ABINGTON TOWNSHIP BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS MONTGOMERY COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA --Continued Hearing Ordinance No. 1984 Ordinance No.

1985 --Wednesday, November 18, 2009 Commencing at 7:30 p.m. --Abington Junior High Little Theatre Susquehanna Road Abington, Pennsylvania --BOARD MEMBERS: CAROL DIJOSEPH, President STEVEN KLINE ROBERT A. WACHTER MICHAEL OCONNOR JOHN J. OCONNOR 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] _______ Brad Werden, 2048 Mount Carmel Avenue, Jenkintown Aaron Siegel, 902 Frazer Road, Rydal Robert Sklaroff, M.D. 1219 Fairacres Road, Rydal Paul E. Morse, Jr., 755, Glenn Road, Jenkintown Lewis Mifsud, Ph.D., 1315 Washington Lane, Rydal Matt Hammond, 2500 East High Street, Suite 650, Pottstown, Pennsylvania 19464 Michelle Cloud, 1413 Autumn Road, Rydal Elaine Cohen, Meetinghouse Road, Meadowbrook Sandi Philips, 1920 Sharon Road, Meadowbrook Sylvan Litz, 1570 The Fairway, Jenkintown Marsha Prybutok, 1426 Autumn Road, Rydal Carolyn Hoppe,110 Pennmore Place, Rydal Kathleen Schlerb, 1236 Washington Lane, Rydal Walter Hicks, 1533 Cherry Lane, Rydal Connie Zagerman, 1404 Noble Road, Rydal Susan Odhner, 1349 Warner Road, Rydal Toto Schiavone, 1115 Rydal Road, Rydal Mike Stewart, 1921 Harte Road, Rydal Vincent Magyar, Esquire, 1927 Cator Street, Phila. PA, 19146 Law firm of Curtin & Heefner, Morrisville, PA Representing John Fedorowitz [964 Rydal Road, Rydal] Russell Allen, 1510 Grove Avenue, Jenkintown, 19046 Adam Benosky Bohler Engineering, 1600 Manor Drive, Chalfont, PA Bob Wirtshafter, Ph.D., 1428 Cloverly Lane, Rydal Jodie Abrams, 1536 Warner Road, Meadowbrook Diane Reed, 1056 Huntingdon Road, Abington Philip Laska, 1204 Rosemont Lane, Abington, 19001 Robert Sklaroff, M.D. 1219 Fairacres Road, Rydal Joseph Dratch, 1186 Mill Road Circle, Rydal Ralph Friedman, 1420 Hunter Road, Rydal Representing the Rydal Meadowbrook Civic Association Carson Adcock, 1714 Brook Road, Rydal Paul Aloe, 1259 Cox Road, Rydal --Page ____ 8 12 13 19 24 26 31 36 41 45 47 51 52 53 55 59 62 78

86 92 98 100 102 105 109 110 117 122 129 132

4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MS. DIJOSEPH: Good evening. Welcome to the Township of Abington Board of Commissioners for a continued hearing for Ordinance Number 1984 and Ordinance Number 1985. Now the roll call, please. MR. MATTEO: Wachter? MR. WACHTER: Here. MR. MATTEO: Peacock? MR. PEACOCK: Here. MR. MATTEO: Ring? MR. RING: Here. MR. MATTEO: Schreiber? MS. SCHREIBER: Here. MR. MATTEO: Zappone? (No response.) MR. MATTEO: Luker? MR. LUKER: Here. MR. MATTEO: Lynott? (No response.) MR. MATTEO: Gillespie? MS. GILLESPIE: Here. MR. MATTEO: Benzak? (No response.) MR. MATTEO: Jay OConnor?

5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 OConnor? MR. M. OCONNOR: Here. MR. MATTEO: Myers? (No response.) MR. MATTEO: Madam President? MS. DIJOSEPH: Here. At this time, I will ask you to stand for the Pledge of Allegiance. I would like to thank all of you for coming. I know it wasnt easy to find a parking spot tonight, and I see many of you are seeking seats and getting settled in. But we do want to start because we only have the room until ten oclock, at which time we will be out of here, if not before. So we are going to start now. At this time, I would like to call on Mr. Matteo, Larry Matteo, who is head of our Code Enforcement land development and what I MR. J. OCONNOR: Here. MR. MATTEO: Kline? MR. KLINE: Here. MR. MATTEO: Carlin? (No response.) MR. MATTEO: Michael

6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 does not? MR. MATTEO: He does not. Im sorry. He does not. MS. DIJOSEPH: All right. So for us. MR. MATTEO: Thank you. At the last meeting, on October 14th, the applicant presented their application on these ordinances to this body. At that time, we took questions from Commissioners and then from the residents. And I believe, at that time, it became a little late and we had to stop the questioning portion of the hearing. We are going to go into testimony, but we were just asking questions of the applicant at that time. And I think we can continue at that point, because Ive spoken to Mr. Kaplin tonight and he doesnt have any further presentation to make. MS. DIJOSEPH: He does or would like him to do, what I would ask him to do is review what we did at last or first part, if you will, of this hearing. Larry, if you will do a recap

7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Thank you. MR. MATTEO: Thank you. we did finish with questions. MR. MATTEO: Well, we can continue that because -MS. DIJOSEPH: Maybe at this point we could do questions and comments. Would that be agreeable to you, Mr. Kaplin? MR. KAPLIN: Certainly. MS. DIJOSEPH: Okay. So let us do it that way. MR. MATTEO: Carol, why dont we start with questions? I think a couple of people had questions at that time. If there are no questions, then we will go into the comment section. MS. DIJOSEPH: All right. MR. MATTEO: If I may add also, when we get into the comment section, the people in the ordinance will be sworn in for their testimony at that time, and they must give their name and address. MS. DIJOSEPH: All right.

8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MS. DIJOSEPH: All right. Are there any members of the audience at this time who have a question? And, if so, you will come forward and use the podium up here where the microphone is up front. Any questions? Yes, sir? Do you want to come forward to the podium? MR. WERDEN: I am Brad Werden, 2048 Mount Carmel Avenue. MS. DIJOSEPH: Will you speak into the microphone, please? MR. WERDEN: I have been following the goings on about the Brandolini property. My question is regarding the zoning as it stands and as its proposed. Theres a question that the rear piece of the shopping center property carries with it an R-1 zoning. Theres a question as to how that may have been arrived at. It is my understanding, from having looked at zoning maps and The Fairway at large that all of the other properties are in a PB District. I think that it would be easiest and

9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 time for this. question. MR. WERDEN: Thank you. MR. MATTEO: You will have a question? MR. WERDEN: Im raising the question that there should be consideration as to -THE AUDIENCE: Thats not a most expeditious to solve this problem if we change the R-1 to a PB and let the developer build -MR. MATTEO: Mr. Werden, I appreciate your comments. I think right now were just asking questions, sir. But youre making a statement. MS. DIJOSEPH: You started with a question. MR. MATTEO: You will have that opportunity to make statements, later on in the proceedings. MS. DIJOSEPH: But you did start with a question. MR. MATTEO: What is your

10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Mr. Werden? MR. WERDEN: Yes. MS. DIJOSEPH: All right. Would anyone like to address that question? Mr. Kaplin? MR. KAPLIN: Its a very interesting question because I, as Ive tried to explain the last time -- and Im not sure that the people in the audience understand this. Back almost a year ago, we filed whats called a challenge or request for a curative amendment with this Board challenging the validity of the zoning of the piece in the back, the eight acres. This gentleman is correct. Im not sure that everything around it is PB. But everything around that eight-acre piece is something other than PB. And we filed a challenge to the validity of that zoning. That zoning, in my opinion, is whats called reverse spot zoning. MS. DIJOSEPH: I think Mr. Werden might have been asking, why are we not considering changing the R-1 to PB. I think that might be the question. Would that be the question,

11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 We took our challenge to the Township Planning Commission, as we are required to do under the Municipalities Planning Code, and we explained the spot zoning nature of the eight acres. We also showed a possible plan for development of redevelopment of the entire property under the PB. At the end of that meeting, the Planning Commission asked us -- I guess the best way to say it is, what would you really like to do? And that resulted in a dialogue with the Planning Commission and the Township. And what we said was that we would really like to redevelop the center as we have shown on these drawings, which are essentially the drawings that have been shown to the Planning Commission almost a year before, in April of 08. So, the short answer to that question is, yes, that was our original request after three or three-and-a-half years of a stalemate. We said, yes, change it to PB, and we will figure out how to develop it or redevelop it in accordance with the PB District. Im not sure that this is the

