public hearing - 11-18-9
TRANSCRIPT
ABINGTON TOWNSHIP
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
MONTGOMERY COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
- - -
Continued Hearing
Ordinance No. 1984Ordinance No. 1985
- - -
Wednesday, November 18, 2009Commencing at 7:30 p.m.
- - -
Abington Junior High Little TheatreSusquehanna Road
Abington, Pennsylvania
- - -
BOARD MEMBERS:
CAROL DIJOSEPH, President STEVEN KLINE ROBERT A. WACHTER MICHAEL O’CONNOR JOHN J. O’CONNOR WAYNE C. LUKER LES BENZAK ERNIE PEACOCK JAMES H. RING CAROL E. GILLESPIE LORI A. SCHRIEBER
- - -
Mark Manjardi Official Court Reporter 610-278-3272
COUNSEL APPEARED AS FOLLOWS:
MARC B. KAPLIN, ESQUIRE for Baederwood Limited Partnership
ROBERT REX HERDER, JR., ESQUIRE Solicitor for Abington Township
- - -
ALSO PRESENT:
BURTON T. CONWAY, Manager LAWRENCE T. MATTEO, JR., Code Officer MICHAEL NARCOWICH, County Planner
- - -
I N D E X {Amplified by RBS}_ _ _ _ _
Community Witnesses [except “Hammond” and “Benosky”] Page _______ ____
Brad Werden, 2048 Mount Carmel Avenue, Jenkintown 8Aaron Siegel, 902 Frazer Road, Rydal 12Robert Sklaroff, M.D. 1219 Fairacres Road, Rydal 13Paul E. Morse, Jr., 755, Glenn Road, Jenkintown 19Lewis Mifsud, Ph.D., 1315 Washington Lane, Rydal 24Matt Hammond, 2500 East High Street, Suite 650, Pottstown,
Pennsylvania 19464 26Michelle Cloud, 1413 Autumn Road, Rydal 31Elaine Cohen, Meetinghouse Road, Meadowbrook 36Sandi Philips, 1920 Sharon Road, Meadowbrook 41Sylvan Litz, 1570 The Fairway, Jenkintown 45Marsha Prybutok, 1426 Autumn Road, Rydal 47Carolyn Hoppe,110 Pennmore Place, Rydal 51Kathleen Schlerb, 1236 Washington Lane, Rydal 52Walter Hicks, 1533 Cherry Lane, Rydal 53Connie Zagerman, 1404 Noble Road, Rydal 55Susan Odhner, 1349 Warner Road, Rydal 59Toto Schiavone, 1115 Rydal Road, Rydal 62Mike Stewart, 1921 Harte Road, Rydal 78Vincent Magyar, Esquire, 1927 Cator Street, Phila. PA, 19146
Law firm of Curtin & Heefner, Morrisville, PARepresenting John Fedorowitz [964 Rydal Road, Rydal] 86
Russell Allen, 1510 Grove Avenue, Jenkintown, 19046 92Adam Benosky
Bohler Engineering, 1600 Manor Drive, Chalfont, PA 98Bob Wirtshafter, Ph.D., 1428 Cloverly Lane, Rydal 100Jodie Abrams, 1536 Warner Road, Meadowbrook 102Diane Reed, 1056 Huntingdon Road, Abington 105Philip Laska, 1204 Rosemont Lane, Abington, 19001 109Robert Sklaroff, M.D. 1219 Fairacres Road, Rydal 110Joseph Dratch, 1186 Mill Road Circle, Rydal 117Ralph Friedman, 1420 Hunter Road, Rydal
Representing the Rydal Meadowbrook Civic Association 122Carson Adcock, 1714 Brook Road, Rydal 129Paul Aloe, 1259 Cox Road, Rydal 132
- - -
4 1
2 MS. DIJOSEPH: Good evening.
3 Welcome to the Township of Abington Board of
4 Commissioners for a continued hearing for
5 Ordinance Number 1984 and Ordinance Number 1985.
6 Now the roll call, please.
7 MR. MATTEO: Wachter?
8 MR. WACHTER: Here.
9 MR. MATTEO: Peacock?
10 MR. PEACOCK: Here.
11 MR. MATTEO: Ring?
12 MR. RING: Here.
13 MR. MATTEO: Schreiber?
14 MS. SCHREIBER: Here.
15 MR. MATTEO: Zappone?
16 (No response.)
17 MR. MATTEO: Luker?
18 MR. LUKER: Here.
19 MR. MATTEO: Lynott?
20 (No response.)
21 MR. MATTEO: Gillespie?
22 MS. GILLESPIE: Here.
23 MR. MATTEO: Benzak?
24 (No response.)
25 MR. MATTEO: Jay O’Connor?
5 1
2 MR. J. O’CONNOR: Here.
3 MR. MATTEO: Kline?
4 MR. KLINE: Here.
5 MR. MATTEO: Carlin?
6 (No response.)
7 MR. MATTEO: Michael
8 O’Connor?
9 MR. M. O’CONNOR: Here.
10 MR. MATTEO: Myers?
11 (No response.)
12 MR. MATTEO: Madam President?
13 MS. DIJOSEPH: Here.
14 At this time, I will ask you
15 to stand for the Pledge of Allegiance.
16 I would like to thank all of
17 you for coming. I know it wasn’t easy to find a
18 parking spot tonight, and I see many of you are
19 seeking seats and getting settled in. But we do
20 want to start because we only have the room until
21 ten o’clock, at which time we will be out of here,
22 if not before. So we are going to start now.
23 At this time, I would like to
24 call on Mr. Matteo, Larry Matteo, who is head of
25 our Code Enforcement land development and what I
6 1
2 would like him to do, what I would ask him to do
3 is review what we did at last or first part, if
4 you will, of this hearing.
5 Larry, if you will do a recap
6 for us.
7 MR. MATTEO: Thank you. At
8 the last meeting, on October 14th, the applicant
9 presented their application on these ordinances to
10 this body. At that time, we took questions from
11 Commissioners and then from the residents. And I
12 believe, at that time, it became a little late and
13 we had to stop the questioning portion of the
14 hearing.
15 We are going to go into
16 testimony, but we were just asking questions of
17 the applicant at that time. And I think we can
18 continue at that point, because I’ve spoken to Mr.
19 Kaplin tonight and he doesn’t have any further
20 presentation to make.
21 MS. DIJOSEPH: He does or
22 does not?
23 MR. MATTEO: He does not.
24 I’m sorry. He does not.
25 MS. DIJOSEPH: All right. So
7 1
2 we did finish with questions.
3 MR. MATTEO: Well, we can
4 continue that because --
5 MS. DIJOSEPH: Maybe at this
6 point we could do questions and comments.
7 Would that be agreeable to
8 you, Mr. Kaplin?
9 MR. KAPLIN: Certainly.
10 MS. DIJOSEPH: Okay. So let
11 us do it that way.
12 MR. MATTEO: Carol, why don’t
13 we start with questions? I think a couple of
14 people had questions at that time. If there are
15 no questions, then we will go into the comment
16 section.
17 MS. DIJOSEPH: All right.
18 MR. MATTEO: If I may add
19 also, when we get into the comment section, the
20 people in the ordinance will be sworn in for their
21 testimony at that time, and they must give their
22 name and address.
23 MS. DIJOSEPH: All right.
24 Thank you.
25 MR. MATTEO: Thank you.
8 1
2 MS. DIJOSEPH: All right.
3 Are there any members of the audience at this time
4 who have a question? And, if so, you will come
5 forward and use the podium up here where the
6 microphone is up front.
7 Any questions?
8 Yes, sir? Do you want to
9 come forward to the podium?
10 MR. WERDEN: I am Brad
11 Werden, 2048 Mount Carmel Avenue.
12 MS. DIJOSEPH: Will you speak
13 into the microphone, please?
14 MR. WERDEN: I have been
15 following the goings on about the Brandolini
16 property.
17 My question is regarding the
18 zoning as it stands and as it’s proposed. There’s
19 a question that the rear piece of the shopping
20 center property carries with it an R-1 zoning.
21 There’s a question as to how that may have been
22 arrived at. It is my understanding, from having
23 looked at zoning maps and The Fairway at large
24 that all of the other properties are in a PB
25 District. I think that it would be easiest and
9 1
2 most expeditious to solve this problem if we
3 change the R-1 to a PB and let the developer
4 build --
5 MR. MATTEO: Mr. Werden, I
6 appreciate your comments. I think right now we’re
7 just asking questions, sir. But you’re making a
8 statement.
9 MS. DIJOSEPH: You started
10 with a question.
11 MR. MATTEO: You will have
12 that opportunity to make statements, later on in
13 the proceedings.
14 MS. DIJOSEPH: But you did
15 start with a question.
16 MR. MATTEO: What is your
17 question?
18 MR. WERDEN: I’m raising the
19 question that there should be consideration as
20 to --
21 THE AUDIENCE: That’s not a
22 question.
23 MR. WERDEN: Thank you.
24 MR. MATTEO: You will have a
25 time for this.
10 1
2 MS. DIJOSEPH: I think Mr.
3 Werden might have been asking, why are we not
4 considering changing the R-1 to PB. I think that
5 might be the question.
6 Would that be the question,
7 Mr. Werden?
8 MR. WERDEN: Yes.
9 MS. DIJOSEPH: All right.
10 Would anyone like to address that question?
11 Mr. Kaplin?
12 MR. KAPLIN: It’s a very
13 interesting question because I, as I’ve tried to
14 explain the last time -- and I’m not sure that the
15 people in the audience understand this.
16 Back almost a year ago, we
17 filed what’s called a challenge or request for a
18 curative amendment with this Board challenging the
19 validity of the zoning of the piece in the back,
20 the eight acres. This gentleman is correct. I’m
21 not sure that everything around it is PB. But
22 everything around that eight-acre piece is
23 something other than PB. And we filed a challenge
24 to the validity of that zoning. That zoning, in
25 my opinion, is what’s called reverse spot zoning.
11 1
2 We took our challenge to the
3 Township Planning Commission, as we are required
4 to do under the Municipalities Planning Code, and
5 we explained the spot zoning nature of the eight
6 acres. We also showed a possible plan for
7 development of redevelopment of the entire
8 property under the PB.
9 At the end of that meeting,
10 the Planning Commission asked us -- I guess the
11 best way to say it is, what would you really like
12 to do? And that resulted in a dialogue with the
13 Planning Commission and the Township. And what we
14 said was that we would really like to redevelop
15 the center as we have shown on these drawings,
16 which are essentially the drawings that have been
17 shown to the Planning Commission almost a year
18 before, in April of ‘08.
19 So, the short answer to that
20 question is, yes, that was our original request
21 after three or three-and-a-half years of a
22 stalemate. We said, yes, change it to PB, and we
23 will figure out how to develop it or redevelop it
24 in accordance with the PB District.
25 I’m not sure that this is the
12 1
2 right place or whether you want to do it at this
3 time, but we have a plan that shows how it could
4 be developed. It’s not our ideal plan. It
5 certainly is not. But it is not the proverbial
6 bad plan either. It was not submitted to scare
7 people. It is realistically what could be done.
8 This is much better. We
9 thought the Township and the staff recognized
10 that, and that’s why we have been in a dialogue
11 for seven or eight months to come up with this
12 ordinance.
13 I hope that clears some of
14 this up.
15 MS. DIJOSEPH: Okay. Thank
16 you.
17 Are there any other questions
18 from anyone in the audience?
19 Yes, sir? Come forward,
20 please.
21 MR. MATTEO: Please state
22 your name and address.
23 MR. SIEGEL: Aaron Siegel,
24 902 Frazer Road, Rydal.
25 My question is, has there
13 1
2 been a look at what the ratables would be if
3 indeed this project were to go forward and how
4 that might impact Abington resident taxes?
5 MS. DIJOSEPH: Mr. Kaplin?
6 MR. KAPLIN: Mr. Siegel, we
7 submitted to the Board a fiscal impact study. It
8 was given to the Board a month and a half ago. We
9 had a professional planner apply what’s called the
10 Rutgers’ method. I believe it compared present
11 ratables and future ratables under our proposed
12 plan. It’s a statistical analysis. It’s a model
13 that is widely used. It requires the inputting of
14 a lot of assumptions. We have not brought it out.
15 We have given it to the Township for review. It’s
16 extremely positive, particularly to the School
17 District.
18 MS. DIJOSEPH: Thank you.
19 Yes?
20 MR. SKLAROFF: Robert
21 Sklaroff, S-K-L-A-R-O-F-F, 1219 Fairacres Road,
22 F-A-I-R-A-C-R-E-S, Rydal.
23 Two questions.
24 One was mentioned to me a few
25 weeks ago, and, that is, I understand that fire
14 1
2 engines can’t get back there. And the response
3 antidotally was the building should be made
4 fireproof or something. I would like to find out
5 what the fire protection situation is going to be.
6 That’s part one.
7 Part two. I reviewed the
8 Traffic Planning and Design, Incorporated, report
9 of July 13th, ‘09. It looked at four
10 intersections. And without going into what I was
11 going to do was testimony, I will just cut to the
12 chase. It only advised really redesigning the
13 intersection at The Fairway/Rydal Road, and it
14 also does not take into account the potential
15 traffic impact of the Old York Road corridor
16 regarding the access to the railroad station.
17 MR. MATTEO: Your question
18 is?
19 MR. SKLAROFF: I know. That
20 was a background. I know.
21 So now my question is -- I
22 thought it was important for people to know that
23 fact.
24 MR. MATTEO: I understand.
25 But you will have time to testify.
15 1
2 MR. SKLAROFF: I’m trying to
3 cut out the testimony and get to the facts.
4 So the question arises that,
5 in light of the fact that this Traffic Planning
6 Design question is inherently flawed because it
7 does not take into account known information. In
8 light of the fact is, intuitive, that even in
9 non-rush hours, there is a lineup between the
10 bridge and major intersection of Susquehanna.
11 It seems to me that a new
12 report should be issued which would reflect the
13 truth of the fact that you already have a traffic
14 jam.
15 So could that question be
16 addressed in detail?
17 MS. DIJOSEPH: Mr. Kaplin?
18 MR. KAPLIN: I can, Mr.
19 Sklaroff.
20 MR. SKLAROFF: Doctor.
21 MR. KAPLIN: Excuse me. I
22 think I explained this before, but I will go
23 through it again. We are at the zoning stage.
24 We’re not at the land development stage.
25 However, because we knew that
16 1
2 this issue, just like we knew the fiscal impact
3 would come up, we had a traffic study prepared.
4 We hired Traffic Planning and Design that
5 represents many, many municipalities. And what we
6 asked them to do was to determine the additional
7 traffic that would be generated by this
8 development. We compared it with what the
9 shopping center would normally generate in terms
10 of traffic and what the differential would be.
11 The methodology was the first
12 draft of the traffic report was given to Mr.
13 Matteo who sent it to the Township’s traffic
14 consultant, McMahon & Associates, and they were
15 asked, is this methodology correct? Would you
16 review the report?
17 McMahon came back to Matt
18 Hammond, our traffic engineer, and said, we would
19 like you to assess this using a somewhat different
20 methodology. Matt did that.
21 It turned out that the
22 original methodology was more conservative. By
23 more conservative, it showed that our development
24 would create more traffic than the methodology
25 that McMahon had suggested. So McMahon agreed
17 1
2 that the methodology that showed the additional
3 amount of traffic -- the additional amount of
4 traffic was correct.
5 The second phase of that --
6 and I assume that this is what Dr. Sklaroff is
7 objecting to -- was that the traffic engineers
8 then what they called distributed the traffic over
9 the road network during the peak hours and
10 assessed the impact and what the changes would be
11 in the intersections in the surrounding area.
12 Now, if the intersection was
13 already at a Level F, obviously a little more
14 traffic is not going to help. And that’s what the
15 traffic engineers found. The additional traffic
16 from the development is not that significant at
17 any one place so as to drastically change any
18 existing intersection.
