held in-person and via Zoom
Register for Zoom Meeting
Call by Phone: 1-646-558-8656
Meeting ID: 873 0897 0242
Passcode: 507637
Meeting Packets can be found on the Township website
Reminder to meeting participants: Please speak clearly into the microphone.
CALL TO ORDER
REVIEW OF MEETING MINUTES
1. Approval of Meeting Minutes: February 17, 2026.
PUBLIC COMMENT/CONCERNS/QUESTIONS
Comments or questions regarding issues NOT on the agenda should be raised at this time.
Members of the public will have an opportunity to ask questions and comment upon agenda
items during the discussion on those items.
PLANS
1. Weston Way Partners II Inc. (Weston Tract)
Address: 1400 Weston Way
First Review: Sketch Plan
Request: Revised concept plan and proposed Zoning Ordinance amendment for the
redevelopment of the former Weston Solutions office campus for residential use with singlefamily homes, pursuant to the cluster development option.
NEW BUSINESS
OLD BUSINESS
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Data Center draft ordinance update.
ADJOURNMENT
Next Meeting: March 17, 2026

MEMORANDUM
TO:

Planning Commission

FROM:

John R. Weller, AICP
Director of Planning and Zoning

SUBJECT:

The Weston Property: Revised concept plan and
proposed Zoning Ordinance amendment

DATE:

February 27, 2026

APPLICANT:

Weston Way Partners II, LLC
1273 Butler Pk.
Blue Bell, PA 19422

SITE ADDRESS:

1400 Weston Way
West Chester, PA 19380

TAX PARCELS:

41-6-77
41-6-82
41-6-87

ZONING:

R-1, Residential

DESCRIPTION:

Revised concept plan and proposed Zoning Ordinance
amendment for the redevelopment of the former Weston
Solutions office campus for residential use with singlefamily homes, pursuant to the cluster development option

41-6-80
41-6-83
41-6-88.2

41-6-81
41-6-84
41-6-88.2A

Background
The subject property is the Weston Solutions office campus along King Rd. It has a gross area
of 53.55 acres and is bound by King Rd. on the north, the US Route 202 expressway on the
west, and by residential neighborhoods on the south and east, which consist of single-family
homes on lots ranging in size from about two-thirds of an acre up to one acre.
The principal access to the site is Weston Way, a private street extending south from King Rd.
There is a secondary access to King Rd. from the west side of the property via Lewis La. and
Old Phoenixville Pk. Existing improvements include office buildings, parking lots, and several
historic resources, the most prominent of which include the Morstein Mansion, designed in 1898
and adaptively re-purposed by Weston for office space; a stable complex associated with the
mansion; and the Morstein train station, which is on the National Register of Historic Places.
There are no FEMA-designated floodplain areas or significant areas of steep slope on the property; the northern section is heavily wooded; two pipeline rights-of-way cross the tract.

1

Staff summarized the history of this tract in our memorandum dated October 10, 2025, so we
will not repeat it here. Suffice it to say that the property was in the Office/Laboratory (O/L)
zoning district for many years, which allowed the Weston operation by right. On November 13,
2024, the Board of Supervisors unanimously approved an amendment to the Zoning Map that
re-zoned this tract and a handful of surrounding properties from O/L to R-1, Residential.
The Applicant has submitted a conditional use application 1 for the development of the tract,
which the Planning Commission reviewed at the meeting of October 14, 2025. That plan used
the cluster design option, which is allowed in the R-1 district by §325-9.B(3) of the Zoning Ordinance. The intent of the cluster option is to promote open space preservation by allowing
single-family homes on smaller lots than normally required in exchange for permanent open
space. The cluster option may be used 2 on tracts of 25 acres or more. The minimum lot size is
22,000 sq.ft. (0.51 acre) of developable area and requires that at least 30% of the developable
area of the tract be open space. Section 325-26.C(1) provides a 20% density bonus for use of
the cluster option, with the bonus based upon a “yield plan” showing how many homes could
be built on the tract using the standard regulations. We noted that the Applicant had provided
such a plan earlier in 2025, demonstrating that the tract could be divided into 42 lots meeting
the R-1 district standards in §325-9.C. This Director reviewed this plan and confirmed that the
lots shown complied with the R-1 standards; he subsequently advised the Applicant that they
were entitled to up to 50 3 lots if they used the cluster option.
The plan we reviewed last October proposed 49 lots for development with single-family
detached homes, one lot to accommodate the historic Morstein mansion, 15.09 acres of open
space, and approximately 3,000 linear feet of new roads. The Zoning Officer determined that
the proposed lots all met the minimum size requirement, but questioned whether the proposed
open space met the standards in §325-26.C(4) of the Zoning; this concern was echoed by the
consultants who reviewed the plan.
The October 10 Staff memo advised that the plan failed to meet as many as eight of the twelve
conditional use criteria in §325-124.C(1) of the Zoning Ordinance. Staff further advised that
they found the design disappointing in a number of areas, with the open space design (including removal of trees) and the treatment of the historic resources being most prominent. In the
course of discussion at the October 14 meeting, the Commission expressed their agreement
with Staff while acknowledging the challenges presented by the tract. The Applicant stated that
they would review the Commission’s comments and return with a revised plan.
In the intervening months, the Applicant has paused the conditional use process and instead
prepared the attached concept plan for our consideration, advising that this design will require
amendment of the existing cluster development regulations. The Applicant has also provided a
copy of a proposed Zoning Ordinance amendment that would accommodate this design.