12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 please. MR. MATTEO: Please state your name and address. MR. SIEGEL: Aaron Siegel, 902 Frazer Road, Rydal. My question is, has there you. Are there any other questions from anyone in the audience? Yes, sir? Come forward, this up. MS. DIJOSEPH: Okay. Thank right place or whether you want to do it at this time, but we have a plan that shows how it could be developed. Its not our ideal plan. It certainly is not. But it is not the proverbial bad plan either. It was not submitted to scare people. It is realistically what could be done. This is much better. We thought the Township and the staff recognized that, and thats why we have been in a dialogue for seven or eight months to come up with this ordinance. I hope that clears some of

13 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 been a look at what the ratables would be if indeed this project were to go forward and how that might impact Abington resident taxes? MS. DIJOSEPH: Mr. Kaplin? MR. KAPLIN: Mr. Siegel, we submitted to the Board a fiscal impact study. It was given to the Board a month and a half ago. We had a professional planner apply whats called the Rutgers method. I believe it compared present ratables and future ratables under our proposed plan. Its a statistical analysis. Its a model that is widely used. It requires the inputting of a lot of assumptions. We have not brought it out. We have given it to the Township for review. Its extremely positive, particularly to the School District. MS. DIJOSEPH: Thank you. Yes? MR. SKLAROFF: Robert Sklaroff, S-K-L-A-R-O-F-F, 1219 Fairacres Road, F-A-I-R-A-C-R-E-S, Rydal. Two questions. One was mentioned to me a few weeks ago, and, that is, I understand that fire

14 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 is? MR. SKLAROFF: I know. That was a background. I know. So now my question is -- I thought it was important for people to know that fact. MR. MATTEO: I understand. But you will have time to testify. engines cant get back there. And the response antidotally was the building should be made fireproof or something. I would like to find out what the fire protection situation is going to be. Thats part one. Part two. I reviewed the Traffic Planning and Design, Incorporated, report of July 13th, 09. It looked at four intersections. And without going into what I was going to do was testimony, I will just cut to the chase. It only advised really redesigning the intersection at The Fairway/Rydal Road, and it also does not take into account the potential traffic impact of the Old York Road corridor regarding the access to the railroad station. MR. MATTEO: Your question

15 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Sklaroff. MR. SKLAROFF: Doctor. MR. KAPLIN: Excuse me. I think I explained this before, but I will go through it again. We are at the zoning stage. Were not at the land development stage. However, because we knew that MR. SKLAROFF: Im trying to cut out the testimony and get to the facts. So the question arises that, in light of the fact that this Traffic Planning Design question is inherently flawed because it does not take into account known information. In light of the fact is, intuitive, that even in non-rush hours, there is a lineup between the bridge and major intersection of Susquehanna. It seems to me that a new report should be issued which would reflect the truth of the fact that you already have a traffic jam. So could that question be addressed in detail? MS. DIJOSEPH: Mr. Kaplin? MR. KAPLIN: I can, Mr.

16 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 this issue, just like we knew the fiscal impact would come up, we had a traffic study prepared. We hired Traffic Planning and Design that represents many, many municipalities. And what we asked them to do was to determine the additional traffic that would be generated by this development. We compared it with what the shopping center would normally generate in terms of traffic and what the differential would be. The methodology was the first draft of the traffic report was given to Mr. Matteo who sent it to the Townships traffic consultant, McMahon & Associates, and they were asked, is this methodology correct? Would you review the report? McMahon came back to Matt Hammond, our traffic engineer, and said, we would like you to assess this using a somewhat different methodology. Matt did that. It turned out that the original methodology was more conservative. By more conservative, it showed that our development would create more traffic than the methodology that McMahon had suggested. So McMahon agreed

17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 that the methodology that showed the additional amount of traffic -- the additional amount of traffic was correct. The second phase of that -and I assume that this is what Dr. Sklaroff is objecting to -- was that the traffic engineers then what they called distributed the traffic over the road network during the peak hours and assessed the impact and what the changes would be in the intersections in the surrounding area. Now, if the intersection was already at a Level F, obviously a little more traffic is not going to help. And thats what the traffic engineers found. The additional traffic from the development is not that significant at any one place so as to drastically change any existing intersection. So what we have proposed in that traffic -- what we suggested in the traffic impact study was, look, were going to make a contribution. We would be willing to make a contribution to the Township in some significant way. We suggested Rydal Road and The Fairway. We suggested a straightening out of that intersection

18 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Thank you. I dont know where Dr. Sklaroff got his information about fire trucks cant get wherever he thinks fire trucks cant get. Were not at the building stage yet. But there are many, many mixed use developments that fire? MR. KAPLIN: Good question. thats been proposed as long as I can remember. The cost of that five hundred and ten or twenty thousand dollars, we said, and we have said it in public, we will make those improvements or we will commit to make those improvements in the land development process or we will commit to use that money on some other intersection that the Township would designate. We have also provided for a light at our main entrance that, obviously, we want to have and will benefit us. It will also create a walkway -- a pedestrian walkway to the condominiums across the street. I hope that explains some of the traffic information. THE AUDIENCE: How about the

19 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 are less intense than this. These buildings would be totally sprinklered. They would have to comply with the National Fire Protection Code. And it is entirely possible to make the structure garage accessible for fire vehicles, and the fire people will address this Im sure. But what I am told repeatedly is that fires today are fought -- in buildings such as this, are fought not by the trucks but by the fire protection systems, the stand-pipe systems that are installed. And we will comply with all of the fire requirements, fire protection requirements. At this stage, at building permit stage, hopefully, we will get there. Thank you. MS. DIJOSEPH: Thank you. Yes? MR. MORSE: Paul E. Morse, M-O-R-S-E, Junior, 755, Glenn Road, Jenkintown, 19046. I have a question regarding the number of school-aged children that the 266 apartments are expected to put into the community. MR. KAPLIN: Thats in the --

20 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 let me find the fiscal impact study. The fiscal impact study says the following, Mr. Morris: Anticipated number of public school students from the proposed development. And then theres a formula, number of school-aged children per dwelling times the number of dwellings, obviously. The one bedroom units and two bedroom units, based on this formula, would result in an anticipation of fifteen children. The footnote says, based upon information contained in, quote, residential demographic multipliers prepared by the Rutgers University Center for Urban Policy in June 2006, there will be an average of .04 public school students per one-bedroom unit and .07 per two-bedroom units. MR. MORSE: I have a follow-up question, if I may? MS. DIJOSEPH: Go ahead. MR. MORSE: The follow-up question is, Im interested in the formula that was used because, according to the National Multi-Housing Council for school-aged children in apartments, its .31. And if you multiply .31 times 266, you come to about 82 school-aged

21 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 children. And you multiply that by the cost to educate the children of about $10,000 in the Abington community, puts an impact on this community of almost a million dollars. And so Im curious what formula Rutgers used and what formula the developer used. MR. KAPLIN: We used the Rutgers formula. The Rutgers formula is the recognized formula. It was not prepared by -- it was not prepared by a developer or developer organization. You will have to talk to the Township people, but I think that they will tell you that the Rutgers formula is the accepted formula. Now, youve taken a number from some -- I dont know where you got the number from. MR. MORSE: National Multi-Housing Council. And they are in favor of apartments. This is a pro-apartment number. MR. KAPLIN: But what youre taking is an across-the-board. I dont know whether youre talking -- I dont know exactly

22 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 what numbers you used. But were using one bedroom and two bedrooms only. We are not using -- we are not using three bedrooms or anything like that. Charlie Guttenplan, our planner, has told us that across-the-board, Charlie -MR. GUTTENPLAN: County-wide. MR. KAPLIN: County-wide, including all types of apartments, the number is .08 children in multi-family buildings, that includes three-bedroom buildings -- three-bedroom units. And that would only be twenty-one kids. But, from an experienced point-of-view, I have a number of clients who have built newer apartments similar to this, and they all report the same thing. The numbers of children in newer apartments are very, very low. Now, I will tell you this. I have seen other planners take the fifteen children and say -- and go and make another calculation on top of that. And the calculation they make is, they say, okay, let us check the census population. What percentage of the children are

23 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 questions? MR. KLINE: Mr. Morse, can I in private school? What percentage of the children are in parochial school. And they would then lower the fifteen to something less. For whatever its worth, these numbers are consistent. This fifteen is consistent with what Ive seen the planners come up with and what Ive seen the apartment owners determine from empirical studies. We believe that this is an accurate number. MR. MORSE: Im sure you do. But youve referenced your experience, and I would like to reference my experience on the Abington School Board for ten years. Certainly if one looks at Mount Vernon Garden Apartments, theres certainly quite a few students going into the Abington School District from there and other apartments throughout there. So I have documentation that indicates that your numbers are way below. Thank you. MR. KAPLIN: Thank you. MS. DIJOSEPH: Any other