19 So what we have proposed in
20 that traffic -- what we suggested in the traffic
21 impact study was, look, we’re going to make a
22 contribution. We would be willing to make a
23 contribution to the Township in some significant
24 way. We suggested Rydal Road and The Fairway. We
25 suggested a straightening out of that intersection
18 1
2 that’s been proposed as long as I can remember.
3 The cost of that five hundred and ten or twenty
4 thousand dollars, we said, and we have said it in
5 public, we will make those improvements or we will
6 commit to make those improvements in the land
7 development process or we will commit to use that
8 money on some other intersection that the Township
9 would designate.
10 We have also provided for a
11 light at our main entrance that, obviously, we
12 want to have and will benefit us. It will also
13 create a walkway -- a pedestrian walkway to the
14 condominiums across the street.
15 I hope that explains some of
16 the traffic information.
17 THE AUDIENCE: How about the
18 fire?
19 MR. KAPLIN: Good question.
20 Thank you.
21 I don’t know where Dr.
22 Sklaroff got his information about fire trucks
23 can’t get wherever he thinks fire trucks can’t
24 get. We’re not at the building stage yet. But
25 there are many, many mixed use developments that
19 1
2 are less intense than this. These buildings would
3 be totally sprinklered. They would have to comply
4 with the National Fire Protection Code. And it is
5 entirely possible to make the structure garage
6 accessible for fire vehicles, and the fire people
7 will address this I’m sure. But what I am told
8 repeatedly is that fires today are fought -- in
9 buildings such as this, are fought not by the
10 trucks but by the fire protection systems, the
11 stand-pipe systems that are installed. And we
12 will comply with all of the fire requirements,
13 fire protection requirements.
14 At this stage, at building
15 permit stage, hopefully, we will get there.
16 Thank you.
17 MS. DIJOSEPH: Thank you.
18 Yes?
19 MR. MORSE: Paul E. Morse,
20 M-O-R-S-E, Junior, 755, Glenn Road, Jenkintown,
21 19046.
22 I have a question regarding
23 the number of school-aged children that the 266
24 apartments are expected to put into the community.
25 MR. KAPLIN: That’s in the --
20 1
2 let me find the fiscal impact study. The fiscal
3 impact study says the following, Mr. Morris:
4 Anticipated number of public school students from
5 the proposed development. And then there’s a
6 formula, number of school-aged children per
7 dwelling times the number of dwellings, obviously.
8 The one bedroom units and two bedroom units, based
9 on this formula, would result in an anticipation
10 of fifteen children. The footnote says, based
11 upon information contained in, quote, residential
12 demographic multipliers prepared by the Rutgers’
13 University Center for Urban Policy in June 2006,
14 there will be an average of .04 public school
15 students per one-bedroom unit and .07 per
16 two-bedroom units.
17 MR. MORSE: I have a
18 follow-up question, if I may?
19 MS. DIJOSEPH: Go ahead.
20 MR. MORSE: The follow-up
21 question is, I’m interested in the formula that
22 was used because, according to the National
23 Multi-Housing Council for school-aged children in
24 apartments, it’s .31. And if you multiply .31
25 times 266, you come to about 82 school-aged
21 1
2 children. And you multiply that by the cost to
3 educate the children of about $10,000 in the
4 Abington community, puts an impact on this
5 community of almost a million dollars.
6 And so I’m curious what
7 formula Rutgers used and what formula the
8 developer used.
9 MR. KAPLIN: We used the
10 Rutgers’ formula. The Rutgers’ formula is the
11 recognized formula. It was not prepared by -- it
12 was not prepared by a developer or developer
13 organization. You will have to talk to the
14 Township people, but I think that they will tell
15 you that the Rutgers’ formula is the accepted
16 formula.
17 Now, you’ve taken a number
18 from some -- I don’t know where you got the number
19 from.
20 MR. MORSE: National
21 Multi-Housing Council. And they are in favor of
22 apartments. This is a pro-apartment number.
23 MR. KAPLIN: But what you’re
24 taking is an across-the-board. I don’t know
25 whether you’re talking -- I don’t know exactly
22 1
2 what numbers you used. But we’re using one
3 bedroom and two bedrooms only. We are not
4 using -- we are not using three bedrooms or
5 anything like that.
6 Charlie Guttenplan, our
7 planner, has told us that across-the-board,
8 Charlie --
9 MR. GUTTENPLAN: County-wide.
10 MR. KAPLIN: County-wide,
11 including all types of apartments, the number is
12 .08 children in multi-family buildings, that
13 includes three-bedroom buildings -- three-bedroom
14 units. And that would only be twenty-one kids.
15 But, from an experienced
16 point-of-view, I have a number of clients who have
17 built newer apartments similar to this, and they
18 all report the same thing. The numbers of
19 children in newer apartments are very, very low.
20 Now, I will tell you this. I
21 have seen other planners take the fifteen children
22 and say -- and go and make another calculation on
23 top of that. And the calculation they make is,
24 they say, okay, let us check the census
25 population. What percentage of the children are
23 1
2 in private school? What percentage of the
3 children are in parochial school. And they would
4 then lower the fifteen to something less.
5 For whatever it’s worth,
6 these numbers are consistent. This fifteen is
7 consistent with what I’ve seen the planners come
8 up with and what I’ve seen the apartment owners
9 determine from empirical studies. We believe that
10 this is an accurate number.
11 MR. MORSE: I’m sure you do.
12 But you’ve referenced your
13 experience, and I would like to reference my
14 experience on the Abington School Board for ten
15 years. Certainly if one looks at Mount Vernon
16 Garden Apartments, there’s certainly quite a few
17 students going into the Abington School District
18 from there and other apartments throughout there.
19 So I have documentation that
20 indicates that your numbers are way below.
21 Thank you.
22 MR. KAPLIN: Thank you.
23 MS. DIJOSEPH: Any other
24 questions?
25 MR. KLINE: Mr. Morse, can I
24 1
2 ask one question?
3 MR. MORSE: Certainly.
4 MR. KLINE: Your figure for
5 .31, was that for one bedroom or two bedrooms?
6 MR. MORSE: They didn’t
7 specifically go into that aspect of the National
8 Multi-Housing Council.
9 MR. KLINE: One other
10 question.
11 Mr. Narcowich, do you have
12 any information that the County uses in situations
13 such as this type of development?
14 MR. NARCOWICH: We do have
15 some numbers. I don’t have that at any disposal,
16 but I could research some for you.
17 MR. KLINE: Thank you.
18 MR. MIFSUD: I am Dr. Mifsud.
19 I am a forensic physicist and professional
20 engineer. I live at 1315 Washington Lane, Rydal,
21 PA 19046.
22 I have a question regarding
23 the traffic report for Mr. Kaplin.
24 Does your traffic report,
25 anywhere in your traffic report, mention a study
25 1
2 and a prediction of the potential problems which
3 may arise as a result of these three factors;
4 bottlenecks, traffic density, traffic waiting and
5 queuing times? Are these factors at all mentioned
6 anywhere in your report, sir?
7 MR. KAPLIN: Give them to us
8 again.
9 MR. MIFSUD: Traffic density.
10 MR. KAPLIN: Density --
11 sorry.
12 MR. MIFSUD: Traffic
13 bottlenecks.
14 MR. KAPLIN: And what was
15 the --
16 MR. MIFSUD: Traffic waiting
17 and queuing time.
18 MR. KAPLIN: Matt?
19 The answer is yes.
20 MR. MIFSUD: The answer is,
21 no, sir. I have the report with me. There isn’t
22 a single word that it’s mentioned. There is no
23 prediction regarding that.
24 MR. KAPLIN: Here’s --
25 MR. MIFSUD: Will you go on
26 1
2 record that you said, no, and I said, yes, or you
3 said, yes, and I said, no?
4 MR. KAPLIN: I’m not here --
5 excuse me.
6 MR. MIFSUD: I raised the
7 question.
8 MR. KAPLIN: May I continue
9 the answer?
10 MS. DIJOSEPH: Yes. Mr.
11 Kaplin, go on.
12 MR. MIFSUD: Go ahead.
13 MR. KAPLIN: Matt. This is
14 Matt Hammond, our traffic engineer.
15 MR. HAMMOND: The answer to
16 that question again, Marc, is, yes.
17 MR. MATTEO: Excuse me.
18 - - -
19 MATTHEW HAMMOND, having been
20 duly sworn, testified as follows:
21 - - -
22 MR. HAMMOND: Matt Hammond,
23 H-A-M-M-O-N-D, 2500 East High Street, Suite 650,
24 Pottstown, Pennsylvania 19464.
25 BY MR. KAPLIN:
27 1
2 Q. Matt, before we get started, you are a
3 licensed professional engineer in the Commonwealth
4 of Pennsylvania?
5 A. I am.
6 Q. With a specialty in traffic planning and
7 design?
8 A. That is correct.
9 Q. Thank you.
10 A. The answer to the question, again, is, yes.
11 The analysis that was performed does take into
12 account bottlenecks, traffic congestion, queuing,
13 as well as traffic density.
14 MR. MIFSUD: Page number,
15 please?
16 MR. HAMMOND: Let me finish
17 answering.
18 MR. MIFSUD: Thank you.
19 MR. HAMMOND: The analysis --
20 the specific analyses are not included within the
21 report. The summary of the analysis that takes
22 into account all of those factors is. And that is
23 included in tables --
24 MR. MIFSUD: On page --
25 MR. KAPLIN: Excuse me,
28 1
2 Doctor. Will you let Mr. Hammond finish his
3 answer?
4 MR. MIFSUD: Certainly.
5 MR. HAMMOND: Does include it
6 in Table 7 and 8, is included in Tables --
7 starting on Page 6. At the bottom of Page 6, it
8 talks about capacity analysis from the study area
9 intersections. And you can see the last paragraph
10 talks about these analyses were conducted
11 according to the methodologies contained in the
12 2000 Highway Capacity Manual, or HCM, for the
13 following conditions.
14 MR. MIFSUD: Show me the
15 words.
16 MR. KAPLIN: Excuse me.
17 MS. DIJOSEPH: Just a minute.
18 Mr. Hammond, do the two of
19 you have the same report?
20 MR. MIFSUD: Absolutely.
21 MS. DIJOSEPH: Are you sure
22 of that?
23 MR. MIFSUD: Certainly. I
24 bought it from you, from the Township.
25 MS. DIJOSEPH: I believe Mr.
29 1
2 Hammond is giving you page numbers.
3 MR. HAMMOND: Page 6. It is
4 on your left-hand side. No. Right down there.
5 Go to the last paragraph, please, that I just
6 referred to. These analyses were conducted
7 according to the methodologies contained in the
8 2000 Highway Capacity Manual for the following
9 conditions.
10 Now, if you go to the next
11 page, Pages 7 through 12, Tables 7, 8 and 9, those
12 items contain within the table are referred to as
13 levels of service. The levels of service analysis
14 take into account many different factors with
15 regard to traffic, queuing being one of them,
16 bottleneck being one of them, traffic density
17 being one of them, the congestion of the roadway
18 being one of them, the grades of the roadway and
19 so on and so forth.
20 So, while the actual
21 analyses’ printouts are not included in the study,
22 the summary of those printouts are included in
23 Tables 7, 8 and 9.
24 MR. MIFSUD: So, in this
25 case, you tell us that the actual number of
30 1
2 traffic moving here and there and your prediction
3 of the number of traffic, but you’re not prepared
4 to tell us the actual waiting times and density of
5 traffic by number the way you did by actually
6 standing --
7 MS. DIJOSEPH: You need to
8 use the microphone.
9 MR. MIFSUD: Sorry. I
10 apologize.
11 MR. HAMMOND: Actually, the
12 analyses do say the waiting times, according to
13 the levels of service.
14 MS. DIJOSEPH: May I suggest
15 something? Perhaps, Doctor, after the meeting,
16 perhaps you and Mr. Hammond, if you wouldn’t mind,
17 Mr. Hammond, maybe you can point out to the Doctor
18 exactly what it is and where it is in the study.
19 Would you mind doing that?
20 MR. HAMMOND: I would be more
21 than happy to do that.
22 MR. MIFSUD: I would like to
23 make a comment. I know where he’s coming from.
24 He’s saying that because these are legitimate ways
25 of doing things it’s included.
31 1
2 But not what he’s got here is
3 legitimate. But he excluded doing those
4 calculations. I have no doubt about this.
5 MS. DIJOSEPH: Okay. Thank
6 you.
7 Are there any other questions
8 at this time?
9 Come forward, please.
10 MS. CLOUD: Michelle Cloud,
11 1413 Autumn Road, Rydal, PA 19046, C-L-O-U-D.
12 Real quick. Is there any
13 aforethought or study that has been done that
14 looks at the impact of the adjacent community
15 behind the condominiums and behind Rydal Road and
16 The Fairway? And, also, did that study or the
17 studies that you have done, do you look at how the
18 people living in the apartments will be using the
19 community as a whole?
20 Because, as it is now, the
21 community uses those, and I think that’s part of
22 the rub that’s going on with some of the people
23 coming up here talking because they’re my
24 neighbors and nearby areas. Part of the rub is a
25 lot of cut-through streets, older area, which has
32 1
2 not really been addressed at this point with what
3 we have right now.
4 So I need to know how -- if
5 you’ve looked at how the apartments would utilize
6 the community in the surrounding areas.
7 MR. KAPLIN: I’m sorry. The
8 community as a whole or streets? And, if so, what
9 streets are you talking about?
10 MS. CLOUD: I’m looking at
11 behind the condominiums where Rydal Road
12 between -- in particular, between Rydal Road going
13 I guess it would be east up to, like, Meetinghouse
14 Road, over towards Alvethorpe Park. Because that
15 area is, especially during business hours, is a
16 very busy, busy area to circumvent Old York Road,
17 to circumvent Washington Lane.
18 MR. MATTEO: Stop. Maybe
19 he’s getting confused.
20 Are you saying the
21 condominiums would include --
22 MS. CLOUD: Or any of the --
23 MR. MATTEO: Do you mean
24 Rydal East Apartments?
25 MS. CLOUD: Yes. The ones on
33 1
2 the other side of --
3 MR. MATTEO: The other side
4 of the street?
5 MS. CLOUD: Behind the
6 railroad station.
7 MR. MATTEO: I think he’s
8 getting confused.
9 MR. KAPLIN: Let me -- I’m
10 not a hundred percent sure. Let me ask you a
11 question or two.
12 Across the street from the
13 Baederwood Center are condominiums.
14 THE AUDIENCE: No. They’re
15 co-ops.
16 MR. MATTEO: They’re
17 apartments.
18 MS. DIJOSEPH: Rydal East and
19 Rydal West.
20 MS. CLOUD: You looked at
21 where The Fairway and Rydal Road meets; correct?
22 MR. KAPLIN: Right.
23 MS. CLOUD: If you make a
24 right going down Rydal Road, right there, there’s
25 a whole host of communities back behind there.
34 1
2 Have you looked at how the
3 traffic will impact that community? There’s my
4 street, Autumn Road. There’s Pepper. There’s
5 Noble. There’s Fairacres, Frog Hollow, a whole
6 host of streets back there, a whole host of young
7 families living back there.
8 MR. KAPLIN: Well --
9 MS. CLOUD: Have you looked
10 at how the traffic will impact back there?
11 MR. KAPLIN: Let me see if I
12 can answer that.
13 What we did was in two steps.
14 I’ve tried to explain it a minute ago. I’m not
15 sure I was clear.
16 First of all, what we --
17 MR. MATTEO: Sorry, Marc.
18 MR. KAPLIN: I don’t want to
19 be distracted by the board. I would like to try
20 and answer your question.
21 We’ve tried to do it in two
22 pieces. The first thing that we’ve tried to do
23 was through the methodology I explained to
24 determine how much additional traffic the new
25 development would create as opposed to the
35 1
2 existing level of development. And we got
3 numbers. We got different numbers for different
4 times on different days.
