After nearly a decade of successfully limiting large-scale building projects, the new Upper Pottsgrove Board of Commissioners is moving to undo years of legal and policy victories that guarded against overdevelopment.
For approximately eight years, the township—under the leadership of former Board President Trace Slinkerd—consistently pushed back against high-density housing proposals. Through a combination of zoning enforcement, legal challenges, and restricting waivers, the township was largely successful in curbing expansive development projects, including proposals affecting the Kummerer Road corridor.
However, at a recent Board of Commissioners meeting, several members expressed a markedly different position. “We can’t stop them,” one commissioner stated, referring to developers seeking to move forward with new projects. The comment has raised concern among residents who believed the township had already secured a favorable position through prior litigation and zoning decisions.
What Changed?
Critics point to Commissioner Elwood Taylor as a central figure in the shift. More than eight years ago, and through 2019 when he lost his reelection bid, Taylor supported development proposals that faced strong opposition from residents, as well as objections from township professionals, including the engineer and solicitor. Now, some residents and observers question whether his current influence—and relationships with legal and development interests—has contributed to a change in strategy among the board.
They argue that prior boards had already done the difficult work: defending the township’s zoning ordinances in court and successfully limiting the scope of proposed developments. From that perspective, maintaining those outcomes would require little more than continuing to uphold existing policies.
Disputed Claims
Commissioner Paretti, who also served on a previous board, stated during the meeting that “we can’t stop” developers. The board can stop developers, and the prior board did.
Opponents of new development note that while developers do have rights, those rights are limited to what is permitted under existing zoning regulations. In Upper Pottsgrove, much of the land in question is zoned R-80, allowing for low-density residential use—typically one home per two acres.
Under what is commonly referred to as “by-right” development, builders can proceed without discretionary approvals only if their plans fully comply with zoning and building codes. However, proposals for higher-density housing often require zoning changes, variances, and waivers—none of which the township is obligated to approve.
Zoning Board Controversy
Further fueling concern is the board’s recent decision to replace the solicitor for the Zoning Hearing Board. Critics view the move as an attempt to influence future decisions after the board previously declined to grant significant zoning relief for a major development proposal.
Transparency Questions
Questions have also been raised about transparency. A Right-to-Know request filed earlier this year sought access to a document reportedly drafted and distributed by Commissioner Taylor ahead of a public meeting. The township denied the request, prompting an appeal and the potential for litigation.
According to sources familiar with the situation, the document may contain information relevant to township decision-making on future development. However, without its release, the full context remains unclear.
Reports of Developer Meetings
Adding to the uncertainty are unconfirmed reports that Commissioners Taylor and Paretti may have met with representatives of a developer interested in the Kummerer Road area. While such meetings are not inherently improper, they can raise concerns if not disclosed publicly, particularly given the township’s prior legal stance.
At this time, no official confirmation has been provided regarding the reported meeting. Perhaps other members of the public will ask if any members of the BOC have met with the developers in the Kummerer Road corridor.
An Open Question
The central issue remains whether the township intends to continue defending its current zoning framework or shift toward accommodating new development proposals.
For residents concerned about growth, infrastructure, and land use, the coming months may prove pivotal. Public meetings and future board decisions will likely clarify whether Upper Pottsgrove maintains its long-standing position—or charts a new course.