24 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 question. Mr. Narcowich, do you have any information that the County uses in situations such as this type of development? MR. NARCOWICH: We do have some numbers. I dont have that at any disposal, but I could research some for you. MR. KLINE: Thank you. MR. MIFSUD: I am Dr. Mifsud. I am a forensic physicist and professional engineer. I live at 1315 Washington Lane, Rydal, PA 19046. I have a question regarding the traffic report for Mr. Kaplin. Does your traffic report, anywhere in your traffic report, mention a study ask one question? MR. MORSE: Certainly. MR. KLINE: Your figure for .31, was that for one bedroom or two bedrooms? MR. MORSE: They didnt specifically go into that aspect of the National Multi-Housing Council. MR. KLINE: One other

25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 the -MR. MIFSUD: Traffic waiting and queuing time. MR. KAPLIN: Matt? The answer is yes. MR. MIFSUD: The answer is, no, sir. I have the report with me. There isnt a single word that its mentioned. There is no prediction regarding that. MR. KAPLIN: Heres -MR. MIFSUD: Will you go on bottlenecks. MR. KAPLIN: And what was sorry. MR. MIFSUD: Traffic again. MR. MIFSUD: Traffic density. MR. KAPLIN: Density -and a prediction of the potential problems which may arise as a result of these three factors; bottlenecks, traffic density, traffic waiting and queuing times? Are these factors at all mentioned anywhere in your report, sir? MR. KAPLIN: Give them to us

26 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 the answer? MS. DIJOSEPH: Yes. Mr. Kaplin, go on. MR. MIFSUD: Go ahead. MR. KAPLIN: Matt. This is Matt Hammond, our traffic engineer. MR. HAMMOND: The answer to that question again, Marc, is, yes. MR. MATTEO: Excuse me. --MATTHEW HAMMOND, having been duly sworn, testified as follows: --MR. HAMMOND: Matt Hammond, H-A-M-M-O-N-D, 2500 East High Street, Suite 650, Pottstown, Pennsylvania 19464. BY MR. KAPLIN: question. MR. KAPLIN: May I continue excuse me. MR. MIFSUD: I raised the record that you said, no, and I said, yes, or you said, yes, and I said, no? MR. KAPLIN: Im not here --

27 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 answering. MR. MIFSUD: Thank you. MR. HAMMOND: The analysis -the specific analyses are not included within the report. The summary of the analysis that takes into account all of those factors is. And that is included in tables -MR. MIFSUD: On page -MR. KAPLIN: Excuse me, please? MR. HAMMOND: Let me finish Q. Matt, before we get started, you are a licensed professional engineer in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania? A. I am. Q. With a specialty in traffic planning and design? A. That is correct. Q. Thank you. A. The answer to the question, again, is, yes. The analysis that was performed does take into account bottlenecks, traffic congestion, queuing, as well as traffic density. MR. MIFSUD: Page number,

28 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 of that? MR. MIFSUD: Certainly. I bought it from you, from the Township. MS. DIJOSEPH: I believe Mr. words. MR. KAPLIN: Excuse me. MS. DIJOSEPH: Just a minute. Mr. Hammond, do the two of you have the same report? MR. MIFSUD: Absolutely. MS. DIJOSEPH: Are you sure Doctor. Will you let Mr. Hammond finish his answer? MR. MIFSUD: Certainly. MR. HAMMOND: Does include it in Table 7 and 8, is included in Tables -starting on Page 6. At the bottom of Page 6, it talks about capacity analysis from the study area intersections. And you can see the last paragraph talks about these analyses were conducted according to the methodologies contained in the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual, or HCM, for the following conditions. MR. MIFSUD: Show me the

29 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Hammond is giving you page numbers. MR. HAMMOND: Page 6. It is on your left-hand side. No. Right down there. Go to the last paragraph, please, that I just referred to. These analyses were conducted according to the methodologies contained in the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual for the following conditions. Now, if you go to the next page, Pages 7 through 12, Tables 7, 8 and 9, those items contain within the table are referred to as levels of service. The levels of service analysis take into account many different factors with regard to traffic, queuing being one of them, bottleneck being one of them, traffic density being one of them, the congestion of the roadway being one of them, the grades of the roadway and so on and so forth. So, while the actual analyses printouts are not included in the study, the summary of those printouts are included in Tables 7, 8 and 9. MR. MIFSUD: So, in this case, you tell us that the actual number of

30 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 apologize. MR. HAMMOND: Actually, the analyses do say the waiting times, according to the levels of service. MS. DIJOSEPH: May I suggest something? Perhaps, Doctor, after the meeting, perhaps you and Mr. Hammond, if you wouldnt mind, Mr. Hammond, maybe you can point out to the Doctor exactly what it is and where it is in the study. Would you mind doing that? MR. HAMMOND: I would be more than happy to do that. MR. MIFSUD: I would like to make a comment. I know where hes coming from. Hes saying that because these are legitimate ways of doing things its included. traffic moving here and there and your prediction of the number of traffic, but youre not prepared to tell us the actual waiting times and density of traffic by number the way you did by actually standing -MS. DIJOSEPH: You need to use the microphone. MR. MIFSUD: Sorry. I

31 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 at this time? Come forward, please. MS. CLOUD: Michelle Cloud, 1413 Autumn Road, Rydal, PA 19046, C-L-O-U-D. Real quick. Is there any aforethought or study that has been done that looks at the impact of the adjacent community behind the condominiums and behind Rydal Road and The Fairway? And, also, did that study or the studies that you have done, do you look at how the people living in the apartments will be using the community as a whole? Because, as it is now, the community uses those, and I think thats part of the rub thats going on with some of the people coming up here talking because theyre my neighbors and nearby areas. Part of the rub is a lot of cut-through streets, older area, which has you. Are there any other questions But not what hes got here is legitimate. But he excluded doing those calculations. I have no doubt about this. MS. DIJOSEPH: Okay. Thank

32 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 not really been addressed at this point with what we have right now. So I need to know how -- if youve looked at how the apartments would utilize the community in the surrounding areas. MR. KAPLIN: Im sorry. The community as a whole or streets? And, if so, what streets are you talking about? MS. CLOUD: Im looking at behind the condominiums where Rydal Road between -- in particular, between Rydal Road going I guess it would be east up to, like, Meetinghouse Road, over towards Alvethorpe Park. Because that area is, especially during business hours, is a very busy, busy area to circumvent Old York Road, to circumvent Washington Lane. MR. MATTEO: Stop. Maybe hes getting confused. Are you saying the condominiums would include -MS. CLOUD: Or any of the -MR. MATTEO: Do you mean Rydal East Apartments? MS. CLOUD: Yes. The ones on

33 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Rydal West. MS. CLOUD: You looked at where The Fairway and Rydal Road meets; correct? MR. KAPLIN: Right. MS. CLOUD: If you make a right going down Rydal Road, right there, theres a whole host of communities back behind there. apartments. MS. DIJOSEPH: Rydal East and co-ops. MR. MATTEO: Theyre of the street? MS. CLOUD: Behind the railroad station. MR. MATTEO: I think hes getting confused. MR. KAPLIN: Let me -- Im not a hundred percent sure. Let me ask you a question or two. Across the street from the Baederwood Center are condominiums. THE AUDIENCE: No. Theyre the other side of -MR. MATTEO: The other side

34 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Have you looked at how the traffic will impact that community? Theres my street, Autumn Road. Theres Pepper. Theres Noble. Theres Fairacres, Frog Hollow, a whole host of streets back there, a whole host of young families living back there. MR. KAPLIN: Well -MS. CLOUD: Have you looked at how the traffic will impact back there? MR. KAPLIN: Let me see if I can answer that. What we did was in two steps. Ive tried to explain it a minute ago. Im not sure I was clear. First of all, what we -MR. MATTEO: Sorry, Marc. MR. KAPLIN: I dont want to be distracted by the board. I would like to try and answer your question. Weve tried to do it in two pieces. The first thing that weve tried to do was through the methodology I explained to determine how much additional traffic the new development would create as opposed to the

35 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 existing level of development. And we got numbers. We got different numbers for different times on different days. MS. CLOUD: Could I ask a question with that? MR. KAPLIN: Let me -MS. CLOUD: Was it business or taken into business and the apartments you would have? MR. KAPLIN: Yes, it took into both. We compared the existing whatever it is, 130,000 square feet of the center, without any residential, to the proposed development of 266 units and a combination of retail and office. And thats the methodology that Matt and I were trying to explain. So we got a quantity of additional traffic. And then the second part was the word I used, the traffic engineer used, uses the word distribute the traffic, meaning how much of it is going to go left, how much is going to go right, how much is going to go, I guess, west on The Fairway to York Road, how much will make a right and go up towards Willow Grove, how much

36 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 questions? MS. COHEN: My name is Elaine Cohen, C-O-H-E-N, 1372 Meetinghouse Road, Meadowbrook, 19046. will go down towards Jenkintown. And they distributed that traffic all around. And there is an analysis there. I cant tell you that -- there is an analysis in there of intersections that weve analyzed. I know for a fact that he analyzed The Fairway and Rydal Road. Did he go up to the right and figure out how much is going to go on Lindsay or go on Autumn? No, he did not get to that level of detail. MS. CLOUD: And thats my concern, because youre looking at the Old York Road, youre looking at the major intersection. But I really need to know if youre looking at the impact, because there is a ton of traffic and safety issues that the community back behind there is really concerned about. MS. DIJOSEPH: Thank you. Are there any other