5 MS. CLOUD: Could I ask a
6 question with that?
7 MR. KAPLIN: Let me --
8 MS. CLOUD: Was it business
9 or taken into business and the apartments you
10 would have?
11 MR. KAPLIN: Yes, it took
12 into both. We compared the existing whatever it
13 is, 130,000 square feet of the center, without any
14 residential, to the proposed development of 266
15 units and a combination of retail and office. And
16 that’s the methodology that Matt and I were trying
17 to explain. So we got a quantity of additional
18 traffic.
19 And then the second part was
20 the word I used, the traffic engineer used, uses
21 the word distribute the traffic, meaning how much
22 of it is going to go left, how much is going to go
23 right, how much is going to go, I guess, west on
24 The Fairway to York Road, how much will make a
25 right and go up towards Willow Grove, how much
36 1
2 will go down towards Jenkintown. And they
3 distributed that traffic all around.
4 And there is an analysis
5 there. I can’t tell you that -- there is an
6 analysis in there of intersections that we’ve
7 analyzed. I know for a fact that he analyzed The
8 Fairway and Rydal Road.
9 Did he go up to the right and
10 figure out how much is going to go on Lindsay or
11 go on Autumn? No, he did not get to that level of
12 detail.
13 MS. CLOUD: And that’s my
14 concern, because you’re looking at the Old York
15 Road, you’re looking at the major intersection.
16 But I really need to know if you’re looking at the
17 impact, because there is a ton of traffic and
18 safety issues that the community back behind there
19 is really concerned about.
20 MS. DIJOSEPH: Thank you.
21 Are there any other
22 questions?
23 MS. COHEN: My name is Elaine
24 Cohen, C-O-H-E-N, 1372 Meetinghouse Road,
25 Meadowbrook, 19046.
37 1
2 There’s been lots of talk
3 about the traffic on Rydal Road, The Fairway. I
4 haven’t heard anything about going under the
5 bridge, Washington Lane and Susquehanna. The
6 traffic now is bad.
7 What do you propose to do
8 about the traffic after all of this goes in?
9 MR. KAPLIN: Well, we
10 can’t -- I have been driving through there since I
11 was a kid. They haven’t been able to fix it in
12 forty-nine years since I’ve had a driver’s
13 license. And I don’t mean to be a wise-guy. But
14 nobody has been able to fix that in my lifetime.
15 We are going to add a very
16 small amount of additional traffic, and it’s
17 not -- it can’t be our obligation in order to use
18 our property to have to fix every existing
19 problem.
20 What we have said is that we
21 would make a substantial contribution, probably
22 disproportionate to what our development is, to
23 the Township.
24 But nobody has been able to
25 solve that for as long as I can remember. I don’t
38 1
2 see how you could expect us to change that
3 configuration.
4 MS. COHEN: Have you taken
5 into consideration the impact on that intersection
6 with the increase in traffic?
7 MR. KAPLIN: We have.
8 Matt, did you measure the
9 bridge or did you conclude -- tell us whether you
10 looked at the bridge.
11 THE AUDIENCE: And what time
12 he did it.
13 MR. HAMMOND: Sure. There’s
14 a previous traffic study done a couple years,
15 maybe two or three years ago from this development
16 when it was previously proposed and a different
17 configuration. And that traffic study at that
18 time, we looked at approximately twenty-one
19 intersections throughout the Township, and one of
20 the intersections was the railroad overpass.
21 We are proposing -- and
22 everyone should keep in mind one important fact.
23 And that fact is, the existing center generates
24 traffic that’s currently on Fairway and the
25 surrounding roadways. And at the time, very
39 1
2 shortly -- very short time in the past there was
3 traffic associated with some other uses in that
4 center, which have since left, as well as the
5 movie theater.
6 What we did when we prepared
7 the most latest traffic study, June or July 13th,
8 2009 study, again, July 13th, we had looked again
9 at what the existing center generates, what the
10 existing traffic volumes are in that roadway and
11 what additional traffic can be expected by the
12 development. And, once you look at that and
13 compare all of those numbers and distribute the
14 traffic throughout the roadway network -- it may
15 be hard to believe, but there will be a small
16 portion of traffic that will be added to that
17 intersection.
18 Now, again, echoing what Mr.
19 Kaplin had stated, there is very little, if
20 anything, that could be done there, short of
21 widening the railroad overpass or relocating the
22 intersection. And that is a huge undertaking as
23 far as that improvement is concerned.
24 What we have committed to do
25 was contribute monies that we feel are over and
40 1
2 above what we would normally contribute that could
3 be utilized for either the intersection at The
4 Fairway and Rydal or could be utilized for other
5 intersections within the Township. If the
6 Township feels that’s the most important
7 intersection and that’s the one that needs the
8 most improvements, then the Township is more than
9 welcome to utilize the funds that we have proposed
10 to try and come up with a solution.
11 I can tell you that I have
12 looked at it. This was a question that came up in
13 previous hearings. And there’s very little that
14 could be done, if anything, to that intersection.
15 And it is my understanding --
16 I haven’t driven through that intersection for
17 forty-nine years, but it is my understanding it’s
18 been that way for a very long time and,
19 unfortunately, just the way it currently exists.
20 There’s not much of anything that can be done.
21 MS. DIJOSEPH: Thank you.
22 May I say, as far as all of
23 this discussion about traffic, when we go into
24 land development, and I think maybe Mr. Matteo can
25 make mention of what that means and what I’m
41 1
2 getting at, the traffic problems/suggestions will
3 be addressed in detail.
4 Mr. Matteo, is that correct?
5 MR. MATTEO: That is correct,
6 Madam President.
7 Land development does take in
8 the scope of the work that’s proposed on the site,
9 the layout of the property, traffic, of course,
10 storm water management and things of those issues
11 are discussed at that time. We are only on an
12 ordinance amendment at this time.
13 MS. DIJOSEPH: Yes. So
14 that’s why talking about traffic right now is
15 really not germane to what we’re doing here. And
16 it’s become redundant I believe from our last
17 hearing.
18 So, having said that, will
19 you please go on, ma’am?
20 MS. PHILIPS: Yes, I came up
21 here to talk about the traffic. My name is Sandi
22 Philips.
23 MS. DIJOSEPH: Okay.
24 MS. PHILIPS: I live at 1020
25 Sharon Road in Meadowbrook.
42 1
2 I just want to clarify
3 something I heard at the last meeting, which is
4 the way to the 266 units is through the shopping
5 center and there is no other way to get in and out
6 of this development.
7 Is that true?
8 MS. DIJOSEPH: Mr. Kaplin?
9 MR. KAPLIN: There are, I
10 believe, four entrances off of Fairway, and I
11 believe all four would be maintained and one of
12 them at the main entrance will be signalized.
13 MS. PHILIPS: Okay. So
14 there’s nothing coming in and out of York Road up
15 above?
16 MR. KAPLIN: That’s correct.
17 MS. PHILIPS: And this
18 gentleman has been kind enough to give us his
19 report.
20 Do you live in this
21 neighborhood or do you live in some other
22 neighborhood?
23 MR. KAPLIN: May I
24 respectfully suggest that that’s really not
25 relative?
43 1
2 MS. PHILIPS: The reason it’s
3 relevant is, if he hasn’t had forty-nine years
4 experience going under the Susquehanna Bridge,
5 that he’s right, that is not, you know, your total
6 responsibility.
7 Now, do you come visit the
8 property in Baederwood as part of your work?
9 MS. DIJOSEPH: Just a minute.
10 MS. PHILIPS: What I’m
11 getting at --
12 MS. DIJOSEPH: Get at what
13 you’re getting at.
14 MS. PHILIPS: What I am
15 getting at is, if I ask for seventy-five
16 volunteers to line their cars up on The Fairway
17 and go through it --
18 MR. MATTEO: Let us make it a
19 question only at this time.
20 MS. PHILIPS: Well, I’m
21 dealing with empirical evidence, not all of your
22 reports. You will find a lot of traffic.
23 This study was taken July
24 13th? That’s a question. Or the report was July
25 13th.
44 1
2 MR. KAPLIN: Matt, I will ask
3 you not to answer.
4 MS. PHILIPS: Okay. So if it
5 was taken in the summertime when there was lighter
6 traffic --
7 MR. MATTEO: Question only.
8 MS. PHILIPS: -- it’s not
9 evident of the traffic that we have.
10 Something has happened in
11 this neighborhood, and the traffic has gotten
12 really serious in the past few months. I don’t
13 know why. My husband said he had to drive around
14 and around just to get a parking spot for Whole
15 Foods to go in and shop tonight. The traffic is
16 very much a part of this issue.
17 And the reason I think you
18 mentioned, sir, this attorney here mentioned the
19 last time, that other developers have not bid on
20 this property. There was a reason why. I don’t
21 know the reason why.
22 MR. KAPLIN: What --
23 MS. PHILIPS: The problem is
24 the traffic is the main issue here.
25 MS. DIJOSEPH: We understand
45 1
2 that.
3 Do you have another question?
4 MS. PHILIPS: Yes. These
5 people go home to the Main Line, and they don’t
6 have to deal with this afterwards.
7 Thank you.
8 MR. MATTEO: Thank you.
9 Are there any other
10 questions?
11 MS. DIJOSEPH: Any other
12 questions, please?
13 Come forward.
14 MR. LITZ: My name is Sylvan
15 Litz, 1570 The Fairway, Jenkintown, 19046,
16 L-I-T-Z.
17 This question is either for
18 Mr. Kaplin or for perhaps the Commissioners.
19 I would like to know, has
20 there been an environmental impact study made of
21 what would occur if the trees, those beautiful
22 trees behind the shopping center are torn down for
23 this apartment building?
24 MS. DIJOSEPH: Mr. Kaplin?
25 MR. KAPLIN: I don’t know of
46 1
2 the type of environmental impact study that this
3 gentleman is asking about. I can say that, if we
4 get to land development, there will be a very
5 in-depth engineering storm water management,
6 post-construction storm water control program that
7 will be undertaken, will be reviewed by the
8 Township Engineer, also by the Montgomery County
9 Soil Conservation Service and probably the
10 Department of Environmental Protection. That will
11 come later in the process.
12 If what you are talking about
13 is, is there going to be runoff? Is there --
14 MR. LITZ: No, that’s not
15 what I’m talking about. I’m talking about green
16 areas. There’s a mandate for communities to
17 maintain and increase the number of green areas,
18 not to just decrease them by tearing down the
19 trees.
20 Has this Board considered
21 seizing that property behind the shopping center
22 with eminent domain for the good of the community?
23 Have you considered it?
24 MS. DIJOSEPH: We have not,
25 sir.
47 1
2 MR. LITZ: Would you?
3 MS. DIJOSEPH: I do not think
4 we would, no.
5 MR. LITZ: Why not? Why not?
6 MS. DIJOSEPH: Anybody want
7 to field that question?
8 Commissioner Kline?
9 MR. KLINE: It is my
10 understanding you can take a property through
11 eminent domain for public use. We would have to
12 create some public use to take that property.
13 There is no public use for this property.
14 MR. LITZ: For a park?
15 MR. MATTEO: You would have
16 to go through the other property.
17 MR. KLINE: It’s not being
18 considered.
19 MR. LITZ: It should be.
20 Thank you.
21 MS. PRYBUTOK: Marsha
22 Prybutok, P-R-Y-B-U-T-O-K, 1426 Autumn Road,
23 19046.
24 Do you have a price-point for
25 your apartments?
48 1
2 MS. DIJOSEPH: Price-points?
3 MS. PRYBUTOK: What would a
4 studio go for? Is there a ballpark? Two-bedroom?
5 One-bedroom?
6 MR. KAPLIN: I’m not sure.
7 Let me take a look at something.
8 MS. PRYBUTOK: Would we
9 consider these luxury apartments?
10 MR. KAPLIN: I said, will you
11 let me look at something?
12 MS. PRYBUTOK: I will
13 certainly, Mr. Kaplin, let you check that out.
14 MR. KAPLIN: Fred just said
15 we estimated about $1.75 a foot. So if an average
16 apartment, if --
17 MS. PRYBUTOK: Is this a
18 one-bedroom?
19 MR. KAPLIN: Excuse me.
20 MS. PRYBUTOK: I want a
21 clarification.
22 MR. KAPLIN: I’m going to
23 answer.
24 MS. PRYBUTOK: Go ahead.
25 MR. KAPLIN: I’m going to
49 1
2 answer.
3 MS. PRYBUTOK: Go ahead.
4 MR. KAPLIN: If you assume
5 that the average apartment was 1,000 feet, just to
6 give an illustration, that would be $1,750 a
7 month.
8 Now, you don’t build 1,000
9 square foot apartments. You build one-bedrooms at
10 more like 750, 800, maybe 900 square feet. Okay?
11 What Ken assumed here in the
12 study was the one-bedrooms would be 800 square
13 feet and the two-bedrooms would be 1,100 square
14 feet.
15 MS. PRYBUTOK: So a
16 two-bedroom would rent for a couple thousand
17 dollars a month?
18 MR. KAPLIN: Right.
19 MS. PRYBUTOK: $1,800 a
20 month.
21 I am concerned with impact on
22 schools. I’m a former educator. And I would
23 assert that people come to a community because of
24 the schools. For you to do a comparison
25 county-wide does not really talk about the impact
50 1
2 on Abington schools. Abington is an award-winning
3 school district. People will come here with their
4 children to enroll their children in our schools.
5 They wouldn’t go maybe to, I don’t know, Pottstown
6 maybe to enroll their children there and go into
7 an apartment there. But they would come here.
8 And I am very concerned.
9 Class size in Rydal Elementary School is now
10 between 24 and 26 pupils per class. When people
11 came here --
12 MS. DIJOSEPH: Do you have a
13 question?
14 MS. PRYBUTOK: When people
15 came here, there were 17 or 18. So I am very
16 concerned.
17 I want to know the price
18 point, and I think that will affect it.
19 MR. MATTEO: Madam President,
20 if people rather give testimony, maybe we should
21 get into that portion.
22 MS. DIJOSEPH: They can go
23 ahead.
24 MR. MATTEO: Okay. Just a
25 question then.
51 1
2 MS. HOPPE: A very quick
3 question. I wasn’t going to say a word tonight.
4 MR. MATTEO: Name and
5 address?
6 MS. HOPPE: Carolyn Hoppe,
7 H-O-P-P-E, 110 Pennmore Place, Rydal.
8 But listening to all of this
9 about the traffic, and, of course, I’m very
10 concerned about it, too, but Mr. Kaplin mentioned
11 before when people are coming in or out of the
12 shopping center or apartments they might turn
13 right or left on York Road. I am terribly
14 concerned about what is facing the Baeder -- not
15 the Baederwood shopping center, the Baederwood
16 area. All of those streets that get all the
17 traffic coming from the high school, the junior
18 high school, they’re going to be impacted
19 incredibly. So people just don’t turn right and
20 left. People come through there all the time.
21 And that’s a tremendous detriment for all the kids
22 that come through there also.
23 I want to ask you if you
24 would consider the other side of York Road?
25 MR. MATTEO: Thank you.
52 1
2 MS. DIJOSEPH: Thank you.
3 MS. SCHLERB: My name is
4 Kathleen Schlerb, S-C-H-L-E-R-B. My address is
5 1236 Washington Lane, Rydal.
6 I’ve lived in the community
7 since 1977. At the time when I moved in, I recall
8 hearing that there had been a study done with the
9 idea of a proposed bridge from Susquehanna coming
10 down the hill, over the tracks and going up
11 Susquehanna. I was told about that. I don’t know
12 if that’s true or not. Perhaps some of the
13 old-timers on the Board here would know.
