Public Hearing - 11-18-9

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.


24 Thank you.

25 MR. MATTEO: Thank you.

8 1


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.


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?


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.


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.


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.


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.


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?


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.


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?


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?


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?


52 1


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


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.


10 - - -

11 TOTO SCHIAVONE, having been


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.


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.


24 - - -

25 MICHAEL STEWART, having been

78 1


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


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


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.


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


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.


16 - - -

17 JODIE ABRAMS, having been


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.


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.


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


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.


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.


8 - - -

9 JOSEPH DRATCH, having been


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.


11 MR. DRATCH: Thank you.

12 - - -

13 RALPH FRIEDMAN, having been


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


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.


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.


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.


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

Date post:	03-Mar-2015
Category:	Documents
Upload:	robert-b-sklaroff
View:	75 times
Download:	0 times

Public Hearing - 11-18-9

Documents