37 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Theres been lots of talk about the traffic on Rydal Road, The Fairway. I havent heard anything about going under the bridge, Washington Lane and Susquehanna. The traffic now is bad. What do you propose to do about the traffic after all of this goes in? MR. KAPLIN: Well, we cant -- I have been driving through there since I was a kid. They havent been able to fix it in forty-nine years since Ive had a drivers license. And I dont mean to be a wise-guy. But nobody has been able to fix that in my lifetime. We are going to add a very small amount of additional traffic, and its not -- it cant be our obligation in order to use our property to have to fix every existing problem. What we have said is that we would make a substantial contribution, probably disproportionate to what our development is, to the Township. But nobody has been able to solve that for as long as I can remember. I dont

38 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 he did it. MR. HAMMOND: Sure. Theres a previous traffic study done a couple years, maybe two or three years ago from this development when it was previously proposed and a different configuration. And that traffic study at that time, we looked at approximately twenty-one intersections throughout the Township, and one of the intersections was the railroad overpass. We are proposing -- and everyone should keep in mind one important fact. And that fact is, the existing center generates traffic thats currently on Fairway and the surrounding roadways. And at the time, very see how you could expect us to change that configuration. MS. COHEN: Have you taken into consideration the impact on that intersection with the increase in traffic? MR. KAPLIN: We have. Matt, did you measure the bridge or did you conclude -- tell us whether you looked at the bridge. THE AUDIENCE: And what time

39 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 shortly -- very short time in the past there was traffic associated with some other uses in that center, which have since left, as well as the movie theater. What we did when we prepared the most latest traffic study, June or July 13th, 2009 study, again, July 13th, we had looked again at what the existing center generates, what the existing traffic volumes are in that roadway and what additional traffic can be expected by the development. And, once you look at that and compare all of those numbers and distribute the traffic throughout the roadway network -- it may be hard to believe, but there will be a small portion of traffic that will be added to that intersection. Now, again, echoing what Mr. Kaplin had stated, there is very little, if anything, that could be done there, short of widening the railroad overpass or relocating the intersection. And that is a huge undertaking as far as that improvement is concerned. What we have committed to do was contribute monies that we feel are over and

40 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 above what we would normally contribute that could be utilized for either the intersection at The Fairway and Rydal or could be utilized for other intersections within the Township. If the Township feels thats the most important intersection and thats the one that needs the most improvements, then the Township is more than welcome to utilize the funds that we have proposed to try and come up with a solution. I can tell you that I have looked at it. This was a question that came up in previous hearings. And theres very little that could be done, if anything, to that intersection. And it is my understanding -I havent driven through that intersection for forty-nine years, but it is my understanding its been that way for a very long time and, unfortunately, just the way it currently exists. Theres not much of anything that can be done. MS. DIJOSEPH: Thank you. May I say, as far as all of this discussion about traffic, when we go into land development, and I think maybe Mr. Matteo can make mention of what that means and what Im

41 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 getting at, the traffic problems/suggestions will be addressed in detail. Mr. Matteo, is that correct? MR. MATTEO: That is correct, Madam President. Land development does take in the scope of the work thats proposed on the site, the layout of the property, traffic, of course, storm water management and things of those issues are discussed at that time. We are only on an ordinance amendment at this time. MS. DIJOSEPH: Yes. So thats why talking about traffic right now is really not germane to what were doing here. And its become redundant I believe from our last hearing. So, having said that, will you please go on, maam? MS. PHILIPS: Yes, I came up here to talk about the traffic. My name is Sandi Philips. MS. DIJOSEPH: Okay. MS. PHILIPS: I live at 1020 Sharon Road in Meadowbrook.

42 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 I just want to clarify something I heard at the last meeting, which is the way to the 266 units is through the shopping center and there is no other way to get in and out of this development. Is that true? MS. DIJOSEPH: Mr. Kaplin? MR. KAPLIN: There are, I believe, four entrances off of Fairway, and I believe all four would be maintained and one of them at the main entrance will be signalized. MS. PHILIPS: Okay. So theres nothing coming in and out of York Road up above? MR. KAPLIN: Thats correct. MS. PHILIPS: And this gentleman has been kind enough to give us his report. Do you live in this neighborhood or do you live in some other neighborhood? MR. KAPLIN: May I respectfully suggest that thats really not relative?

43 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 getting at -MS. DIJOSEPH: Get at what youre getting at. MS. PHILIPS: What I am getting at is, if I ask for seventy-five volunteers to line their cars up on The Fairway and go through it -MR. MATTEO: Let us make it a question only at this time. MS. PHILIPS: Well, Im dealing with empirical evidence, not all of your reports. You will find a lot of traffic. This study was taken July 13th? Thats a question. Or the report was July 13th. MS. PHILIPS: The reason its relevant is, if he hasnt had forty-nine years experience going under the Susquehanna Bridge, that hes right, that is not, you know, your total responsibility. Now, do you come visit the property in Baederwood as part of your work? MS. DIJOSEPH: Just a minute. MS. PHILIPS: What Im

44 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. KAPLIN: Matt, I will ask you not to answer. MS. PHILIPS: Okay. So if it was taken in the summertime when there was lighter traffic -MR. MATTEO: Question only. MS. PHILIPS: -- its not evident of the traffic that we have. Something has happened in this neighborhood, and the traffic has gotten really serious in the past few months. I dont know why. My husband said he had to drive around and around just to get a parking spot for Whole Foods to go in and shop tonight. The traffic is very much a part of this issue. And the reason I think you mentioned, sir, this attorney here mentioned the last time, that other developers have not bid on this property. There was a reason why. I dont know the reason why. MR. KAPLIN: What -MS. PHILIPS: The problem is the traffic is the main issue here. MS. DIJOSEPH: We understand

45 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 questions? MS. DIJOSEPH: Any other questions, please? Come forward. MR. LITZ: My name is Sylvan Litz, 1570 The Fairway, Jenkintown, 19046, L-I-T-Z. This question is either for Mr. Kaplin or for perhaps the Commissioners. I would like to know, has there been an environmental impact study made of what would occur if the trees, those beautiful trees behind the shopping center are torn down for this apartment building? MS. DIJOSEPH: Mr. Kaplin? MR. KAPLIN: I dont know of that. Do you have another question? MS. PHILIPS: Yes. These people go home to the Main Line, and they dont have to deal with this afterwards. Thank you. MR. MATTEO: Thank you. Are there any other

46 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 sir. the type of environmental impact study that this gentleman is asking about. I can say that, if we get to land development, there will be a very in-depth engineering storm water management, post-construction storm water control program that will be undertaken, will be reviewed by the Township Engineer, also by the Montgomery County Soil Conservation Service and probably the Department of Environmental Protection. That will come later in the process. If what you are talking about is, is there going to be runoff? Is there -MR. LITZ: No, thats not what Im talking about. Im talking about green areas. Theres a mandate for communities to maintain and increase the number of green areas, not to just decrease them by tearing down the trees. Has this Board considered seizing that property behind the shopping center with eminent domain for the good of the community? Have you considered it? MS. DIJOSEPH: We have not,

47 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 considered. MR. LITZ: It should be. Thank you. MS. PRYBUTOK: Marsha Prybutok, P-R-Y-B-U-T-O-K, 1426 Autumn Road, 19046. Do you have a price-point for your apartments? MR. LITZ: Would you? MS. DIJOSEPH: I do not think we would, no. MR. LITZ: Why not? Why not? MS. DIJOSEPH: Anybody want to field that question? Commissioner Kline? MR. KLINE: It is my understanding you can take a property through eminent domain for public use. We would have to create some public use to take that property. There is no public use for this property. MR. LITZ: For a park? MR. MATTEO: You would have to go through the other property. MR. KLINE: Its not being

48 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 answer. MS. PRYBUTOK: Go ahead. MR. KAPLIN: Im going to clarification. MR. KAPLIN: Im going to MS. DIJOSEPH: Price-points? MS. PRYBUTOK: What would a studio go for? Is there a ballpark? Two-bedroom? One-bedroom? MR. KAPLIN: Im not sure. Let me take a look at something. MS. PRYBUTOK: Would we consider these luxury apartments? MR. KAPLIN: I said, will you let me look at something? MS. PRYBUTOK: I will certainly, Mr. Kaplin, let you check that out. MR. KAPLIN: Fred just said we estimated about $1.75 a foot. So if an average apartment, if -MS. PRYBUTOK: Is this a one-bedroom? MR. KAPLIN: Excuse me. MS. PRYBUTOK: I want a