14 MR. MATTEO: The old-timers?
15 Who did you point to?
16 MS. SCHLERB: The point that
17 I’m making is that addressing the concerns, the
18 very legitimate concerns, of people who were
19 concerned about the bottleneck underneath the
20 bridge at Washington Lane and Susquehanna, go up,
21 they have a right to be concerned. In ten years,
22 if this plan were to go through with no real
23 concern for that bottleneck, you could be having
24 the same group plus additional new residents
25 having to deal with the proposal for a bridge
53 1
2 spanning it. Now, who wants to go through that
3 again.
4 That’s my point, that you
5 can’t just address the concerns of the community
6 by saying it’s obsolete and we have no solution
7 for it. You will have everybody back here in ten
8 or fifteen years voting on a bridge.
9 MS. DIJOSEPH: Thank you very
10 much.
11 MR. MATTEO: Are we still in
12 the question stage?
13 MS. DIJOSEPH: No. We will
14 take comments or -- we will take them together.
15 MR. MATTEO: He has one
16 question.
17 MR. HICKS: Walter Hicks.
18 MR. MATTEO: One second. If
19 you are going to make comments, please tell me so
20 I could have you sworn in for testimony.
21 Thank you.
22 MR. HICKS: My name is Walter
23 Hicks, 1533 Cherry Lane, Rydal, PA 19046,
24 H-I-C-K-S, about a block away from where this is.
25 My question is, if it ended
54 1
2 up being that most of the people in the community
3 did not want this, would you still persist?
4 MR. KAPLIN: I’m hesitating
5 because I don’t want to give you an answer that
6 sounds like a wise-guy.
7 MR. HICKS: Just a yes or no
8 is fine.
9 MR. KAPLIN: What I would say
10 to that is my client owns property just like you
11 do and my client has the right to use and develop
12 or redevelop its property within the law.
13 THE AUDIENCE: Then use the
14 rights you have.
15 MR. KAPLIN: And I don’t
16 believe it’s a popularity contest. So we
17 bought -- my client bought this with the intent to
18 redevelop it and spent four years.
19 When we weren’t able to get
20 anywhere with that, when we couldn’t get a
21 resolution, we did what we could. We filed a
22 challenge to the validity of the zoning, as the
23 first gentleman who got up suggested.
24 So we’re here to redevelop
25 the property. We were asked by the Township,
55 1
2 after we filed it, to try and work with the staff
3 and with the Montgomery County Planning Commission
4 to implement the plan that was shown to the
5 Planning Commission a year ago April. That’s why
6 we’re here.
7 I’m sorry if that’s a long
8 answer. I just don’t want to give you a flip
9 answer. But the short answer is, yes, we intend
10 to exercise our legitimate property rights to try
11 and redevelop this property.
12 Thank you.
13 MR. MATTEO: Comment or
14 question?
15 - - -
16 CONNIE ZAGERMAN, having been
17 duly, testified as follows:
18 - - -
19 MS. ZAGERMAN: Connie
20 Zagerman, Z-A-G-E-R-M-A-N. I reside at 1404 Noble
21 Road, and I’m a new resident since 2007. That’s
22 Rydal, PA, 19046.
23 I have school-aged children,
24 teenage, and another younger child at elementary
25 Rydal.
56 1
2 My comment is, I’m on the
3 corner of Noble Road and Washington Lane. Prior
4 times of day after three o’clock, if I’m leaving
5 my driveway to turn onto Noble Road, I have to
6 wait at least five cars just to leave my driveway.
7 So traffic is a huge concern if it increases just
8 a little bit. I’ve seen traffic go through
9 stopped school buses on Washington Lane. I’ve
10 seen cars not adhere to any of the stop signs
11 right there on Noble Road turning onto Washington
12 Lane.
13 So my question is, will these
14 266 developments, what is your factor of the cars
15 for each apartment? Because if everyone comes
16 with just one car, that’s 266. So what is the
17 factor in terms of anticipating the volume?
18 MR. KAPLIN: Well, I don’t
19 want to get into a long discussion of what the
20 traffic analysis is, but I will try and give it to
21 you quickly.
22 The traffic analysis, the
23 conventional traffic analysis, focuses on the peak
24 hours. The peak hours are four consecutive
25 fifteen minute spans in the morning, in the
57 1
2 afternoon and usually Saturday afternoon. So the
3 studies are done to see what’s the existing
4 traffic at those times. That’s the study that was
5 done. That’s part of the study that was done.
6 Then we have to add on top of
7 that -- and that’s what you’re talking about --
8 what additional traffic would be developed. This
9 is a little different. This is not a blank piece
10 of paper. It’s not a blank piece of ground. So
11 we had to do a differential analysis. And we came
12 up with -- not we. The traffic engineers used the
13 Institute of Traffic Engineers. It’s a very thick
14 volume that has different categories. And it
15 tells Matt Hammond either in terms of a formula or
16 in terms of a number of cars how many cars would
17 be generated in, how many out, at each peak hour,
18 per apartment. So there is a factor. And it’s
19 not linear.
20 And then what he did was he
21 took the additional traffic that would come in and
22 out of the development and did what’s called a
23 gravity analysis to determine, well, if they come
24 out, is sixty percent going to turn left, is forty
25 going to turn right? When they come down to Rydal
58 1
2 Road and The Fairway, what percentage is going to
3 make a right and go up Rydal? What percentage is
4 going to go all the way around under the bridge,
5 up?
6 I mean, so, there is a
7 methodology. It is an estimate. It’s
8 scientifically based. We did not do the analysis
9 at every corner, but the analysis is there. And
10 what we tried to do was to give the analysis and
11 the methodology to the Township in advance so that
12 the Township’s traffic engineer would be able to
13 say, yes, no, maybe or I want you to use a
14 different analysis.
15 I think you heard what I said
16 before. We did give this a lot of thought. We
17 knew the traffic was a big deal. And we
18 appreciate it. And there will be some additional
19 traffic.
20 MS. ZAGERMAN: But you’re
21 building parking spaces for this development. I’m
22 just wondering, before they even move, what is the
23 volume of cars anticipated for the 266 units? You
24 had to use a multiplier factor.
25 MR. KAPLIN: Is it
59 1
2 one-and-a-half or two? I think we used
3 one-and-a-half parking spaces per unit.
4 MS. ZAGERMAN: Okay. Thank
5 you.
6 MR. MATTEO: That’s by code.
7 MR. KAPLIN: Sorry. I could
8 have given you a shorter answer. I apologize.
9 - - -
10 SUSAN ODHNER, having been
11 duly sworn, testified as follows:
12 - - -
13 MS. ODHNER: Susan Odhner,
14 O-D-H-N-E-R, 1349 Warner Road.
15 I’m concerned not only about
16 the things that other people have spoken about but
17 about the way things are going to look, the
18 attractiveness, the landscaping, the trees. And I
19 remember about two years ago when the Brandolini
20 Brothers didn’t first present this but presented
21 it that there was a drawing of the Baederwood
22 Shopping Center and how they thought it was -- how
23 they planned it, how it was going to look. And,
24 looking carefully, there was almost no
25 landscaping, very, very little green, very little
60 1
2 trees or shrubs or anything like that.
3 And my question is, has there
4 been any change to that for the shopping center
5 area?
6 MR. KAPLIN: Were you here
7 the last time?
8 MR. MATTEO: Did you come to
9 the last meeting in October?
10 MS. ODHNER: I don’t think
11 so.
12 MR. KAPLIN: Well, we did a
13 whole presentation of the plan. We showed the
14 landscaping. We showed the entire development.
15 MS. ODHNER: Okay. Would I
16 be able to see this?
17 MR. KAPLIN: Sure. We will
18 be glad to show it to you afterwards.
19 MS. ODHNER: If I had
20 suggestions -- is it like a done deal and it’s
21 written in blood? Or would anybody be open for
22 suggestions from like an intense gardener and have
23 lots of things?
24 MR. KAPLIN: Certainly. We
25 will be glad to listen. There are a great deal of
61 1
2 constraints with regard to the site. We showed a
3 drawing that shows the existing landscaping, which
4 is --
5 MS. ODHNER: Next to nothing.
6 MR. KAPLIN: Almost
7 non-existent. And we have shown how we would try
8 to preserve the parking, yet add some landscaping
9 to it.
10 MS. ODHNER: Did some of that
11 landscape include evergreens or trees of any kind?
12 MR. KAPLIN: Yes. That’s so
13 far down the road, that’s a land development
14 issue.
15 MS. DIJOSEPH: That’s a land
16 development issue.
17 MS. ODHNER: And if it’s not
18 discussed up front, it gets overlaid by concrete
19 and blacktop.
20 MS. DIJOSEPH: That
21 landscaping is not going to disappear. It won’t
22 happen.
23 MS. ODHNER: The comment part
24 of that is, I would like to see as much
25 landscaping as possible. In my mind, I see these
62 1
2 wonderful shopping centers in New Jersey with land
3 and trees, which they have more land, which we
4 don’t in this space, but I think things could be
5 done in such a way to enhance the beauty of the
6 area as opposed to covering it over. And I wanted
7 to state that up front.
8 Thank you.
9 MS. DIJOSEPH: Thank you.
10 - - -
11 TOTO SCHIAVONE, having been
12 duly sworn, testified as follows:
13 - - -
14 MR. SCHIAVONE: Toto
15 Schiavone, 1115 Rydal Road, Rydal, PA,
16 S-C-H-I-A-V-O-N-E.
17 I’m an engineer and forgive
18 my presentation. No one here is against the
19 Township, at least I’m not. And I don’t think
20 anyone here is against Brandolini, and I will give
21 you the reason why. We come here not as an enemy
22 but as a good resident, as a good community. We
23 hope that after tonight we’re not going to waste
24 anybody’s time, my time, your time, Brandolini’s
25 legal time. I hope you come to a good solution
63 1
2 and to a good, right decision.
3 Years ago, I don’t know, six
4 or seven years ago, Brandolini came to our
5 Township and they spent a lot of money. And I
6 think we should thank them. Now they come up with
7 this ambitious program. Whether it’s putting good
8 money on top of bad money, it’s not our business.
9 But I don’t know if this ambitious program was an
10 afterthought of their decision of the shopping
11 center or was perhaps in the beginning. I
12 personally feel it was in the beginning because
13 nothing was done in the center since the
14 acquisition, was no new tenant brought in.
15 Contrarily, tenants were pushed out.
16 Now, if we leave the shopping
17 center as it is, it’s not going to benefit
18 anybody. It’s not going to benefit the Township.
19 It doesn’t benefit Brandolini’s investment. It
20 doesn’t benefit the community. The Township will
21 lose money. Brandolini loses big money. And
22 we’re even embarrassed to drive through because
23 it’s abandoned and idle shopping center,
24 Now, the realization of this
25 program, this project, if it ever comes to
64 1
2 reality, it has to benefit all of the parties
3 involved. The Township -- and we are glad. Mr.
4 Kaplin has expressed a number of dollars the
5 Township makes from the realization of this
6 program. I just learned tonight almost eighty
7 percent, this morning, comes in tax goes back to
8 the school because of additional children coming
9 for the school. And the Township benefit.
10 Brandolini is going to benefit big. It’s a big
11 piece of beef.
12 Now, how are we going to
13 benefit? We’re going to benefit very little as a
14 community, very, very little. The only way we can
15 benefit is if we have a decent shopping center.
16 Otherwise, a few years from now we will have to
17 drive four miles to buy a glass of milk.
18 Now, Whole Foods, it’s not
19 the gimmick anymore of the organic product. Wawa
20 is an organic product. So if they have a
21 long-term lease and pay fifty cents a square feet,
22 how long is Whole Foods going to be there if there
23 is no business? So we have no shopping center,
24 and we have this monstrosity of a building.
25 Now, something has to be done
65 1
2 because they’re not going to make a facelift to
3 the shopping center. Making a facelift is like
4 making a hole in the water, and that won’t
5 accomplish anything. Making a major structure is
6 going to be economically impossible for them.
7 Making this monstrosity, I don’t know if they
8 could handle that.
9 Last week somebody suggested,
10 what about a ten-house unit? It’s not
11 economically feasible for Brandolini to do that.
12 Have we thought perhaps twenty, thirty, expensive
13 townhouse and build a good shopping center, the
14 one they did in Walnut Lane on Huntingdon Pike.
15 That’s very nice, expensive, good community. Have
16 we have talked about that? I don’t know. It’s
17 not up to me to decide.
18 But let me go forward more.
19 I’m not against progress, and I don’t think these
20 people are against progress. This is a good
21 thing. And about having a good area where it’s
22 deer and raccoon and lime disease -- I’m allergic,
23 too. We have a beautiful landscaped area. That’s
24 what I would like in my neighborhood.
25 Now, Claire and I, we’re good
66 1
2 neighbors. I don’t know if we can support -- I
3 don’t know if we feel like welcoming 266 new
4 neighbors in our neighborhood. I don’t know if we
5 would be ready to do that.
6 For the last three years in a
7 row we had this plaque, one of the best places to
8 live. If you walk a mile, if you drive a mile on
9 611, there is an overpass. I believe it’s
10 Watertown. There’s a banner there that the
11 Township is proud, one of the best places to live.
12 The Township I think puts this plaque on the
13 stationery. We are proud. Everyone is proud of
14 that.
15 Now, if you drive -- who got
16 the credit for that? Who got the credit for this?
17 Anybody knows who got the credit for this? Did I
18 do anything to have this credit, to deserve this?
19 No, I didn’t do anything. Did these people do
20 anything? No. You deserve the credit. You have
21 the credit for giving us good service, giving us a
22 good school. We have two great hospitals. We
23 have one of the best malls in the region, great
24 service.
25 And can I say something about
67 1
2 service? I was on the wing the other day. It was
3 Monday morning, I believe, three or four weeks
4 ago. It was the pickup truck, the backside thing
5 that pick ups Monday morning. And, as my trash
6 can went over the truck, there was a box, a shoe
7 box. It came out. It fell down the street. The
8 driver -- I did not believe it. If I had a
9 camera, I would have shuttered the camera. The
10 driver, he parked the car. It was there. He went
11 on his feet, picked up the box and put it in his
12 truck. And I applaud the service of this
13 Township. What other Township does this happen?
14 Now, as you drive a mile
15 north on 611, you drive a mile and a half south on
16 611, near Church Road, I believe, there is also an
17 overpass, right after Church Road. There is no
18 banner there. There is no banner that says the
19 best community to live. These people who decide
20 this, they didn’t pick up Abington Township by
21 random. They analyzed why they pick up us. They
22 didn’t give this envelope to Jenkintown Township.
23 But, contrarily, if you have
24 five, six blocks southeast of Church Road, my good
25 buddy, Don Rief (ph.), he bought a house in 1990,
68 1
2 $410,000 he paid for it. He put it on the market
3 this past May for $250,000. He sold this month
4 for $190,000. $190,000. The buyer, under the
5 recommendation of the realtor, said, you should go
6 to the Township and complain about the tax because
7 he paid $12,000 a year for the tax based on the
8 $410,000 value that he paid for. The Township
9 granted $5,100 tax, and he bought the property for
10 $190,000. That’s what you want to happen to us,
11 to come to you ten or fifteen years from now and
12 coming to say the value for the properties are
13 less so you have to give us less tax?
14 I’m not asking for you to not
15 change the zoning. If you have the power to do
16 it, do it. If you feel comfortable, do it. I’m
17 only asking not to change our beautiful Township
18 from Class A to Class C. I’m not asking how to
19 give them the right permit they need to make this
20 construction. I’m asking not to give Abington
21 Township the reputation of Cheltenham Township.
22 And, furthermore, our
23 neighboring Jenkintown, fifteen years ago if I
24 would have gone there and applied that I wanted to
25 open a house of bordello, they will give me a
69 1
2 license. They were going to give me the license.
3 Today, Jenkintown, the civic center of Jenkintown
4 is only maybe three blocks, three city blocks.