1

Required by §325-124.A(1) of the Zoning since the plan proposed more than fifteen new lots for residential
development.

2

§325-26 of the Zoning Ordinance.

3

20% of 42 is 8.4, rounded down to 8 additional lots. This was communicated to the Applicant’s engineer in an email from the Director dated January 21, 2025.

2

Tonight is the first presentation of the concept plan and Zoning Ordinance amendment to the
Planning Commission.
Staff Comment
We are being asked to consider two different items: a revised concept plan and an amendment
to the Zoning Ordinance needed to allow that concept to proceed.
The new concept plan is similar to what we reviewed in October 2025 in several ways: the road
configuration is essentially the same, and both versions propose fifty lots, including one lot for
the Morstein mansion. There are some critical differences, however, that respond to the
Commission’s comments:
•

The lot sizes are smaller, increasing the amount of permanent open space from 30% to
nearly 45%. While the configuration of the open space is similar to what was on the prior
plan, it is more useful simply because there is more of it and the individual areas are larger.

•

The new design preserves some of the woodland areas, including a buffer along King Rd.

•

Buffer areas from surrounding properties appear to be larger.

•

The new design still shows the relocation of the historic Morstein train station, but Staff
finds the new location preferable to what was shown before. Rather than being isolated in
an open space area, it is now placed to serve as an entrance feature, making it both more
visible from King Rd. and closer to its original location.

Staff would still like to see the preservation of additional historic resources, but we nevertheless
find this design to be much improved over what the Commission reviewed in October. Increasing the open space areas makes them more useful and allows for preservation of at least some
of the woods. The Historical Commission should comment upon the relocation of the former
train station building, but our initial impression is that the new location enhances the prominence and public awareness of the resource – and is sufficiently close to the original site to act
as a reminder of the rail line that once served this area.
As a “concept plan,” this submission has the same status as a sketch plan: it is to provide a
basis for discussion. While the Commission should comment and provide direction to the Applicant based upon their submission, there should not be any motion to approve or deny.

The proposed amendment to the Zoning Ordinance is limited to the cluster development provisions in §325-26 and §325-91; no changes are proposed to the base R-1 district 4 regulations in
§325-9. The Applicant is proposing the following changes, which are necessary to allow the
proposed site design.
•

The minimum lot size is reduced to a gross area of 19,000 sq.ft. from the current minimum
of 22,000 sq.ft net lot area.

•

The minimum rear yard is reduced to 20 ft. from the currently required 40 ft.

4

The cluster design option is permitted only in the R-1 district.

3

•

The minimum side yard is reduced to 15 ft. from the currently required 20 ft.

•

The proposed limit on building coverage is 4,356 sq.ft. All other sections of the Zoning
Ordinance express this limit as a percentage of the lot size: this figure is 22.9% of the
proposed new lot size minimum of 19,000 sq.ft.

•

Similarly, the proposed limit on impervious cover is 6,534 sq.ft., or 34.4% of 19,000 sq.ft.

•

What the amendment shows as §325-91.B(1) – allowing a bonus for the preservation of a
historic resource – is an existing provision. The proposed change is a new §325-91.B(2),
which has stricter limits on building and impervious cover for the lots that accommodate
historic structures compared to the other cluster lots.

While not included in the text of the proposed amendment, we note that “Zoning Data Tabulation” chart on the plan drawing lists an increase in the permanent open space requirement to
40% (currently 30%) among the proposed changes.
Staff offers the following thoughts for your consideration.
1. No change is proposed to the way in which the permitted number of lots is calculated, so
this amendment would not result in any increase in residential density above what is
currently allowed.
2. The proposed minimum lot size is only 3,000 sq.ft. less than the current minimum – a
reduction of less than 15%. The amendment specifies that this would be the gross area
rather than the current requirement that the minimum be based upon developable area.
Staff does not object to the reduction provided that it remains based upon developable
area: with the reduction, it is more critical that the lots provide useful private space for the
future owners. It appears that this change would not affect the proposed plan.
3. We do not object to the reduced yard setbacks, as they appear appropriate for the reduced
lot sizes.
4. The proposed limits on building and impervious cover are expressed in square feet rather
than as percentages of the lot size, which is how these limits are expressed in all other zoning districts. That being said, we do not object to this approach. In most applications, a
percentage limit allows the building and impervious areas to increase as the lot size
increases. However, developers using the cluster design option typically keep the lot sizes
as close to the allowed minimum as possible, so it is unlikely that we would have a situation
where a large lot would be prevented from reasonable development. Furthermore, it
appears that this approach would minimize the impact upon existing cluster developments,
as described below in more detail.
It appears that the limits in the proposed amendment are based upon this design, resulting
in the unusually precise limits when expressed in square feet. As noted above, based upon
a 19,000 sq.ft. lot, the proposed building coverage limit of 4,356 sq.ft. works out to 22.9%
and the proposed impervious coverage limit of 6,534 is 34.4%. The current limits (based
on a 22,000 sq.ft. lot) are 12% and 20%, respectively.
The Applicant should explain why they have expressed these limits in square feet and the
reasoning behind the precise number. The Commission should advise as to whether you
agree with their approach, as well as your thoughts on allowing these limits to be so much