49 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 month. I am concerned with impact on schools. Im a former educator. And I would assert that people come to a community because of the schools. For you to do a comparison county-wide does not really talk about the impact answer. MS. PRYBUTOK: Go ahead. MR. KAPLIN: If you assume that the average apartment was 1,000 feet, just to give an illustration, that would be $1,750 a month. Now, you dont build 1,000 square foot apartments. You build one-bedrooms at more like 750, 800, maybe 900 square feet. Okay? What Ken assumed here in the study was the one-bedrooms would be 800 square feet and the two-bedrooms would be 1,100 square feet. MS. PRYBUTOK: So a two-bedroom would rent for a couple thousand dollars a month? MR. KAPLIN: Right. MS. PRYBUTOK: $1,800 a

50 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ahead. MR. MATTEO: Okay. Just a question then. question? MS. PRYBUTOK: When people came here, there were 17 or 18. So I am very concerned. I want to know the price point, and I think that will affect it. MR. MATTEO: Madam President, if people rather give testimony, maybe we should get into that portion. MS. DIJOSEPH: They can go on Abington schools. Abington is an award-winning school district. People will come here with their children to enroll their children in our schools. They wouldnt go maybe to, I dont know, Pottstown maybe to enroll their children there and go into an apartment there. But they would come here. And I am very concerned. Class size in Rydal Elementary School is now between 24 and 26 pupils per class. When people came here -MS. DIJOSEPH: Do you have a

51 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 address? MS. HOPPE: Carolyn Hoppe, H-O-P-P-E, 110 Pennmore Place, Rydal. But listening to all of this about the traffic, and, of course, Im very concerned about it, too, but Mr. Kaplin mentioned before when people are coming in or out of the shopping center or apartments they might turn right or left on York Road. I am terribly concerned about what is facing the Baeder -- not the Baederwood shopping center, the Baederwood area. All of those streets that get all the traffic coming from the high school, the junior high school, theyre going to be impacted incredibly. So people just dont turn right and left. People come through there all the time. And thats a tremendous detriment for all the kids that come through there also. I want to ask you if you would consider the other side of York Road? MR. MATTEO: Thank you. MS. HOPPE: A very quick question. I wasnt going to say a word tonight. MR. MATTEO: Name and

52 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MS. DIJOSEPH: Thank you. MS. SCHLERB: My name is Kathleen Schlerb, S-C-H-L-E-R-B. My address is 1236 Washington Lane, Rydal. Ive lived in the community since 1977. At the time when I moved in, I recall hearing that there had been a study done with the idea of a proposed bridge from Susquehanna coming down the hill, over the tracks and going up Susquehanna. I was told about that. I dont know if thats true or not. Perhaps some of the old-timers on the Board here would know. MR. MATTEO: The old-timers? Who did you point to? MS. SCHLERB: The point that Im making is that addressing the concerns, the very legitimate concerns, of people who were concerned about the bottleneck underneath the bridge at Washington Lane and Susquehanna, go up, they have a right to be concerned. In ten years, if this plan were to go through with no real concern for that bottleneck, you could be having the same group plus additional new residents having to deal with the proposal for a bridge

53 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 question. MR. HICKS: Walter Hicks. MR. MATTEO: One second. If you are going to make comments, please tell me so I could have you sworn in for testimony. Thank you. MR. HICKS: My name is Walter Hicks, 1533 Cherry Lane, Rydal, PA 19046, H-I-C-K-S, about a block away from where this is. My question is, if it ended much. MR. MATTEO: Are we still in the question stage? MS. DIJOSEPH: No. We will take comments or -- we will take them together. MR. MATTEO: He has one spanning it. Now, who wants to go through that again. Thats my point, that you cant just address the concerns of the community by saying its obsolete and we have no solution for it. You will have everybody back here in ten or fifteen years voting on a bridge. MS. DIJOSEPH: Thank you very

54 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 is fine. MR. KAPLIN: What I would say to that is my client owns property just like you do and my client has the right to use and develop or redevelop its property within the law. THE AUDIENCE: Then use the rights you have. MR. KAPLIN: And I dont believe its a popularity contest. So we bought -- my client bought this with the intent to redevelop it and spent four years. When we werent able to get anywhere with that, when we couldnt get a resolution, we did what we could. We filed a challenge to the validity of the zoning, as the first gentleman who got up suggested. So were here to redevelop the property. We were asked by the Township, up being that most of the people in the community did not want this, would you still persist? MR. KAPLIN: Im hesitating because I dont want to give you an answer that sounds like a wise-guy. MR. HICKS: Just a yes or no

55 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 question? --CONNIE ZAGERMAN, having been duly, testified as follows: --MS. ZAGERMAN: Connie Zagerman, Z-A-G-E-R-M-A-N. I reside at 1404 Noble Road, and Im a new resident since 2007. Thats Rydal, PA, 19046. I have school-aged children, teenage, and another younger child at elementary Rydal. after we filed it, to try and work with the staff and with the Montgomery County Planning Commission to implement the plan that was shown to the Planning Commission a year ago April. Thats why were here. Im sorry if thats a long answer. I just dont want to give you a flip answer. But the short answer is, yes, we intend to exercise our legitimate property rights to try and redevelop this property. Thank you. MR. MATTEO: Comment or

56 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 My comment is, Im on the corner of Noble Road and Washington Lane. Prior times of day after three oclock, if Im leaving my driveway to turn onto Noble Road, I have to wait at least five cars just to leave my driveway. So traffic is a huge concern if it increases just a little bit. Ive seen traffic go through stopped school buses on Washington Lane. Ive seen cars not adhere to any of the stop signs right there on Noble Road turning onto Washington Lane. So my question is, will these 266 developments, what is your factor of the cars for each apartment? Because if everyone comes with just one car, thats 266. So what is the factor in terms of anticipating the volume? MR. KAPLIN: Well, I dont want to get into a long discussion of what the traffic analysis is, but I will try and give it to you quickly. The traffic analysis, the conventional traffic analysis, focuses on the peak hours. The peak hours are four consecutive fifteen minute spans in the morning, in the

57 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 afternoon and usually Saturday afternoon. So the studies are done to see whats the existing traffic at those times. Thats the study that was done. Thats part of the study that was done. Then we have to add on top of that -- and thats what youre talking about -what additional traffic would be developed. This is a little different. This is not a blank piece of paper. Its not a blank piece of ground. So we had to do a differential analysis. And we came up with -- not we. The traffic engineers used the Institute of Traffic Engineers. Its a very thick volume that has different categories. And it tells Matt Hammond either in terms of a formula or in terms of a number of cars how many cars would be generated in, how many out, at each peak hour, per apartment. So there is a factor. And its not linear. And then what he did was he took the additional traffic that would come in and out of the development and did whats called a gravity analysis to determine, well, if they come out, is sixty percent going to turn left, is forty going to turn right? When they come down to Rydal

58 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Road and The Fairway, what percentage is going to make a right and go up Rydal? What percentage is going to go all the way around under the bridge, up? I mean, so, there is a methodology. It is an estimate. Its scientifically based. We did not do the analysis at every corner, but the analysis is there. And what we tried to do was to give the analysis and the methodology to the Township in advance so that the Townships traffic engineer would be able to say, yes, no, maybe or I want you to use a different analysis. I think you heard what I said before. We did give this a lot of thought. We knew the traffic was a big deal. And we appreciate it. And there will be some additional traffic. MS. ZAGERMAN: But youre building parking spaces for this development. Im just wondering, before they even move, what is the volume of cars anticipated for the 266 units? You had to use a multiplier factor. MR. KAPLIN: Is it

59 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 you. MR. MATTEO: Thats by code. MR. KAPLIN: Sorry. I could have given you a shorter answer. I apologize. --SUSAN ODHNER, having been duly sworn, testified as follows: --MS. ODHNER: Susan Odhner, O-D-H-N-E-R, 1349 Warner Road. Im concerned not only about the things that other people have spoken about but about the way things are going to look, the attractiveness, the landscaping, the trees. And I remember about two years ago when the Brandolini Brothers didnt first present this but presented it that there was a drawing of the Baederwood Shopping Center and how they thought it was -- how they planned it, how it was going to look. And, looking carefully, there was almost no landscaping, very, very little green, very little one-and-a-half or two? I think we used one-and-a-half parking spaces per unit. MS. ZAGERMAN: Okay. Thank

60 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 so. MR. KAPLIN: Well, we did a whole presentation of the plan. We showed the landscaping. We showed the entire development. MS. ODHNER: Okay. Would I be able to see this? MR. KAPLIN: Sure. We will be glad to show it to you afterwards. MS. ODHNER: If I had suggestions -- is it like a done deal and its written in blood? Or would anybody be open for suggestions from like an intense gardener and have lots of things? MR. KAPLIN: Certainly. We will be glad to listen. There are a great deal of trees or shrubs or anything like that. And my question is, has there been any change to that for the shopping center area? MR. KAPLIN: Were you here the last time? MR. MATTEO: Did you come to the last meeting in October? MS. ODHNER: I dont think