5 That’s it. There’s nineteen empty properties,
6 nineteen empty properties. We don’t want that to
7 happen to our Township.
8 Now, furthermore, I believe
9 and I assume that the Brandolini people, they do
10 more. They apprise, and I think they do, a mile
11 and a half east from the property in question
12 there are 230 empty apartments. That is 200 empty
13 apartments in Hamilton Place since three years.
14 And there is an average of 30 empty apartments in
15 Meadowbrook Apartments. And both apartments, they
16 are right, they sit next to a fully occupied and
17 energetic shopping center, with a market, a
18 pharmacy, a bank, a pizza place, a restaurant, a
19 dry cleaner, an hair cutter. Everybody is there.
20 Good school. It’s Moreland Township. Good
21 school, good transportation, right next to a
22 hospital, a great pool, a great gym. And they’re
23 empty. Three years now they’re empty.
24 Now, how do they expect to
25 fill up this 266 unit neighborhood at $1,800,
70 1
2 $2,000 each apartment, unless they give away for
3 $400 or $500. That’s the only way they can rent
4 that apartment. Otherwise, they will be empty.
5 Instead, for us to have the deer and the raccoons
6 in the forest, we will have empty houses dancing
7 and doing the same in the apartment, really.
8 MS. DIJOSEPH: Sir, I believe
9 there are about five people behind you.
10 Do you want to wind it up for
11 us, please?
12 MR. SCHIAVONE: Madam
13 President, time. I’m not asking question to the
14 other party. So I’m talking. So some of the
15 questions that were raised before, they’re were
16 much lengthy than my statement. I will take about
17 a few more minutes, and then I will give the
18 microphone to other people.
19 MS. DIJOSEPH: All right.
20 Thank you.
21 MR. SCHIAVONE: Now, let me
22 come to my note here. Now, we have all heard a
23 lot of people talk about traffic. They talked
24 about traffic last week, too. Yeah, it’s a
25 concern about traffic.
71 1
2 Nobody mentioned about the
3 motorcycle gang on Sunday on The Fairway. I mean,
4 it’s like for hours. But that’s irrelevant.
5 Maybe I’m the only one. I’m the closest one. I’m
6 the only one that hears that.
7 But the traffic is a concern.
8 It’s a concern. It’s not going to be as much
9 traffic as in 611. It’s not going to be as much
10 traffic in as in Center City. But it’s a concern.
11 But instead of five minutes to reach the
12 destination, you go six minutes.
13 Somebody asked the question
14 about the greenery, about the tree. Those trees,
15 they’re all so old. We’re not going to die for
16 lack of oxygen because those trees are coming
17 down. Brandolini has beautiful landscaping.
18 They’re going to plant more vibrant trees and
19 breathe more fresh oxygen.
20 But the two elements, the
21 most two elements nobody mentioned here yet, and
22 that’s my darling note here, there are two
23 elements, maintaining the value of our residence,
24 of our properties, and water. There are two
25 elements.
72 1
2 Now, water -- there are two
3 things in the world that are uncontrollable or
4 unpredictable. One is by the act of God, water.
5 And one is terrorism. It’s unpredictable,
6 uncontrollable.
7 We know the water. We can
8 die without water. It’s the most element that we
9 need. We die without water. But the water is so
10 powerful that there’s more people that die by
11 water every year than any made weapons. We know
12 Katrina. We know the tsunami. And other world
13 things that happen.
14 Now, let me briefly
15 mention -- show my property here. Six years ago,
16 we were not in this room but in the other room in
17 the Township. The engineer for Rydal Park said we
18 never get flooded. You will be flooded maybe once
19 every hundred years. So we figured out, who lives
20 a hundred years? So we close one eye. So we
21 bring the permit for the expansion. So we do the
22 expansion. But the program we build there was for
23 the community because a lot of the residents for
24 Rydal and Abington, they sell their house and
25 they’re living in Rydal Park now. Fine. So we
73 1
2 close one eye. Now, if we close the other eye,
3 we’re going to become blind.
4 This is my property here,
5 right here, 1115 Rydal Road. Before the expansion
6 of Rydal Park, the water under the bridge, it was
7 about eighteen, twenty inches from the mouth, from
8 the top of the mouth to below. Since Rydal Park,
9 there is no space between the water and the
10 mouth -- the top of the mouth of the bridge.
11 What’s the name of this
12 bridge? Anybody know? Does this bridge have a
13 name?
14 MS. DIJOSEPH: I don’t know.
15 MR. SCHIAVONE: I think I
16 will name this bridge tonight the water meeting
17 bridge.
18 Not only if there’s not
19 enough space left under the bridge, but I have
20 four twenty-four-inch -- 1, 2, 3, 4 -- four
21 twenty-four-inch pipe drainage. One is coming
22 from Washington Lane. One is coming from The
23 Fairway. One is coming from Rydal Park, and one
24 is coming from Rydal and Susquehanna. Four
25 twenty-four-inch pipe. All this meeting pipe
74 1
2 here, they’re not meeting on this property.
3 They’re not meeting before. They’re meeting right
4 there, right where I start.
5 Now, you see the red ink
6 here? That is thirty-five, thirty-eight percent
7 of my property, thirty-five or thirty-eight
8 percent of my property. The engineer six years
9 ago says it happens once every hundred years. It
10 happened five times in the last three years. Five
11 times it happened in the last three years. This
12 picture is the one that just happened June, July,
13 August.
14 I would like for you to see,
15 if you don’t mind. Would you mind? It’s
16 important. Can I come up?
17 This in June, July and
18 August. I have here, ladies and gentlemen, $4,800
19 worth of bills that I have to spend the end of
20 August, beginning of September, $4,800 of bills
21 for cleanup and repair, cleanup and repair.
22 Additionally, I have an estimate to build a wall.
23 I call EPT, Environmental Protection Total. I
24 have 250 feet of thick wall that I’m going to
25 build. If the Township is going to give me ten
75 1
2 years of tax abatement for the $135,000 I’m going
3 to spend or the Brandolini is going to compensate
4 me. I do not have the money to spend.
5 This is my property. And
6 this is my property before the expansion of Rydal
7 Road, beautiful landscaping because I’m a
8 gardener. And this is the one after. Would you
9 rather live in that environment or do you rather
10 live in this beautiful environment? You tell me.
11 I’m not asking you to not
12 give the zoning, to change the zoning. I’m asking
13 not to change our Township. We’ve been here
14 before. We selected Abington Township to leave,
15 to retire because all the good things, the school,
16 the service, all the beautiful residential
17 environment that we have.
18 Ladies and gentlemen, this,
19 it’s not a construction. This is an invasion.
20 This is an invasion of our Township. This is an
21 invasion of interest. This is an invasion of
22 interest. Let them come up and put something more
23 sensible that we can all live with. And we
24 appreciate that they spend the money. We do.
25 We’re not against you. We want you to come. We
76 1
2 don’t want the shopping center as it is. We don’t
3 want to go to Willow Grove. We had a beautiful
4 place there. I remember a lot of these people
5 used to give the cops on Sunday, Saturday to have
6 breakfast. They’re no longer there. They’re no
7 longer there.
8 Now, let me read you these
9 things to you, and then I finish.
10 MS. DIJOSEPH: I wish you
11 would.
12 MR. SCHIAVONE: Yes. Thank
13 you.
14 MS. DIJOSEPH: People are
15 waiting.
16 MR. SCHIAVONE: Okay. You
17 can put Mark Spitz, one of the best swimmers in
18 the world --
19 MS. DIJOSEPH: If you can use
20 the microphone, please?
21 MR. SCHIAVONE: You can put
22 Mark Spitz in the velocity and the pressure in the
23 center of the water there, who is one of the best
24 swimmers in the world, he would not survive. Now,
25 imagine, imagine a defenseless tree or defenseless
77 1
2 piece of furniture. I have to go to Meadowbrook
3 Station to pick up my furniture. That’s where I
4 have to go. I have to go with the boots.
5 Let me read this quote that’s
6 written by Susan Barney about the best community
7 in the world, which is reported by Colin Powell.
8 Up until one hundred communities across the
9 country to receive the honor and only community in
10 Pennsylvania to win three years in a row. From
11 supporting adults to outstanding educational
12 opportunity, Abington is a community that creates
13 safe, well-rounded and happy people, Powell said,
14 happy people.
15 These people are not happy.
16 They see the agony of the other one. They’re not
17 happy.
18 So we ask you to make the
19 right decision so they can benefit, we can
20 benefit, and we’re happy.
21 I’m not asking any questions,
22 and I thank you for listening to me.
23 MR. MATTEO: Thank you.
24 - - -
25 MICHAEL STEWART, having been
78 1
2 duly sworn, testified as follows:
3 - - -
4 MR. STEWART: Mike Stewart,
5 S-T-E-W-A-R-T, 1921 Hart, H-A-R-T, Road.
6 MS. DIJOSEPH: You have a
7 hard act to follow.
8 MR. STEWART: I will try not
9 to be as long. I just want to start out kind of
10 reiterating the point that everyone here has a
11 sense of community. Everybody up here is coming
12 to these meetings. We have great turnout
13 basically because we want to see change to The
14 Fairway. We want better things at The Fairway.
15 I’ve attended the 611
16 corridor meetings. I’ve attended several of these
17 Brandolini meetings. In the corridor study
18 meeting, we talked about making a main street,
19 which I think many people here, when there used to
20 be a movie theater and other things, had a sense
21 of community. I think most of those people go to
22 Jenkintown or Glenside for that sense of
23 community. We kind of lost that.
24 When Eckenhoff (ph.) went out
25 of business, the dealership, I was contacting Mr.
79 1
2 Peacock, my Ward Commissioner, asking for a phone
3 number and tried to bring in restaurants. I think
4 we should try to rebuild our community and make it
5 a better place for business and for the residents.
6 I even sent some restaurant links over to
7 Brandolini, and I recommended that they contact
8 them because I knew they were basically going to
9 rebuild the shopping center and I think we would
10 all like to see that.
11 I’ve attended -- the first
12 meeting I attended with Brandolini was about a
13 year ago, and Mr. Snow gave a presentation. And I
14 thought he was very cordial in the presentation.
15 He offered us a similar proposal. I believe it
16 had quite less in the number of actual units and
17 they were age restricted. All of a sudden, I
18 would say something -- my guess is the economy
19 went wrong at that point, and a year went by, and
20 we really never heard of anything in the Township.
21 And I often object when I
22 hear that this has been a four-year process. It
23 seems to be a four-year, on-and-off process. It
24 doesn’t seem to be continually conversations that
25 are building towards something.
80 1
2 All of a sudden, recently,
3 I’ve come to the Brandolini meeting, and it seems
4 like the number of units went up and all of a
5 sudden they went to apartments.
6 The main points of contention
7 that I think come here are, there are three
8 parcels that Brandolini is trying to merge to try
9 and create a higher density environment, and they
10 are also including this eight-acre parcel in the
11 back that is only zoned for eight homes. The
12 arguments that we have seen, this is really only
13 R-1. It’s for eight homes. I’ve heard multiple
14 times now from Mr. Kaplin that they’re following
15 the comprehensive guide and the corridor study. I
16 want to point out some of the things from the
17 comprehensive guide and the corridor study.
18 First is green space. Today
19 that zoning is seventy-five percent green space,
20 which means six out of those eight acres will be
21 green. Instead, Brandolini is looking to build on
22 five of those eight acres, reducing this to 37.5
23 percent green space, which is a fifty percent
24 loss. The entire comprehensive guide points to
25 green space and open space being one of our most
81 1
2 important factors.
3 Next I point to the
4 comprehensive guide rewards property owners and
5 developers for preserving usable open space. It
6 also points to parks and recreations. As you
7 notice, there are three acres they keep saying
8 will remain untouched. I worry that, even if this
9 is passed. Several years we will come back to
10 those three acres and try to build another unit on
11 top of that.
12 The corridor study talks
13 about relieving traffic congestion. It talks
14 about natural drainage and making sure we don’t
15 do, as it says here, clear cutting of trees must
16 be avoided in future developments in Abington.
17 The comprehensive plan also
18 points to Abington has an above average number of
19 sixty-four to seventy-five-year-old individuals
20 that need help finding affordable housing. It
21 talks about these elderly need to find homes and
22 not apartments and also for the elderly mobile
23 challenged.
24 The comprehensive guide even
25 points to Baederwood Shopping Center, and I will
82 1
2 read the quote in the comprehensive study. It
3 says, it is a prime example of an opportunity
4 where the Township and its collaboration with the
5 developer can bear fruit beneficial to both
6 parties. A mixed-use development, if done with
7 care and sensitivity, could enable the developer
8 and the Township to produce a product on a
9 property in an area already populated with higher
10 density development. This type of mixed-use
11 redevelopment could provide that age-restricted
12 housing discussed earlier in this section.
13 We see this is in direct
14 contradiction to what we’re seeing. This is not
15 beneficial to both parties. This seems to be
16 turning into how much money can we get for this
17 property by building the largest structure as
18 possible. It’s not being done with -- this is not
19 being done with care and sensitivity. We can see
20 that many people are showing up for these
21 meetings, way above average.
22 We have already discussed the
23 higher population density. It addresses the
24 higher population density, but we continue to just
25 keep talking about making more and more higher
83 1
2 density.
3 We have discussed
4 age-restricted housing, and for some reason I
5 don’t understand why the age-restricted housing,
6 even though the comprehensive plan points to
7 Baederwood Shopping Center, says it’s ideal, says
8 these older people can have access to the train
9 and not have to drive, limiting the number of cars
10 on the property, has been ignored for apartments.
11 The other thing I would like
12 to point out is the 611 corridor study talks about
13 moving store fronts to the street. We continue to
14 call this entranceway to the apartments, which all
15 I believe is a road driving into a parking garage,
16 we keep calling it Main Street. I don’t believe
17 that’s what the 611 corridor study believed was
18 Main Street.
19 We have heard that we can
20 close this down for parades and other types of
21 parties. You cannot close it down and have 266
22 people trapped in their apartments.
23 I became so frustrated at the
24 tone change in the last meeting that I decided to
25 come up with a petition. I’ve asked a few
84 1
2 neighbors on my street to sign this petition, and
3 I realized that this petition just -- I wanted to
4 get it to Mr. Peacock within two weeks. I sent
5 him an e-mail and would try and realized this
6 petition was going to take forever because each
7 person’s door I knocked on wanted to talk for a
8 half an hour about this problem.
9 So I decided to just walk the
10 streets, and I dropped off the piece of paper at
11 about four hundred homes. Out of these four
12 hundred homes, I just left a note and said, here’s
13 what Brandolini is proposing. I don’t care if
14 you’re for or against it. Please come to the
15 meeting and voice your opinion. But, if you’re in
16 opposition to this rezoning, I would like you to
17 sign this, and, if you would, can you drop this
18 off to my house.
19 I got home and said to my
20 wife, I doubt if anybody is going to take such an
21 issue to want to sign something, deliver it to
22 somebody they don’t know, be driving down the
23 street. Well, I’ve seen many people champion it
24 and come from their streets and deliver to me
25 their entire street which they wandered up and
85 1
2 down and handed to each person. I had a street
3 for those two weeks that looked like a post office
4 with car after car knocking on my door asking to
5 talk about this for a half an hour because they
6 were so upset as to what has happened.
7 I think the petition is here.
8 In two weeks, I handed Ernie Peacock three hundred
9 signed petitions. And I would like to say -- I
10 would like to say -- and I go back to the case
11 that this gentleman made -- I am in no way against
12 Brandolini. I thought of Mr. Snow when he gave
13 that presentation last year with the
14 age-restricted housing and the number of units.
15 There were some Township objections, but I think
16 we were on the road to a mutual agreement. I
17 believe now it has turned into a more greedy
18 proposal, and I believe the three hundred
19 petitions, clearly, is a statement to you, the
20 Commissioners, that says the residents of your
21 Township believe this is way too big for us to be
22 able to handle.