4

larger than what is currently allowed. It should be noted that one of the stated purposes 5
of allowing a cluster option is to “reduce impervious surface and utilities, resulting in a
lesser increase in stormwater runoff.” The larger limits proposed appear to be inconsistent
with this statement.
If the cluster design standards are changed, they will apply not only to future development but
to all existing lots that were designed under the cluster provisions. This includes approximately
200 lots in Swedesford Chase and over 150 lots in Ryerss Hunt. Staff concern on this point is
mitigated by the proposed limits on building and impervious cover being expressed in square
feet rather than as a percentage. If these figures were expressed as percentages of the lot
size, the residents of those communities would suddenly be allowed additional coverage, and
that raises concern about the impact upon their stormwater management systems. However, a
review of a sample of properties in these communities show that the square footage of their
impervious cover is similar to what is proposed here.
As with the concept plan, the Commission should provide guidance to the Applicant regarding
the proposed amendment, but Staff advises that a formal motion is premature at this time.
Attachments
1. “The Weston Property” drawing, superimposed on an aerial photograph, prepared by Howell Engineering, dated January 29, 2026.
2. “Text Amendment Plan” (3 sheets), prepared by Howell Engineering, dated August 1, 2025.
3. Draft amendment to the Zoning Ordinance, prepared by Riley, Riper, Hollin and Colagreco, undated.
Plans\U thru Z\Weston\Conditional Use\PC memo – 260227

5 §325-26.(4) of the Zoning Ordinance.

5

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
WEST WHITELAND TOWNSHIP
CHESTER COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 325, “ZONING,” OF THE WEST
WHITELAND TOWNSHIP CODE OF ORDINANCES TO AMEND THE AREA
AND BULK REQUIREMENTS FOR CLUSTERING AND LOT AVERAGING
DEVELOPMENTS AND TO PROVIDE FOR OPTIONS FOR PRESERVATION
OF HISTORIC RESOURCES IN CONNECTION WITH A CLUSTER
DEVELOPMENT.
BE IT HEREBY ENACTED AND ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of West Whiteland
Township, Chester County, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania as follows:
Section 1.
Sub-section 325-26.D of Chapter 325, “Zoning,” of the West Whiteland
Township Code of Ordinances, is hereby amended as follows:
D.

Area and bulk regulations. For developments utilizing cluster development or
lot averaging, the following minimum area and bulk regulations shall apply:
(1)

Gross lot area (minimum for clustering or lot averaging): 19,000 square
feet.

(2)

Lot width at building line (minimum): 100 feet.

(3)

Lot width at street line (minimum): 50 feet.

(4)

Front yard (minimum): 50 feet.

(5)

Rear yard (minimum): 20 feet.

(6)

Side yard (minimum): 15 feet.

(7)

Building coverage (maximum): 4,356 square feet.

(8)

Total impervious coverage (maximum): 6,534 square feet.

(9)

Height (maximum): 35 feet.

Section 2.
Sub-section 325-91.B of Chapter 325, “Zoning,” of the West Whiteland
Township Code of Ordinances, is hereby amended as follows:
B.

#1798097v1

Cluster development. In developments proposing to
development option in accordance with Section 325-26:
1

use

the

cluster

(1)

One additional lot may be created in excess of the maximum number of
lots otherwise permissible under the terms of this chapter where such
lot will contain a historic resource to be preserved as part of the
development plan.

(2)

The maximum building coverage applicable to a lot that contains a
historic resource shall be 10% and the maximum impervious coverage
applicable to a lot that contains a historic resource shall be 25%.

Section 3.
The provisions of this Ordinance are severable, and if any section, sentence,
clause, part, or provision thereof shall be held illegal, invalid, or unconstitutional by any
court of competent jurisdiction, such decision of the court shall not affect or impair the
remaining sections, sentences, clauses, parts, or provisions of this Ordinance.
Section 4.

This Ordinance shall take effect immediately as provided by law.

ENACTED AND ORDAINED this _____ day of __________, 2026.
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
WEST WHITELAND TOWNSHIP
Brian Dunn
Chair
Rajesh Kumbhardare
Vice Chair
Libby Madarasz
Member

ATTEST:
______________________________________
Pam Gural-Bear, Township Manager

#1798097v1

2