61 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 constraints with regard to the site. We showed a drawing that shows the existing landscaping, which is -MS. ODHNER: Next to nothing. MR. KAPLIN: Almost non-existent. And we have shown how we would try to preserve the parking, yet add some landscaping to it. MS. ODHNER: Did some of that landscape include evergreens or trees of any kind? MR. KAPLIN: Yes. Thats so far down the road, thats a land development issue. MS. DIJOSEPH: Thats a land development issue. MS. ODHNER: And if its not discussed up front, it gets overlaid by concrete and blacktop. MS. DIJOSEPH: That landscaping is not going to disappear. It wont happen. MS. ODHNER: The comment part of that is, I would like to see as much landscaping as possible. In my mind, I see these

62 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 wonderful shopping centers in New Jersey with land and trees, which they have more land, which we dont in this space, but I think things could be done in such a way to enhance the beauty of the area as opposed to covering it over. And I wanted to state that up front. Thank you. MS. DIJOSEPH: Thank you. --TOTO SCHIAVONE, having been duly sworn, testified as follows: --MR. SCHIAVONE: Toto Schiavone, 1115 Rydal Road, Rydal, PA, S-C-H-I-A-V-O-N-E. Im an engineer and forgive my presentation. No one here is against the Township, at least Im not. And I dont think anyone here is against Brandolini, and I will give you the reason why. We come here not as an enemy but as a good resident, as a good community. We hope that after tonight were not going to waste anybodys time, my time, your time, Brandolinis legal time. I hope you come to a good solution

63 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 and to a good, right decision. Years ago, I dont know, six or seven years ago, Brandolini came to our Township and they spent a lot of money. And I think we should thank them. Now they come up with this ambitious program. Whether its putting good money on top of bad money, its not our business. But I dont know if this ambitious program was an afterthought of their decision of the shopping center or was perhaps in the beginning. I personally feel it was in the beginning because nothing was done in the center since the acquisition, was no new tenant brought in. Contrarily, tenants were pushed out. Now, if we leave the shopping center as it is, its not going to benefit anybody. Its not going to benefit the Township. It doesnt benefit Brandolinis investment. It doesnt benefit the community. The Township will lose money. Brandolini loses big money. And were even embarrassed to drive through because its abandoned and idle shopping center, Now, the realization of this program, this project, if it ever comes to

64 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 reality, it has to benefit all of the parties involved. The Township -- and we are glad. Mr. Kaplin has expressed a number of dollars the Township makes from the realization of this program. I just learned tonight almost eighty percent, this morning, comes in tax goes back to the school because of additional children coming for the school. And the Township benefit. Brandolini is going to benefit big. Its a big piece of beef. Now, how are we going to benefit? Were going to benefit very little as a community, very, very little. The only way we can benefit is if we have a decent shopping center. Otherwise, a few years from now we will have to drive four miles to buy a glass of milk. Now, Whole Foods, its not the gimmick anymore of the organic product. Wawa is an organic product. So if they have a long-term lease and pay fifty cents a square feet, how long is Whole Foods going to be there if there is no business? So we have no shopping center, and we have this monstrosity of a building. Now, something has to be done

65 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 because theyre not going to make a facelift to the shopping center. Making a facelift is like making a hole in the water, and that wont accomplish anything. Making a major structure is going to be economically impossible for them. Making this monstrosity, I dont know if they could handle that. Last week somebody suggested, what about a ten-house unit? Its not economically feasible for Brandolini to do that. Have we thought perhaps twenty, thirty, expensive townhouse and build a good shopping center, the one they did in Walnut Lane on Huntingdon Pike. Thats very nice, expensive, good community. Have we have talked about that? I dont know. Its not up to me to decide. But let me go forward more. Im not against progress, and I dont think these people are against progress. This is a good thing. And about having a good area where its deer and raccoon and lime disease -- Im allergic, too. We have a beautiful landscaped area. Thats what I would like in my neighborhood. Now, Claire and I, were good

66 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 neighbors. I dont know if we can support -- I dont know if we feel like welcoming 266 new neighbors in our neighborhood. I dont know if we would be ready to do that. For the last three years in a row we had this plaque, one of the best places to live. If you walk a mile, if you drive a mile on 611, there is an overpass. I believe its Watertown. Theres a banner there that the Township is proud, one of the best places to live. The Township I think puts this plaque on the stationery. We are proud. Everyone is proud of that. Now, if you drive -- who got the credit for that? Who got the credit for this? Anybody knows who got the credit for this? Did I do anything to have this credit, to deserve this? No, I didnt do anything. Did these people do anything? No. You deserve the credit. You have the credit for giving us good service, giving us a good school. We have two great hospitals. We have one of the best malls in the region, great service. And can I say something about

67 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 service? I was on the wing the other day. It was Monday morning, I believe, three or four weeks ago. It was the pickup truck, the backside thing that pick ups Monday morning. And, as my trash can went over the truck, there was a box, a shoe box. It came out. It fell down the street. The driver -- I did not believe it. If I had a camera, I would have shuttered the camera. The driver, he parked the car. It was there. He went on his feet, picked up the box and put it in his truck. And I applaud the service of this Township. What other Township does this happen? Now, as you drive a mile north on 611, you drive a mile and a half south on 611, near Church Road, I believe, there is also an overpass, right after Church Road. There is no banner there. There is no banner that says the best community to live. These people who decide this, they didnt pick up Abington Township by random. They analyzed why they pick up us. They didnt give this envelope to Jenkintown Township. But, contrarily, if you have five, six blocks southeast of Church Road, my good buddy, Don Rief (ph.), he bought a house in 1990,

68 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 $410,000 he paid for it. He put it on the market this past May for $250,000. He sold this month for $190,000. $190,000. The buyer, under the recommendation of the realtor, said, you should go to the Township and complain about the tax because he paid $12,000 a year for the tax based on the $410,000 value that he paid for. The Township granted $5,100 tax, and he bought the property for $190,000. Thats what you want to happen to us, to come to you ten or fifteen years from now and coming to say the value for the properties are less so you have to give us less tax? Im not asking for you to not change the zoning. If you have the power to do it, do it. If you feel comfortable, do it. Im only asking not to change our beautiful Township from Class A to Class C. Im not asking how to give them the right permit they need to make this construction. Im asking not to give Abington Township the reputation of Cheltenham Township. And, furthermore, our neighboring Jenkintown, fifteen years ago if I would have gone there and applied that I wanted to open a house of bordello, they will give me a

69 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 license. They were going to give me the license. Today, Jenkintown, the civic center of Jenkintown is only maybe three blocks, three city blocks. Thats it. Theres nineteen empty properties, nineteen empty properties. We dont want that to happen to our Township. Now, furthermore, I believe and I assume that the Brandolini people, they do more. They apprise, and I think they do, a mile and a half east from the property in question there are 230 empty apartments. That is 200 empty apartments in Hamilton Place since three years. And there is an average of 30 empty apartments in Meadowbrook Apartments. And both apartments, they are right, they sit next to a fully occupied and energetic shopping center, with a market, a pharmacy, a bank, a pizza place, a restaurant, a dry cleaner, an hair cutter. Everybody is there. Good school. Its Moreland Township. Good school, good transportation, right next to a hospital, a great pool, a great gym. And theyre empty. Three years now theyre empty. Now, how do they expect to fill up this 266 unit neighborhood at $1,800,

70 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Thank you. MR. SCHIAVONE: Now, let me come to my note here. Now, we have all heard a lot of people talk about traffic. They talked about traffic last week, too. Yeah, its a concern about traffic. us, please? MR. SCHIAVONE: Madam President, time. Im not asking question to the other party. So Im talking. So some of the questions that were raised before, theyre were much lengthy than my statement. I will take about a few more minutes, and then I will give the microphone to other people. MS. DIJOSEPH: All right. $2,000 each apartment, unless they give away for $400 or $500. Thats the only way they can rent that apartment. Otherwise, they will be empty. Instead, for us to have the deer and the raccoons in the forest, we will have empty houses dancing and doing the same in the apartment, really. MS. DIJOSEPH: Sir, I believe there are about five people behind you. Do you want to wind it up for

71 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Nobody mentioned about the motorcycle gang on Sunday on The Fairway. I mean, its like for hours. But thats irrelevant. Maybe Im the only one. Im the closest one. Im the only one that hears that. But the traffic is a concern. Its a concern. Its not going to be as much traffic as in 611. Its not going to be as much traffic in as in Center City. But its a concern. But instead of five minutes to reach the destination, you go six minutes. Somebody asked the question about the greenery, about the tree. Those trees, theyre all so old. Were not going to die for lack of oxygen because those trees are coming down. Brandolini has beautiful landscaping. Theyre going to plant more vibrant trees and breathe more fresh oxygen. But the two elements, the most two elements nobody mentioned here yet, and thats my darling note here, there are two elements, maintaining the value of our residence, of our properties, and water. There are two elements.