23 Thank you.
24 - - -
25 VINCENT MAGYAR, having been
86 1
2 duly sworn, testified as follows:
3 - - -
4 MR. MAGYAR: Vincent Magyar,
5 M-A-G-Y-A-R. My address is 1927 Cator Street,
6 Philadelphia PA, 19146. I’m an attorney from the
7 law firm of Curtin & Heefner in Morrisville,
8 Pennsylvania, and we represent John Fedorowitz,
9 F-E-D-O-R-O-W-I-T-Z.
10 On behalf of Mr. Fedorowitz,
11 we’re just asking the Board to deny this
12 developer’s request to amend the Township Zoning
13 Ordinance. The developer asks this Board to
14 ignore its duties and obligations to the
15 community, especially legislate in favor of the
16 developer and its real property holdings.
17 When the developer purchased
18 the property, it had full knowledge of the zoning
19 requirements, terms and conditions applicable
20 thereto. Now for the sole benefit of the
21 developer, the Board has been asked to rezone
22 particular parcels owned by the developer by
23 enacting an ordinance that grants maximum
24 flexibility to this developer alone.
25 We carefully studied this
87 1
2 developer’s presentation and it becomes apparent
3 that his goal is not to work within the framework
4 of the current comprehensive plan of the Township.
5 Rather, the proposed rezoning area is a curve-out
6 designed to benefit the interest of the single
7 developer irrespective of the detrimental impact
8 and the interests to the community at large.
9 Engaging in such a zoning
10 change is an affluent to the zoning related duties
11 and obligations of the Board which include, among
12 other things, the promotion, protection and
13 facilitation of public health, safety and general
14 welfare in providing for coordinated and practical
15 community development.
16 It’s noteworthy that the
17 Township’s current R-1 and PB zoning
18 classifications in which the properties are
19 located permit a broad mix of uses of the
20 properties. That the currently permitted mix of
21 uses differ from the uses preferred by this
22 developer to advance its particular interest does
23 not impose a requirement of the Board to amend the
24 zoning ordinance.
25 While the landowner has the
88 1
2 right to enjoy its property, it is limited by the
3 zoning ordinance similar to the existing zoning
4 ordinance which protects and preserves the public
5 health, safety and welfare. Opportunities and
6 development options are clearly available to the
7 developer under the current zoning regime which is
8 not so overly restricted so as to warrant
9 amendment.
10 To reiterate, the Board is
11 now required to rezone portions of the Township to
12 fit within the proposed theoretical design
13 guidelines and standards presented by this
14 developer. In fact, it would be an ammorgation of
15 the Board’s duties to do so. Moreover, the
16 current mix of land use in the area of this
17 developer’s properties provides an exceptional
18 example of residential and commercial districts
19 existing side by side for advancing general
20 interests of the community at large.
21 Another point for
22 consideration by this Honorable Board is that of
23 spot zoning. Contrary to the developer’s claims,
24 an enactment of this ordinance presented by this
25 developer will be the very definition of spot
89 1
2 zoning. Zoning must be directed towards the
3 community as a whole, concerned with public
4 interest generally and justified by balancing of
5 community costs and benefits. Spot zoning is
6 contrary to this preset -- legislature focuses on
7 a particular property and the costs and benefits
8 to be balanced going back to the particular
9 property owner. As a matter of fact, the
10 Pennsylvania Supreme Court has observed that spot
11 zoning is the singling out of one lot or smaller
12 for different treatment from that accord of
13 similar surrounding land indistinguishable from
14 any character for the economic benefit of the
15 owner of that lot. This Board is being asked to
16 single out and rezone specific lots owned by the
17 developer for different treatment from that accord
18 of similar surrounding land all for the economic
19 benefit of the developer.
20 If the Board rezones to
21 accommodate this developer, it would invite and
22 encourage a separate legal challenge.
23 Again, our client asks this
24 Board to stand by its current zoning regime. My
25 client asks this Board to show restraint and
90 1
2 reject the proposed zoning changes before it. And
3 we thank the Board for its time and consideration
4 in support of this matter.
5 MR. KAPLIN: Sir, come back
6 please. I have several questions for you. I have
7 a couple of questions for you.
8 Number one. Where does your
9 client live?
10 MR. MAGYAR: My client lives
11 at --
12 MR. PEACOCK: Rydal Road.
13 MR. MAGYAR: 964 Rydal Road.
14 MR. KAPLIN: By whom is he
15 employed.
16 MR. PEACOCK: What does that
17 have --
18 MR. MAGYAR: I’m not
19 allowed --
20 MR. FEDOROWITZ: S. Walter
21 Packaging.
22 THE AUDIENCE: It’s
23 irrelevant.
24 MR. KAPLIN: And you’re here
25 on behalf of an individual, not a group, not a
91 1
2 union?
3 MR. MAGYAR: On behalf of Mr.
4 Fedorowitz.
5 MR. KAPLIN: And that’s who
6 is paying your fee?
7 MR. MAGYAR: On behalf --
8 MR. KAPLIN: Is that who is
9 paying your fee?
10 MR. MAGYAR: It’s irrelevant.
11 MR. KAPLIN: It’s very
12 relevant to your credibility.
13 MR. MAGYAR: It’s irrelevant
14 to you.
15 MR. KAPLIN: I could address
16 the contents, but I won’t. I just want to make
17 sure that this Board knows who it is that’s
18 possibly behind this.
19 I asked a simple question.
20 Who is paying your fee? I am allowed to ask that
21 question in any Court when somebody gets up to
22 influence a body.
23 - - -
24 RUSSELL ALLEN, having been
25 duly sworn, testified as follows:
92 1
2 - - -
3 MR. ALLEN: Russ Allen, 1510
4 Grove Avenue, Jenkintown, 190346, A-L-L-E-N.
5 Grove Avenue is one of the streets that’s off
6 Rydal Road.
7 We’re seeing a pattern here.
8 You’ve heard a number of my neighbors speak
9 already tonight. What you’re hearing is the Noble
10 neighborhood. We’re the neighborhood that
11 stretches from the Noble train station, to both
12 sides of Rydal, up to Meetinghouse Road and up to
13 Washington Lane. You’ve heard a pattern here in
14 which there are concerns that have been expressed.
15 They’re very germane to the flip side which I want
16 to present now, which is a very specific request
17 from our neighborhood. You’ve heard the concerns
18 about the sacrifices that we may need to make.
19 I think most of us, however,
20 are reconciled to the fact that there probably is
21 going to be a new development there. We want it
22 to be as good as it could be, and we want to
23 contribute to the quality of out of community.
24 This has been the theme from the beginning, this
25 will contribute to the quality of our community.
93 1
2 There’s a problem in the
3 Noble neighborhood. No one can safely get from
4 the Noble neighborhood as a pedestrian to The
5 Fairway, period. It’s impossible. You can either
6 cross the tracks illegally or you can try to walk
7 down Rydal Road. I think a lot of us know what
8 that’s like. Ernie knows what that’s like. He
9 burned some shoe leather during election time
10 walking that road. It’s worth your life. There’s
11 a sidewalk that goes down halfway down Rydal Road
12 and stops dead. The road narrows there. So
13 there’s no access from our neighborhood as
14 pedestrians.
15 We have discussed a proposal
16 with Ernie that he supports. We would like that
17 sidewalk completed down one side of Rydal Road.
18 It would require a very small amount of the funds
19 that are currently allocated to the improvement of
20 the intersection at The Fairway and Rydal and
21 would require only a few hundred yards of sidewalk
22 to be added to complete where it stops in the
23 middle of Rydal Road. This will allow baby
24 carriages, walkers, runners, anyone who wants to
25 get to that development without using a car to
94 1
2 arrive safely. It’s consistent with the theme
3 that we have heard about this, not only adding to
4 the quality of our life and the neighborhood but
5 being pedestrian friendly and offsetting the
6 congestion issues that we’re all going to have to
7 deal with now by making it pedestrian accessible.
8 We’re the largest
9 neighborhood that is arguably most impacted by
10 this development, and our backs are right up
11 against it, but we can’t get to it. I’ve talked
12 to many of my neighbors. There’s unanimity in our
13 neighborhood that this will be a positive thing.
14 It would require a small amount of taking from a
15 few properties, and some of those property owners
16 are even in favor of it.
17 We’re looking forward to
18 working with Brandolini staff and Ernie to
19 formalize this request and have it as part of the
20 Township’s agreement. If this can’t be
21 formalized, we’re going to urge our Township
22 Commissioner very hard to vote against any zoning
23 variance for this development.
24 Thank you.
25 MR. KAPLIN: Excuse me. I
95 1
2 just want to know, that’s the first we have heard
3 of this.
4 MR. ALLEN: Okay. You will
5 hear plenty more.
6 MR. KAPLIN: You heard me say
7 before that we put $520,000 on the table. I mean,
8 what you’re talking about, if the right of way is
9 available, and we can’t make the right of way,
10 sounds to me it’s not a lot of money.
11 MR. ALLEN: It’s not. The
12 right of way issue is something for the Township
13 to deal with.
14 MR. KAPLIN: That’s right.
15 MR. ALLEN: It really is just
16 a few hundred yards of sidewalk. Certainly the
17 largest neighborhood impacted by this development
18 would be able to walk.
19 MR. KAPLIN: I don’t even
20 think I would have to ask Mr. Snow whether I’m
21 allowed to commit to that. But if we could get
22 your neighborhood in favor of our proposal, I’m
23 sure that we would find a way to fund that
24 sidewalk.
25 MS. DIJOSEPH: Okay. Thank
96 1
2 you.
3 MR. WIRTSHAFTER: Three
4 questions first. Bob Wirtshafter,
5 W-I-R-T-S-H-A-F-T-E-R, 1428 Cloverly Lane, Rydal,
6 19046.
7 My first question is, how
8 many existing parking spaces are there at the
9 shopping center now?
10 MR. KAPLIN: I’m not sure
11 whether Adam could tell you. He has the plan. He
12 may be able to tell you.
13 MR. MATTEO: Was he sworn in
14 before?
15 MR. KAPLIN: No, I don’t
16 think so.
17 MR. MATTEO: I don’t think so
18 either.
19 MR. BENOSKY: 609.
20 MR. WIRTSHAFTER: The next
21 question is, how many are in the plan for total
22 parking spaces and parking lot?
23 MR. KAPLIN: Well, we can get
24 that question. I think that what you will see is
25 the surface parking remains around the same.
97 1
2 MR. WIRTSHAFTER: But you’ve
3 expanded the road. You put in this landscaping.
4 So there can’t be as many as there were before.
5 MR. KAPLIN: We will get you
6 the number. But I’m giving you generally the
7 parking spaces remain the same. The parking, the
8 additional parking is in a structured garage.
9 MR. BENOSKY: 609.
10 MR. KAPLIN: 609.
11 Can you tell from the other
12 plan that Cornelius did what’s the number? It’s
13 pretty close, isn’t it?
14 MR. MATTEO: Michael?
15 MR. NARCOWICH: The plan I
16 have dated I think it’s March 22nd, 2009.
17 MR. KAPLIN: Larry, can I
18 have our engineer who prepared this plan answer?
19 MR. MATTEO: Sure. We were
20 trying to assist.
21 MR. KAPLIN: Adam, go ahead.
22 - - -
23 ADAM BENOSKY, having been
24 duly sworn, testified as follows:
25 - - -
98 1
2 MR. BENOSKY: Adam Benosky,
3 B-E-N-O-S-K-Y, Bohler Engineering, 1600 Manor
4 Drive, Chalfont, Pennsylvania.
5 The approximate number of
6 parking spaces in the proposed plan is 1,193 total
7 spaces.
8 MR. KAPLIN: How are they
9 broken down, Adam, if you can?
10 MR. BENOSKY: We have 659
11 spaces for the non-residential parking that’s in
12 the front field. The residential parking is 399
13 spaces. So the total between the structure and
14 non-structure is 617 surface spaces that’s on the
15 ground and then 576 spaces in the structured
16 parking or the parking structure.
17 MR. KAPLIN: How many
18 existing?
19 MR. BENOSKY: 609.
20 MR. KAPLIN: So by
21 redesigning the parking lot, there is some number
22 of additional surface parking?
23 MR. BENOSKY: That is
24 correct.
25 MR. KAPLIN: And then the
99 1
2 rest of the parking is in the structure?
3 MR. BENOSKY: Yes, sir.
4 MR. KAPLIN: Okay. I hope
5 that answers your question, sir.
6 MR. WIRTSHAFTER: My third
7 question is, you said something before about one
8 of the intersections was F -- one of the
9 intersections had an F grade, therefore, when you
10 go through and add the few more cars to that
11 intersection, it’s still F, and that isn’t your
12 responsibility. Is that pretty much it?
13 MR. KAPLIN: No, that’s not
14 what I said. I didn’t mention the word F.
15 MR. WIRTSHAFTER: Yes, you
16 did.
17 MR. KAPLIN: Okay.
18 MR. WIRTSHAFTER: Yes, you
19 did.
20 MR. KAPLIN: Okay.
21 MR. WIRTSHAFTER: Then I want
22 to testify. Now he’s going to -- I need to
23 testify.
24 - - -
25 ROBERT WIRTSHAFTER, having
100 1
2 been duly sworn, testified as follows:
3 - - -
4 MR. WIRTSHAFTER: I’m a Ph.D.
5 in geography. I was on the faculty of Penn and
6 city planning for twenty years. And I would like
7 to say that the transportation plan that they have
8 got is flawed. But I don’t think tonight is the
9 night for that because I think you’re talking
10 about that at the land use time.
11 MR. MATTEO: That is correct.
12 MR. WIRTSHAFTER: But I would
13 say that the way they presented it makes the
14 implication that the capacity of this space is not
15 affected by the traffic. And I believe that is
16 totally incorrect.
17 There is a limitation to how
18 much capacity this area can take. They have added
19 virtually no additional parking for this greater,
20 you know, parking shopping center they have
21 created. Almost all of the additional parking is
22 for this expanded number of tenants. So that they
23 have not in any way really improved our access to
24 this place where there’s already some
25 difficulties.
101 1
2 If they were to fill all of
3 those shops, we would have issues of parking on
4 the road. We would have additional traffic that
5 would be generated by people trying to find
6 parking spaces. All of that is not factored into
7 this equation at all.
8 Also the way they generated
9 their transportation study does not fully
10 incorporate all of the fallout of the bottlenecks.
11 They have not taken those bottlenecks into where
12 the other places where cars will go. They have
13 not adequately modeled the bottleneck that’s
14 created by the Washington Street Bridge. And I
15 will be happy to testify to those.
16 But the real issue here is
17 one of density. And you do not, under any
18 obligations, have to grant a property development
19 that is putting way too many people into this
20 space. I would be happy if it was an eighty
21 people, eighty apartment, luxury apartments. That
22 might be enough.
23 But what they have done now
24 is taken what was a smaller development with a lot
25 of parking in their original plan a year ago,
102 1
2 there was a lot more off-street parking, and now
3 they have given that all to these apartments. So
4 that’s another change that I’ve heard from last
5 year that people need to recognize.
6 So I would say to you, that,
7 yes, they’re not under obligation to fix that
8 intersection. But that intersection, the way it
9 is and the additional load on that intersection,
10 does affect the capacity, the care and capacity of
11 this area. And, even if it was zoned for high
12 density, you would still have to limit the amount
13 of development there because of that.
14 So that’s my testimony.
15 MS. DIJOSEPH: Thank you.
16 - - -
17 JODIE ABRAMS, having been
18 duly sworn, testified as follows:
19 - - -
20 MS. ABRAMS: Jodie Abrams.
21 I’m not sure I want to give my address, but it’s
22 1536 Warner Road, Meadowbrook, A-B-R-A-M-S.
