Council tables revised final supplemental subdivision for Cardinal Ridge at 2570 Alton Drive
March 23, 2025 | Franklin Park, Allegheny County, Pennsylvania
This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »
The Borough Council of Franklin Park on March 19 tabled consideration of a revised final supplemental subdivision application (S F-205-01) filed by Leterra Holdings LLC for the Cardinal Ridge South subdivision at 2570 Alton Drive in the M2 zoning district.
Council and staff said the application record contains conflicting or missing materials. Staff’s report and public remarks noted confusion over stormwater design (references to an underground facility in some submittals and above-ground facilities in others), missing or inconsistent architectural side elevations, incomplete homeowners-association (HOA) documents, and clarifications needed about steep-slope disturbance and building envelopes.
A developer representative who identified himself as an owner of Ontario Point LLC answered technical questions from council and staff. He said the development will operate under an HOA, that streets are intended to be dedicated to the borough, and that the stormwater area would be an underground facility to be maintained by the HOA. He also said the developer would submit HOA draft documents and additional drawings, including side elevations and conceptual sketches of patios or sunroom options.
Borough staff (Mr. Phillips and Mr. Folks, per the record) and members of the planning commission referenced prior approvals in 2022–2023 and sought confirmation that the latest set of materials matches what was presented to the planning commission. Staff requested final or draft HOA documents for solicitor review and updated drawings that show side elevations, end-wall architectural treatment, dimensions, and details that address limited- and conditional-use standards for multifamily units (zoning ordinance chapter 02/12 was cited in discussion).
A motion to table the application until the April meeting passed; the mover asked staff to update their report and the applicant to provide the outstanding items. The applicant indicated it would deliver a draft HOA document within days (the developer said a sample could be provided this week or early next week) and promised to supply revised drawings showing side elevations and building details. The council discussed a 90-day review expectation for complex submissions and directed staff to issue a written list of the outstanding items to the applicant.
The motion to table was made and seconded during the meeting; the transcript records the motion and that the motion carried. No final approval or denial was made at the March 19 meeting.
Council and staff said the application record contains conflicting or missing materials. Staff’s report and public remarks noted confusion over stormwater design (references to an underground facility in some submittals and above-ground facilities in others), missing or inconsistent architectural side elevations, incomplete homeowners-association (HOA) documents, and clarifications needed about steep-slope disturbance and building envelopes.
A developer representative who identified himself as an owner of Ontario Point LLC answered technical questions from council and staff. He said the development will operate under an HOA, that streets are intended to be dedicated to the borough, and that the stormwater area would be an underground facility to be maintained by the HOA. He also said the developer would submit HOA draft documents and additional drawings, including side elevations and conceptual sketches of patios or sunroom options.
Borough staff (Mr. Phillips and Mr. Folks, per the record) and members of the planning commission referenced prior approvals in 2022–2023 and sought confirmation that the latest set of materials matches what was presented to the planning commission. Staff requested final or draft HOA documents for solicitor review and updated drawings that show side elevations, end-wall architectural treatment, dimensions, and details that address limited- and conditional-use standards for multifamily units (zoning ordinance chapter 02/12 was cited in discussion).
A motion to table the application until the April meeting passed; the mover asked staff to update their report and the applicant to provide the outstanding items. The applicant indicated it would deliver a draft HOA document within days (the developer said a sample could be provided this week or early next week) and promised to supply revised drawings showing side elevations and building details. The council discussed a 90-day review expectation for complex submissions and directed staff to issue a written list of the outstanding items to the applicant.
The motion to table was made and seconded during the meeting; the transcript records the motion and that the motion carried. No final approval or denial was made at the March 19 meeting.
View full meeting
This article is based on a recent meeting—watch the full video and explore the complete transcript for deeper insights into the discussion.
View full meeting