72 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Now, water -- there are two things in the world that are uncontrollable or unpredictable. One is by the act of God, water. And one is terrorism. Its unpredictable, uncontrollable. We know the water. We can die without water. Its the most element that we need. We die without water. But the water is so powerful that theres more people that die by water every year than any made weapons. We know Katrina. We know the tsunami. And other world things that happen. Now, let me briefly mention -- show my property here. Six years ago, we were not in this room but in the other room in the Township. The engineer for Rydal Park said we never get flooded. You will be flooded maybe once every hundred years. So we figured out, who lives a hundred years? So we close one eye. So we bring the permit for the expansion. So we do the expansion. But the program we build there was for the community because a lot of the residents for Rydal and Abington, they sell their house and theyre living in Rydal Park now. Fine. So we

73 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 close one eye. Now, if we close the other eye, were going to become blind. This is my property here, right here, 1115 Rydal Road. Before the expansion of Rydal Park, the water under the bridge, it was about eighteen, twenty inches from the mouth, from the top of the mouth to below. Since Rydal Park, there is no space between the water and the mouth -- the top of the mouth of the bridge. Whats the name of this bridge? Anybody know? Does this bridge have a name? MS. DIJOSEPH: I dont know. MR. SCHIAVONE: I think I will name this bridge tonight the water meeting bridge. Not only if theres not enough space left under the bridge, but I have four twenty-four-inch -- 1, 2, 3, 4 -- four twenty-four-inch pipe drainage. One is coming from Washington Lane. One is coming from The Fairway. One is coming from Rydal Park, and one is coming from Rydal and Susquehanna. Four twenty-four-inch pipe. All this meeting pipe

74 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 here, theyre not meeting on this property. Theyre not meeting before. Theyre meeting right there, right where I start. Now, you see the red ink here? That is thirty-five, thirty-eight percent of my property, thirty-five or thirty-eight percent of my property. The engineer six years ago says it happens once every hundred years. It happened five times in the last three years. Five times it happened in the last three years. This picture is the one that just happened June, July, August. I would like for you to see, if you dont mind. Would you mind? Its important. Can I come up? This in June, July and August. I have here, ladies and gentlemen, $4,800 worth of bills that I have to spend the end of August, beginning of September, $4,800 of bills for cleanup and repair, cleanup and repair. Additionally, I have an estimate to build a wall. I call EPT, Environmental Protection Total. I have 250 feet of thick wall that Im going to build. If the Township is going to give me ten

75 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 years of tax abatement for the $135,000 Im going to spend or the Brandolini is going to compensate me. I do not have the money to spend. This is my property. And this is my property before the expansion of Rydal Road, beautiful landscaping because Im a gardener. And this is the one after. Would you rather live in that environment or do you rather live in this beautiful environment? You tell me. Im not asking you to not give the zoning, to change the zoning. Im asking not to change our Township. Weve been here before. We selected Abington Township to leave, to retire because all the good things, the school, the service, all the beautiful residential environment that we have. Ladies and gentlemen, this, its not a construction. This is an invasion. This is an invasion of our Township. This is an invasion of interest. This is an invasion of interest. Let them come up and put something more sensible that we can all live with. And we appreciate that they spend the money. We do. Were not against you. We want you to come. We

76 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 waiting. MR. SCHIAVONE: Okay. You can put Mark Spitz, one of the best swimmers in the world -MS. DIJOSEPH: If you can use the microphone, please? MR. SCHIAVONE: You can put Mark Spitz in the velocity and the pressure in the center of the water there, who is one of the best swimmers in the world, he would not survive. Now, imagine, imagine a defenseless tree or defenseless you. MS. DIJOSEPH: People are would. MR. SCHIAVONE: Yes. Thank dont want the shopping center as it is. We dont want to go to Willow Grove. We had a beautiful place there. I remember a lot of these people used to give the cops on Sunday, Saturday to have breakfast. Theyre no longer there. Theyre no longer there. Now, let me read you these things to you, and then I finish. MS. DIJOSEPH: I wish you

77 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 piece of furniture. I have to go to Meadowbrook Station to pick up my furniture. Thats where I have to go. I have to go with the boots. Let me read this quote thats written by Susan Barney about the best community in the world, which is reported by Colin Powell. Up until one hundred communities across the country to receive the honor and only community in Pennsylvania to win three years in a row. From supporting adults to outstanding educational opportunity, Abington is a community that creates safe, well-rounded and happy people, Powell said, happy people. These people are not happy. They see the agony of the other one. Theyre not happy. So we ask you to make the right decision so they can benefit, we can benefit, and were happy. Im not asking any questions, and I thank you for listening to me. MR. MATTEO: Thank you. --MICHAEL STEWART, having been

78 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 duly sworn, testified as follows: --MR. STEWART: Mike Stewart, S-T-E-W-A-R-T, 1921 Hart, H-A-R-T, Road. MS. DIJOSEPH: You have a hard act to follow. MR. STEWART: I will try not to be as long. I just want to start out kind of reiterating the point that everyone here has a sense of community. Everybody up here is coming to these meetings. We have great turnout basically because we want to see change to The Fairway. We want better things at The Fairway. Ive attended the 611 corridor meetings. Ive attended several of these Brandolini meetings. In the corridor study meeting, we talked about making a main street, which I think many people here, when there used to be a movie theater and other things, had a sense of community. I think most of those people go to Jenkintown or Glenside for that sense of community. We kind of lost that. When Eckenhoff (ph.) went out of business, the dealership, I was contacting Mr.

79 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Peacock, my Ward Commissioner, asking for a phone number and tried to bring in restaurants. I think we should try to rebuild our community and make it a better place for business and for the residents. I even sent some restaurant links over to Brandolini, and I recommended that they contact them because I knew they were basically going to rebuild the shopping center and I think we would all like to see that. Ive attended -- the first meeting I attended with Brandolini was about a year ago, and Mr. Snow gave a presentation. And I thought he was very cordial in the presentation. He offered us a similar proposal. I believe it had quite less in the number of actual units and they were age restricted. All of a sudden, I would say something -- my guess is the economy went wrong at that point, and a year went by, and we really never heard of anything in the Township. And I often object when I hear that this has been a four-year process. It seems to be a four-year, on-and-off process. It doesnt seem to be continually conversations that are building towards something.

80 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 All of a sudden, recently, Ive come to the Brandolini meeting, and it seems like the number of units went up and all of a sudden they went to apartments. The main points of contention that I think come here are, there are three parcels that Brandolini is trying to merge to try and create a higher density environment, and they are also including this eight-acre parcel in the back that is only zoned for eight homes. The arguments that we have seen, this is really only R-1. Its for eight homes. Ive heard multiple times now from Mr. Kaplin that theyre following the comprehensive guide and the corridor study. I want to point out some of the things from the comprehensive guide and the corridor study. First is green space. Today that zoning is seventy-five percent green space, which means six out of those eight acres will be green. Instead, Brandolini is looking to build on five of those eight acres, reducing this to 37.5 percent green space, which is a fifty percent loss. The entire comprehensive guide points to green space and open space being one of our most

81 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 important factors. Next I point to the comprehensive guide rewards property owners and developers for preserving usable open space. It also points to parks and recreations. As you notice, there are three acres they keep saying will remain untouched. I worry that, even if this is passed. Several years we will come back to those three acres and try to build another unit on top of that. The corridor study talks about relieving traffic congestion. It talks about natural drainage and making sure we dont do, as it says here, clear cutting of trees must be avoided in future developments in Abington. The comprehensive plan also points to Abington has an above average number of sixty-four to seventy-five-year-old individuals that need help finding affordable housing. It talks about these elderly need to find homes and not apartments and also for the elderly mobile challenged. The comprehensive guide even points to Baederwood Shopping Center, and I will

82 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 read the quote in the comprehensive study. It says, it is a prime example of an opportunity where the Township and its collaboration with the developer can bear fruit beneficial to both parties. A mixed-use development, if done with care and sensitivity, could enable the developer and the Township to produce a product on a property in an area already populated with higher density development. This type of mixed-use redevelopment could provide that age-restricted housing discussed earlier in this section. We see this is in direct contradiction to what were seeing. This is not beneficial to both parties. This seems to be turning into how much money can we get for this property by building the largest structure as possible. Its not being done with -- this is not being done with care and sensitivity. We can see that many people are showing up for these meetings, way above average. We have already discussed the higher population density. It addresses the higher population density, but we continue to just keep talking about making more and more higher