23 I have a few things to say
24 about the never ending debate concerning
25 Baederwood. It’s time for this project to happen.
103 1
2 I’m tired of driving past the almost empty
3 shopping center that used to be the vibrant
4 Baederwood. I’m tired of driving up and down Old
5 York Road and seeing “For Sale” signs and “For
6 Lease” signs on abandoned stores everywhere. I’m
7 tired of driving to the Main Line and Warrington
8 and English Village and everywhere else but where
9 I live to shop, to be entertained and to dine and
10 to feel a sense of vibrancy and excitement. Let
11 us face it, our neighborhood needs a real shot in
12 the arm.
13 Enough of the parochialism
14 that I hear at these meetings from the vocal
15 minority that want nothing ever to happen out of
16 fear and paranoia that someone is trying to trick
17 them.
18 Baederwood was a busy
19 shopping center for many years before this, and we
20 all survived the traffic. I have faith in our
21 elected officials that they will not put us in
22 jeopardy. It’s time to show confidence in our
23 Commissioners and our Township consultants and to
24 let them do their jobs.
25 No one is pulling the wool
104 1
2 over anyone’s eyes here when it comes to traffic
3 issues, storm water issues and environmental
4 issues. The average person who speaks at these
5 hearings has no expertise when it comes to these
6 complex issues. Our Commissioners do and so do
7 our paid consultants and engineers.
8 I have driven past other
9 Brandolini shopping centers and, in my opinion, we
10 should be delighted to have anything close to the
11 type of projects Brandolini has done in places
12 such as Concordville and Collegeville. Again, I’m
13 tired of seeing projects likes these and saying to
14 myself, why can’t we have shopping centers like
15 this in our own backyard?
16 As far as the condos are
17 concerned, I’m not here to say that I think 175
18 units is the right number or 350 units is the
19 right number because I don’t know and I’m not
20 qualified to express an opinion on that. I’m here
21 to say that enough is enough. Let’s get this
22 project done, and let’s trust our experts to make
23 sure it gets done the right way.
24 MR. MATTEO: Thank you.
25 - - -
105 1
2 DIANE REED, having been duly
3 sworn, testified as follows:
4 - - -
5 MS. REED: Diane Reed,
6 R-E-E-D, 1056 Huntingdon Road in Abington. I just
7 want to say that our property is very near the
8 Elliott debacle, which is now Rydal Park, which is
9 at this point not able to fund the wonderful
10 development they had. And I wonder what guarantee
11 we have that if Brandolini would not be able to do
12 what it wants to do and tears down all the trees
13 and so forth, what guarantee we have not to have
14 another disaster like we had with the Elliott
15 tract.
16 Also, with the Elliott tract,
17 all the trees were taken down. The storm water
18 was handled. It’s all underground now, so it
19 doesn’t water anything. The things that are
20 growing up there are just scrub. If you take all
21 of those trees down and divert the storm water, it
22 all goes down to the Delaware River. It doesn’t
23 do us any good.
24 My biggest point is, however,
25 what guarantees do we have that -- oh, also, I was
106 1
2 not at the last meeting. But is it not true that
3 the Planning Commission said or suggested 175
4 units?
5 MR. MATTEO: Do you have a
6 number? I don’t remember that number. I have to
7 check the minutes on that. The last proposal I
8 believe was April of ‘08 at the Planning
9 Commission meeting. I don’t know if you’re
10 referring to that one or the most recent one.
11 MS. REED: Most recent one.
12 MR. MATTEO: Well, the first
13 was 188, that number. I apologize. It might have
14 been around that. Something like that. I don’t
15 have the records right here.
16 MS. REED: Is it true that
17 Brandolini is going to make the parking spaces
18 smaller so that they get more parking?
19 MR. MATTEO: Do you want to
20 answer that? Marc, do you want to answer that?
21 MS. REED: Are you not asking
22 for some kind of whatever you ask for to get the
23 parking spaces smaller?
24 MR. KAPLIN: No. The parking
25 stalls I believe are standard size. We are adding
107 1
2 more parking. The parking on the first floor of
3 the structured parking facility is for the
4 offices. The last gentleman that got up and
5 testified was not accurate in that. We have
6 reconfigured the parking lot. And based on what
7 Adam said, we’re talking about more surface
8 parking, not less, and parking on the first floor
9 of the parking garage for the office.
10 It wouldn’t do us any good to
11 build a development without the adequate number of
12 parking spaces because nobody would come more than
13 once.
14 MS. REED: I have one other
15 thing to say about the last person that spoke.
16 I’m old but I can’t think that it’s going to do
17 Abington any particular good to have it a
18 destination for people from all over to come to
19 Abington. And that just adds to the traffic. And
20 York Road is already getting to be impossible. So
21 that’s what I have to say.
22 MR. MATTEO: Thank you.
23 MR. PEACOCK: Madam
24 President, if I may. I do have to answer Diane
25 Reed’s question. I do have the minutes from the
108 1
2 Planning Commission meeting. And those minutes
3 would say that they recommend -- the Planning
4 Commission recommends approval of the ordinance
5 subject to the following qualifications, and one
6 of those is maximum density would be 175
7 residential units.
8 THE AUDIENCE: What’s the
9 date on that?
10 MR. PEACOCK: October 7th,
11 2009. It was the continuation of the first
12 Planning Commission meeting that was held on
13 September 24th,
14 THE AUDIENCE: Was it age
15 limited?
16 MR. PEACOCK: The residential
17 component, we recommend it to be fifty-five years
18 or older.
19 MS. DIJOSEPH: Yes, sir?
20 And may I caution those of
21 you that are waiting, we have twenty minutes, so
22 we will take that into consideration.
23 - - -
24 PHILIP LASKA, having been
25 duly sworn, testified as follows:
109 1
2 - - -
3 MR. LASKA: Philip Laska,
4 L-A-S-K-A, 1204 Rosemont Lane, Abington, PA.
5 The one not before me but the
6 one before her mentioned we’re not traffic
7 experts, and that’s right. But I have a set of
8 eyes and a brain. My wife and I bought our house
9 about six years ago, and we watched the traffic
10 increase a great deal.
11 Now we have two dogs that I
12 walk every morning between 5:30 and 7:30 in the
13 morning. The number of cars that I see cutting
14 through my neighborhood, which I live off of
15 Huntingdon Road, near the Sunrise Retirement
16 Community, is incredible. And the addition of 266
17 apartment units is only going to increase the
18 number of people who are going to cut through my
19 neighborhood to avoid Susquehanna Road backlog to
20 get to 611, if you would, or wherever they want to
21 go.
22 The people in my neighborhood
23 on my street, we vehemently oppose the
24 construction of a 266 apartment building because
25 we don’t want to see this increased level of
110 1
2 traffic. We can’t handle it. The children who
3 live in our neighborhood, they can’t ride their
4 bikes because the cars are speeding by in excess
5 of the twenty-five miles per hour speed limit.
6 So, when the three of you go
7 home tonight, think about your neighborhood and
8 think about all of a sudden a bunch of traffic
9 just going through there over the speed limit and
10 think about how much that bothers us because we
11 live here, and it really bothers us.
12 So we are opposed to this
13 apartment building being constructed and
14 increasing the amount of traffic and really
15 jeopardizing the safety of people. Because I see
16 it every morning. I’m really not happy about what
17 I see. Thank you.
18 MR. SKLAROFF: I am going to
19 first ask two questions, and then I’m going to
20 testify.
21 Question one, regarding the
22 question I asked about the fire safety issue, one
23 question. Has the assessment been made regarding
24 the capacity of a fire truck to get to the
25 residential areas? Yay or nay?
111 1
2 MR. KAPLIN: Yes.
3 MR. SKLAROFF: And what’s the
4 result of that?
5 MR. KAPLIN: Fire --
6 MR. SKLAROFF: Trucks. Fire
7 truck. You know, woo, woo, woo. Fire truck.
8 MR. KAPLIN: No, I can’t
9 answer that.
10 But what I can answer is --
11 MS. DIJOSEPH: You better use
12 the microphone.
13 MR. KAPLIN: We’re not at
14 that stage.
15 But what I can tell you, I
16 already said it, that there are adequate means of
17 fighting a fire.
18 MR. SKLAROFF: Don’t
19 filibuster. The answer is, you have not made an
20 assessment.
21 MR. KAPLIN: I answered your
22 question.
23 MR. SKLAROFF: Right. Now
24 the next question is directed to Adam, the traffic
25 man.
112 1
2 Who is the traffic person,
3 the expert?
4 MR. KAPLIN: Please ask your
5 question, and we will decide from our witnesses
6 who will answer.
7 MR. SKLAROFF: Right. I
8 believe he stated earlier that there is raw data
9 upon which the twelve-page report that we read,
10 some of us read, are predicated based on whatever
11 reference. And I would like to ask a yay or nay
12 question.
13 Part A of the question, may
14 we have a copy of the raw data upon which those
15 judgments that, quote, unquote, a small increase
16 will occur as a result of this project, and, B, a
17 copy of the precise methodology, not the
18 reference, the precise methodology that was
19 employed when coming to these conclusions? Yes or
20 no?
21 MR. KAPLIN: The methodology
22 was spelled out.
23 MR. SKLAROFF: No, it was
24 not.
25 MR. KAPLIN: Excuse me.
113 1
2 MR. SKLAROFF: It wasn’t.
3 MR. KAPLIN: Look, I will
4 give you the answer.
5 MR. MATTEO: Let him answer.
6 MR. KAPLIN: The methodology,
7 my understanding is, the methodology was spelled
8 out. I’m not sure -- Matt, was all of the
9 computer printouts given to the Township?
10 MR. BENOSKY: No.
11 MR. KAPLIN: Were you asked
12 for it by McMahon?
13 MR. BENOSKY: No.
14 MR. KAPLIN: We will be glad
15 to give it to the Township.
16 MR. SKLAROFF: So we will get
17 a copy of the data, and we will get a copy of not
18 just the reference to the type of methodology but
19 a reference describing the policy procedures that
20 was applied.
21 MR. KAPLIN: We will give you
22 the rest of the numbers that were run --
23 MR. SKLAROFF: That’s one of
24 the questions.
25 MR. KAPLIN: I would
114 1
2 appreciate it if you just let me finish. You
3 asked me what we’re going to give.
4 MR. SKLAROFF: Right.
5 MR. KAPLIN: If there is
6 other material that was generated or collected, we
7 will give the Township all of that information.
8 MR. SKLAROFF: Okay.
9 Including methodology, I hope. All right. I’m
10 ready to testify.
11 - - -
12 ROBERT B. SKLAROFF, having
13 been duly sworn, testified as follows:
14 - - -
15 MR. SKLAROFF: Robert B.
16 Sklaroff, S-K-L-A-R-O-F-F, 1219 Fairacres Road,
17 Rydal, PA, 19046-2911.
18 I’m going to start with a
19 quotation that I got from the BlackBerry here, and
20 it directly contradicts a point that was made by
21 the Chair suggesting that a lot of the comments
22 here may be out of order. Now, granted, it was
23 from Broward County. But they list eight criteria
24 for zoning, and I’m going to read only A. It’s
25 eight lines. “Whether the proposed use or uses
115 1
2 would have hours of operation, lighting, odor,
3 noise levels, traffic or site activity that would
4 significantly diminish the enjoyment of safety or
5 quality of life in existing neighborhoods within
6 the area which could conceivably be affected by
7 the proposed use.”
8 Therefore, I conclude from
9 that that unless Broward County in Florida is
10 distinctly different from here and their zoning
11 laws are, that the discussion of zoning is highly
12 on point relative to issues related to traffic,
13 parking, et cetera. Part one.
14 What I want to do is read the
15 testimony which is terse regarding the traffic
16 issues so that my entire database is perfectly
17 known to Mr. Kaplin and everybody else. And,
18 basically, I already discussed the Traffic
19 Planning and Design report which was issued on
20 July 13th and, therefore, presumably was based
21 upon data that had been acquired prior thereto.
22 It was attempted to reassure the reader that
23 traffic volumes would not be greatly affected by
24 the plan to construct hundreds of residences,
25 expanded businesses, in a region that’s already
116 1
2 routinely supports bottlenecked traffic on
3 Susquehanna Avenue, et cetera. The four sites I
4 listed. And the key one, of course, is the fact
5 that missing is the bridge. And I also noted the
6 suggestion that the redesign intersection of The
7 Fairway and Rydal Road, which to me is tangential,
8 would be financed.
9 And the key concept I want to
10 suggest be weighed by the Commissioners is a,
11 quote, Primum Non Nocere, the first prior is do no
12 harm. That is a quote the physicians learned from
13 Galen of Pergamum. And, basically, we should not
14 do anything we know that is already going to
15 injure a Level F intersection.
16 And the bottom line of this
17 whole situation to me is that when you look at
18 what’s going on here and you listen to Ms. Abrams
19 say that we should trust our elected leaders, I
20 think with the health care reform situation, et
21 cetera, the bottom line point is we are here as
22 citizens. Whether we’re having a tea party here
23 or not, the bottom line is we are here to give
24 oversight and to give informed consent to all of
25 you. And when that includes expert testimony, you
117 1
2 might say, from people from the citizenry from
3 Penn, et cetera, I think you have to weigh it at
4 least as much as what was given by the applicant’s
5 for the program.
6 Thank you.
7 MS. DIJOSEPH: Thank you.
8 - - -
9 JOSEPH DRATCH, having been
10 duly sworn, testified as follows:
11 - - -
12 MR. DRATCH: Joseph Dratch,
13 1186 Mill Road Circle, Rydal, PA, 19046,
14 D-R-A-T-C-H.
15 I was here at the last
16 meeting, and I had asked a question. I’m going to
17 repeat the question again, because I know that
18 everybody in here has the concerns about the
19 traffic and the storm water and all of these other
20 issues which are very important regarding the
21 development. But I don’t think that’s why we’re
22 here tonight. We’re here about the zoning
23 ordinance and about whether or not the ordinance
24 should be changed.
25 First, before I ask the
118 1
2 question, I want to say that I agree with
3 everything that Mrs. Abrams said in her statement.
4 My question, again, to Mr.
5 Kaplin, and I see Mr. Herder here, is, at least I
6 was left with the impression that should this
7 zoning ordinance be turned down or denied, that
8 there is a potential for litigation; is that
9 correct, Mr. Kaplin?
10 MR. KAPLIN: It’s not a
11 potential. The challenge was filed months ago.
12 MR. DRATCH: Okay. I was not
13 aware of that. I will ask Mr. Herder also since
14 he’s here.
15 Could you please explain to
16 everybody in this room what the potential hazards
17 can be or what the potential problems could be for
18 the Township in the event that you prevail in a
19 lawsuit regarding this particular site?
20 MR. HERDER: I will speak
21 first, I guess, Marc, if that’s all right.
22 MR. KAPLIN: Go ahead.
23 MR. HERDER: If by dangers
24 you mean to the Township, if by that term you
25 mean --
119 1
2 MR. DRATCH: What the
3 repercussions would be to the Township.
4 MR. HERDER: Mr. Kaplin’s
5 challenge is to the validity of the R-1 zoning
6 parcel. And he asks that that be rezoned to PB.
7 And the result to the Township would be that that
8 parcel would then be zoned PB as is the front part
9 of the parcel.
10 MR. KAPLIN: That’s true as
11 far as it goes. When you file a challenge, you
12 have to file a plan, not an engineering plan, but
13 you have to file a plan that shows what could be
14 or what would be proposed to develop.
15 I’m going to digress just a
16 hair because I think it’s important.
17 The front part of the
18 property is already zoned PB. PB allows virtually
19 the same thing that we are proposing. It allows I
20 believe up to some four hundred units if we
21 develop structured parking. The problem with the
22 PB District as it’s presently configured is you
23 can’t do a mixed-use project. It has a number of
24 dimensional limitations that make either this type
25 of development that we’re showing or any type of
120 1
2 modern mixed-use development as recommended by the
3 comprehensive plan and corridor study impossible.
4 So that’s why we just didn’t come in under PB,
5 even though you could get more units. It doesn’t
6 work.
7 But coming back to your
8 question then, what our proposal is, is to have
9 the whole site zoned PB, and we could then do a
10 series of mixed-used buildings in accordance with
11 the PB District. That would allow a certain
12 amount or require a certain amount of retail on
13 the first floor and allow residential above.
14 Unless we can find it quickly, I don’t want to
15 give you a number. But it was a significant
16 number of units.
17 And that’s what the risk is,
18 and we’re here because -- well, you didn’t ask me
19 why we’re here, so I won’t go there.
20 MR. DRATCH: In other words,
21 what you’re saying is, the hypothetical, if this
22 is denied, you could hypothetically come in for
23 four hundred apartment units, hypothetically?
24 MR. KAPLIN: Joe, I hate to
25 do it, because, every time you say that, somebody
121 1
2 says, then you’re threatening us.
3 MR. DRATCH: What I’m trying
4 to do is make clear to the people that are here.
5 First of all, by profession, I’m a real estate
6 developer, so you understand.
7 Well, I’ve been involved in
8 these things. I know how they work, and I know
9 what could happen. And I want the best thing for
10 this Township. And I know this Board has been
11 wrestling with this thing for many, many years.
12 And it’s just too easy to make a statement, you
13 know, deny this thing, without understanding the
14 repercussions.
15 And the fact is that a loss
16 in the Courts could potentially take the
17 development of this property out of your hands and
18 put it into the Court’s hands. And that is a very
19 big risk for the Township to take on such an
20 important project. And I think that it’s
21 important that we sit down as residents, and I’m
22 speaking as a resident now, and try to work out
23 some type of a compromise, some type of a way of
24 seeing our way through this situation so that the
25 Court doesn’t take over.
122 1
2 MR. MATTEO: Joe, are you
3 asking questions or do you want to be sworn?
4 MR. DRATCH: I am sworn.
5 And I think that this is
6 something that I know that you, the Supervisors,
7 understand that and you understand it completely.
8 But I don’t think everybody in this room
9 understands exactly what could happen.
10 MR. MATTEO: Thank you.
11 MR. DRATCH: Thank you.
12 - - -
13 RALPH FRIEDMAN, having been
14 duly sworn, testified as follows:
15 - - -
16 MR. FRIEDMAN: Ralph
17 Friedman. I live at 1420 Hunter Road, Rydal,
18 Pennsylvania. I’m here on behalf of myself and
19 mainly for the Rydal Meadowbrook Civic
20 Association.
21 You’re being asked to approve
22 a zoning ordinance change, and that’s why we’re
23 here. The Rydal Meadowbrook Civic Association is
24 opposed to the proposed change. Most of the
25 reasons have been stated. The density that it
123 1
2 proposes is of great concern to us, and we ask you
3 to support the R-1 zoning as it now exists.
4 However, we are in favor of a
5 redevelopment of the Baederwood Shopping Center,
6 and we would hope that there is some way that, and
7 this all got spotty with Brandolini’s cooperation,
8 can come up with a solution to avoid the
9 communication gap that has developed. Your
10 Township Manager or our Township Manager was
11 quoted in The Times Chronicle over the project at
12 Williard (ph.) when he says it goes to the credits
13 of the developer and the community leadership.
14 They worked hard together for two or three years
15 to get to a point where the community will be
16 happy with what’s there and it could be a
17 successful development. There is no reason why
18 that can’t happen here.
19 Last year I represented the
20 Civic Association when Brandolini made a zoning
21 proposal. I thought that we had begun profitable
22 negotiations with their then counsel to move the
23 thing along, but for some reason it died.
24 Now, I’ve heard the Rutger’s
25 quoted here today. And I’m going to quote an
124 1
2 authority from Penn State University. His name is
3 Joe Paterno. In the locker room he has posted,
4 “Take care of the little things and the big things
5 will take care of themselves.”
6 Well, Mr. Snow, you didn’t
7 take care of the little things. These are the
8 little things, the people that are here today
9 opposing your proposal. Had you come to the Civic
10 Association and heard what we had to say, maybe
11 your proposal would have been different. Maybe it
12 would be acceptable to us. Maybe it would be
13 acceptable to the community.
14 I’m asking you to find a way,
15 whether it’s appointing a task force, a committee,
16 whatever, of community representatives and
17 hopefully with Brandolini’s cooperation we can sit
18 down, work out the problems and get a project done
19 that’s going to be beneficial to everybody.
20 Thank you.
21 MR. KAPLIN: Ralph, can I ask
22 you a couple of questions?
23 MR. FRIEDMAN: Sure.
24 MR. KAPLIN: My understanding
25 is you said that you represented the Civic
125 1
2 Association when Brandolini filed a zoning
3 proposal. By that, I assume you mean the request
4 for variances before the Zoning Hearing Board.
5 MR. FRIEDMAN: That’s
6 correct.
7 MR. KAPLIN: It’s true, I
8 wasn’t there but Fred has told me. That variance,
9 through two hearings, was vehemently opposed,
10 wasn’t it?
11 MR. FRIEDMAN: I don’t think
12 it was vehemently opposed. I think there were
13 objections just as there are to this.
14 MR. KAPLIN: There was a
15 lawyer, other than you, there who represented
16 somebody else and opposed the application.
17 MR. FRIEDMAN: I don’t think
18 so. I don’t remember that.
19 MR. MATTEO: Yes.
20 MR. FRIEDMAN: I could be
21 wrong. Who was that?
22 I know, Marc, as a result of
23 a meeting, we sat down. We began to talk. I
24 thought we were working it out. However, I was
25 representing the Civic Association as then
126 1
2 President of the Civic Association. I think Mr.
3 Snow had some communications, something happened.
4 MR. KAPLIN: Let me just tell
5 you -- and I think it’s very important, because
6 you used the word “communication” and all of that.
7 And I agree with that. And I wasn’t there. But
8 that’s why I became involved. Because Fred -- and
9 Fred explained that you were here the last
10 meeting.
11 The first step was to get
12 some more depth to be able to expand the building.
13 In order to do that, you had to move the office
14 parking to the back. And, in order to do that, we
15 would have had to or Fred would have had to
16 intrude into the R-1 just for parking for the
17 office. That was just the first step.
18 There were -- and I assure,
19 Fred assures me, there were two hearings where
20 they barely got to the substance, and they were
21 opposed. So they, Brandolini, Fred Snow was
22 opposed. And Fred felt that if the community
23 can’t even accept eighteen or some parking spaces
24 in the R-1 ground to allow the start of the
25 redevelopment, then nothing would have ever
127 1
2 happened.
3 That’s the first part that I
4 want the Board to understand about the
5 communication and about the zoning hearing
6 process.
7 MR. FRIEDMAN: In response to
8 that -- I don’t want to waste time with the people
9 here. I have copies of two letters that I wrote
10 to Denise Yarnoff (ph.), who was then counsel, and
11 a letter that I wrote to the President of the
12 Civic Association concerning the breakdown with
13 regard to the negotiations. It is my
14 understanding, at least as far as the Civic
15 Association is concerned, and I think the zoning
16 Board would have gone along with it, that
17 everything had been worked out. There was one
18 issue that I think was problematic to Fred, and
19 that was the size of the stores. There was some
20 bickering going on over that. And that was the
21 only hangup at that point.
22 The issue with regard to the
23 R-1 zoned part in the back to be used for parking
24 was resolved.
25 MR. KAPLIN: Resolved between
128 1
2 who and who?
3 MR. FRIEDMAN: The
4 Association and Mr. Snow.
5 MR. KAPLIN: But when --
6 MR. FRIEDMAN: I don’t know
7 about the other person. But it was never then --
8 it was withdrawn from the Zoning Board’s
9 consideration.
10 MR. KAPLIN: It was withdrawn
11 after two contested hearings.
12 MS. DIJOSEPH: Gentlemen,
13 apparently the two of you are not going to agree
14 on this. It is now five after 10:00. Two other
15 people want to speak very quickly, and I am going
16 to have to ask that.
17 MR. FRIEDMAN: I just
18 reiterate what I said. I hope you will find a way
19 to piece it together and work on it.
20 MS. DIJOSEPH: Your point is
21 well taken. Thank you.
22 - - -
23 CARSON ADCOCK, having been
24 duly sworn, testified as follows:
25 - - -
129 1
2 MR. ADCOCK: Carson Adcock,
3 1714 Brook Road, A-D-C-O-C-K.
4 Briefly, I did oppose that
5 originally and our attorney called Mr. Snow’s
6 office, and we may even be the other person you’re
7 talking about. But we said, as long as you’re
8 willing to restrict yourself only intruding from
9 that one acre to the eight acres and if you would
10 put that in writing, we would be agreeable to the
11 plan. Mr. Snow’s office said they wouldn’t hear
12 anything of it, certainly implying that they
13 wanted to go beyond that once they got that
14 waiver.
15 MS. DIJOSEPH: Thank you.
16 MR. ADCOCK: My point here
17 tonight was just to kind of conclude with
18 something positive for the Board.
19 MS. DIJOSEPH: Please.
20 MR. ADCOCK: And especially
21 to the fellow Republicans on the Board. I think
22 there’s a spirit of property rights --
23 MS. DIJOSEPH: Sir --
24 MR. ADCOCK: -- upholding the
25 rights of the individuals that leaves me as a
130 1
2 Republican, and I hope it resonates with you.
3 MS. DIJOSEPH: Will you make
4 your statement?
5 MR. ADCOCK: Recent history
6 shows us two things. Once you give away these
7 property rights, you won’t be able to take them
8 back. Also, once you appease this demand, more
9 demands are sure to follow. The prelude actually
10 kind of alludes to that, doesn’t it?
11 As long as we go on
12 validating lunacy and rewarding greed which you
13 will not be surprised to find a steady stream of
14 both knocking on our door consuming more and more
15 time and energy and resources, deteriorating our
16 political, social and natural environment along
17 the way.
18 Where will we draw the line?
19 Members of the Board, I will suggest it has been
20 drawn already, and what it shows is eight acres of
21 residential property adjacent to a forty-two acre
22 residential lot to its rear. If Brandolini didn’t
23 like owning or abutting the residential property,
24 why did they purchase it in the first place?
25 As those charged with
131 1
2 protecting the zoning integrity of Abington -- and
3 I don’t mean this in an insulting way, but
4 certainly I would take it as a personal insult
5 that Brandolini would come here with this
6 expectation, that you would be willing to hand
7 over the green space zoned for eight units in
8 exchange for a high density lot zoned for 266.
9 I doubt that when you ran for
10 office, you were motivated out of a desire to find
11 the path of least resistance. If decisions were
12 easy and strength were not required, we would not
13 even need a Board. This is moment to do what you
14 came here to do. This is why you were appointed
15 and elected as our Commissioners. Your time on
16 this decision-making body will soon pass. I
17 challenge each of you, do not set yourself up to
18 look back on this opportunity with regret.
19 Previous Boards have handed you a precedent of
20 conciliation and conception. Hand the next
21 generation a precedent of courage, wisdom and
22 foresight.
23 Please tell Brandolini and
24 those of their kind who would come after, surely
25 and clearly, we will not be intimidated or
132 1
2 coerced. Tell them the line has been drawn
3 already and we tend to hold it.
4 - - -
5 PAUL ALOE, having been duly
6 sworn, testified as follows:
7 - - -
8 MR. ALOE: Paul Aloe, Rydal,
9 A-L-O-E.
10 I want to make clear, and I
11 brought that up at the Commissioners’ meeting the
12 other night, this is not a PB that you’re going to
13 be voting on. It’s a new classification, a new
14 zoning classification written by the applicant, by
15 Brandolini. This application for -- what is it,
16 full name of the application, Larry? The
17 Baederwood --
18 MR. MATTEO: Baederwood
19 Limited Partnership.
20 MR. ALOE: Baederwood Limited
21 Partnership is what they propose to change this
22 not only the PB section but the whole of the eight
23 acres, 8.3 acres besides that?
24 MR. MATTEO: That is correct.
25 MR. ALOE: So what Mr. Herder
133 1
2 said before or Mr. Kaplin said before is not true.
3 It’s not being changed to be PB. It’s being
4 changed to a zoning classification that they
5 wrote. The Township Commissioners did not write
6 this. They wrote it.
7 I think that it’s imperative
8 that we understand that there are many, many
9 people who have already gone home, and I was going
10 to ask all of the people that are against it, and
11 I think you know, that ninety-nine percent, except
12 Mr. Dratch and one other person, are vehemently
13 opposed as this as it stands. I think what this
14 previous person said is true.
15 And I would like to see the
16 zoning kept on the R-1 section. I would like to
17 see Brandolini get started on building the
18 Baederwood Shopping Center. You can take the two
19 PB sections and put them together. But the only
20 ones that can change zoning in Abington Township
21 are you, the Board of Commissioners. The people
22 can’t do it. The zoning is important to all of us
23 that live here and came in this community as a
24 suburban community, not an urban community.
25 We are not opposed to the
134 1
2 rebuilding of the Baederwood Shopping Center.
3 Brandolini admitted at the last meeting that it
4 would be three years before he would get around to
5 building on the R-1 section. He also has a
6 property up in Providence where he has two years
7 to go before he could get that completed.
8 Sentiment is against town
9 centers. We are not a town center. Abington is a
10 town of different communities, each distinctive in
11 its own, and we came into this community because
12 we like a suburban community. We want to retain
13 that suburban community. We would like Fred Snow
14 and Brandolini to help us maintain a suburban
15 community.
16 I say what worked out at the
17 Willow property was great. I think if we get the
18 proper cooperation between Fred Snow and
19 Brandolini and the community we can do it again.
20 We can build something there.
21 But, in the meantime, let’s
22 get a shopping center. Fred, give us a shopping
23 center now, not later. We need a shopping center
24 there. You can come back later when you see that
25 the time is right to see what could be done with
135 1
2 that R-1 section. Right now, let’s get to work
3 and let’s do the Baederwood Shopping Center, what
4 people want back again. And then, in the future,
5 we will see what happens with the R-1. Three
6 years is a long time away, and that’s a long time
7 to wait.
8 Thank you very much.
9 MR. MATTEO: Thank you.
10 MS. DIJOSEPH: Thank you all
11 for coming tonight. At this time, I must tell you
12 a decision will not be rendered tonight. As you
13 can see, this is a multi-layered project with
14 many, many faucets. And we will have a transcript
15 to review in time.
16 And some conciliation. I
17 think, very briefly, our Manager, Mr. Conway,
18 would like to mention that the Township has hired
19 or agreed to hire a planner who is going to be
20 helping us. And, Mr. Conway, if you would want to
21 add on to that a little bit for us.
22 MR. CONWAY: Briefly, of
23 course, as the Board knows, the Board took action
24 at last week’s monthly meeting to authorize me to
25 engage the services of a professional certified
136 1
2 planner to take a look at some of the numbers
3 associated with both the PB option and what’s
4 being proposed this evening and help give the
5 Board some added perspective against what is being
6 proposed. So that process is underway.
7 MS. DIJOSEPH: Thank you.
8 So the point is, we are going
9 to be moving forward, and I just want all of you
10 to know that we do, very seriously, consider all
11 of the testimony that we have heard and that there
12 will not be any kind of private deals being cut.
13 This will all be very transparent, and we
14 certainly thank all of you for your input. That’s
15 very important to us.
16 (At 10:15 p.m., proceedings
17 were concluded.)
18 - - -
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
137 1
2
3 C E R T I F I C A T I O N _________________________
4
5
6
7 I hereby certify that the
8 proceedings and evidence are contained fully and
9 accurately in the notes taken by me in the above
10 cause and that this is a correct transcript of the
11 same.
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19 ________________________
20 MARK MANJARDI
21 Official Court Reporter
22 - - -
23
24