83 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 density. We have discussed age-restricted housing, and for some reason I dont understand why the age-restricted housing, even though the comprehensive plan points to Baederwood Shopping Center, says its ideal, says these older people can have access to the train and not have to drive, limiting the number of cars on the property, has been ignored for apartments. The other thing I would like to point out is the 611 corridor study talks about moving store fronts to the street. We continue to call this entranceway to the apartments, which all I believe is a road driving into a parking garage, we keep calling it Main Street. I dont believe thats what the 611 corridor study believed was Main Street. We have heard that we can close this down for parades and other types of parties. You cannot close it down and have 266 people trapped in their apartments. I became so frustrated at the tone change in the last meeting that I decided to come up with a petition. Ive asked a few

84 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 neighbors on my street to sign this petition, and I realized that this petition just -- I wanted to get it to Mr. Peacock within two weeks. I sent him an e-mail and would try and realized this petition was going to take forever because each persons door I knocked on wanted to talk for a half an hour about this problem. So I decided to just walk the streets, and I dropped off the piece of paper at about four hundred homes. Out of these four hundred homes, I just left a note and said, heres what Brandolini is proposing. I dont care if youre for or against it. Please come to the meeting and voice your opinion. But, if youre in opposition to this rezoning, I would like you to sign this, and, if you would, can you drop this off to my house. I got home and said to my wife, I doubt if anybody is going to take such an issue to want to sign something, deliver it to somebody they dont know, be driving down the street. Well, Ive seen many people champion it and come from their streets and deliver to me their entire street which they wandered up and

85 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 down and handed to each person. I had a street for those two weeks that looked like a post office with car after car knocking on my door asking to talk about this for a half an hour because they were so upset as to what has happened. I think the petition is here. In two weeks, I handed Ernie Peacock three hundred signed petitions. And I would like to say -- I would like to say -- and I go back to the case that this gentleman made -- I am in no way against Brandolini. I thought of Mr. Snow when he gave that presentation last year with the age-restricted housing and the number of units. There were some Township objections, but I think we were on the road to a mutual agreement. I believe now it has turned into a more greedy proposal, and I believe the three hundred petitions, clearly, is a statement to you, the Commissioners, that says the residents of your Township believe this is way too big for us to be able to handle. Thank you. --VINCENT MAGYAR, having been

86 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 duly sworn, testified as follows: --MR. MAGYAR: Vincent Magyar, M-A-G-Y-A-R. My address is 1927 Cator Street, Philadelphia PA, 19146. Im an attorney from the law firm of Curtin & Heefner in Morrisville, Pennsylvania, and we represent John Fedorowitz, F-E-D-O-R-O-W-I-T-Z. On behalf of Mr. Fedorowitz, were just asking the Board to deny this developers request to amend the Township Zoning Ordinance. The developer asks this Board to ignore its duties and obligations to the community, especially legislate in favor of the developer and its real property holdings. When the developer purchased the property, it had full knowledge of the zoning requirements, terms and conditions applicable thereto. Now for the sole benefit of the developer, the Board has been asked to rezone particular parcels owned by the developer by enacting an ordinance that grants maximum flexibility to this developer alone. We carefully studied this

87 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 developers presentation and it becomes apparent that his goal is not to work within the framework of the current comprehensive plan of the Township. Rather, the proposed rezoning area is a curve-out designed to benefit the interest of the single developer irrespective of the detrimental impact and the interests to the community at large. Engaging in such a zoning change is an affluent to the zoning related duties and obligations of the Board which include, among other things, the promotion, protection and facilitation of public health, safety and general welfare in providing for coordinated and practical community development. Its noteworthy that the Townships current R-1 and PB zoning classifications in which the properties are located permit a broad mix of uses of the properties. That the currently permitted mix of uses differ from the uses preferred by this developer to advance its particular interest does not impose a requirement of the Board to amend the zoning ordinance. While the landowner has the

88 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 right to enjoy its property, it is limited by the zoning ordinance similar to the existing zoning ordinance which protects and preserves the public health, safety and welfare. Opportunities and development options are clearly available to the developer under the current zoning regime which is not so overly restricted so as to warrant amendment. To reiterate, the Board is now required to rezone portions of the Township to fit within the proposed theoretical design guidelines and standards presented by this developer. In fact, it would be an ammorgation of the Boards duties to do so. Moreover, the current mix of land use in the area of this developers properties provides an exceptional example of residential and commercial districts existing side by side for advancing general interests of the community at large. Another point for consideration by this Honorable Board is that of spot zoning. Contrary to the developers claims, an enactment of this ordinance presented by this developer will be the very definition of spot

89 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 zoning. Zoning must be directed towards the community as a whole, concerned with public interest generally and justified by balancing of community costs and benefits. Spot zoning is contrary to this preset -- legislature focuses on a particular property and the costs and benefits to be balanced going back to the particular property owner. As a matter of fact, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has observed that spot zoning is the singling out of one lot or smaller for different treatment from that accord of similar surrounding land indistinguishable from any character for the economic benefit of the owner of that lot. This Board is being asked to single out and rezone specific lots owned by the developer for different treatment from that accord of similar surrounding land all for the economic benefit of the developer. If the Board rezones to accommodate this developer, it would invite and encourage a separate legal challenge. Again, our client asks this Board to stand by its current zoning regime. My client asks this Board to show restraint and

90 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 irrelevant. MR. KAPLIN: And youre here on behalf of an individual, not a group, not a Packaging. THE AUDIENCE: Its allowed -MR. FEDOROWITZ: S. Walter have -MR. MAGYAR: Im not employed. MR. PEACOCK: What does that at -MR. PEACOCK: Rydal Road. MR. MAGYAR: 964 Rydal Road. MR. KAPLIN: By whom is he client live? MR. MAGYAR: My client lives reject the proposed zoning changes before it. And we thank the Board for its time and consideration in support of this matter. MR. KAPLIN: Sir, come back please. I have several questions for you. I have a couple of questions for you. Number one. Where does your

91 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 to you. MR. KAPLIN: I could address the contents, but I wont. I just want to make sure that this Board knows who it is thats possibly behind this. I asked a simple question. Who is paying your fee? I am allowed to ask that question in any Court when somebody gets up to influence a body. --RUSSELL ALLEN, having been duly sworn, testified as follows: Fedorowitz. MR. KAPLIN: And thats who is paying your fee? MR. MAGYAR: On behalf -MR. KAPLIN: Is that who is paying your fee? MR. MAGYAR: Its irrelevant. MR. KAPLIN: Its very relevant to your credibility. MR. MAGYAR: Its irrelevant union? MR. MAGYAR: On behalf of Mr.

92 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 --MR. ALLEN: Russ Allen, 1510 Grove Avenue, Jenkintown, 190346, A-L-L-E-N. Grove Avenue is one of the streets thats off Rydal Road. Were seeing a pattern here. Youve heard a number of my neighbors speak already tonight. What youre hearing is the Noble neighborhood. Were the neighborhood that stretches from the Noble train station, to both sides of Rydal, up to Meetinghouse Road and up to Washington Lane. Youve heard a pattern here in which there are concerns that have been expressed. Theyre very germane to the flip side which I want to present now, which is a very specific request from our neighborhood. Youve heard the concerns about the sacrifices that we may need to make. I think most of us, however, are reconciled to the fact that there probably is going to be a new development there. We want it to be as good as it could be, and we want to contribute to the quality of out of community. This has been the theme from the beginning, this will contribute to the quality of our community.

93 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Theres a problem in the Noble neighborhood. No one can safely get from the Noble neighborhood as a pedestrian to The Fairway, period. Its impossible. You can either cross the tracks illegally or you can try to walk down Rydal Road. I think a lot of us know what thats like. Ernie knows what thats like. He burned some shoe leather during election time walking that road. Its worth your life. Theres a sidewalk that goes down halfway down Rydal Road and stops dead. The road narrows there. So theres no access from our neighborhood as pedestrians. We have discussed a proposal with Ernie that he supports. We would like that sidewalk completed down one side of Rydal Road. It would require a very small amount of the funds that are currently allocated to the improvement of the intersection at The Fairway and Rydal and would require only a few hundred yards of sidewalk to be added to complete where it stops in the middle of Rydal Road. This will allow baby carriages, walkers, runners, anyone who wants to get to that development without using a car to

94 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 arrive safely. Its consistent with the theme that we have heard about this, not only adding to the quality of our life and the neighborhood but being pedestrian friendly and offsetting the congestion issues that were all going to have to deal with now by making it pedestrian accessible. Were the largest neighborhood that is arguably most impacted by this development, and our backs are right up against it, but we cant get to it. Ive talked to many of my neighbors. Theres unanimity in our neighborhood that this will be a positive thing. It would require a small amount of taking from a few properties, and some of those property owners are even in favor of it. Were looking forward to working with Brandolini staff and Ernie to formalize this request and have it as part of the Townships agreement. If this cant be formalized, were going to urge our Township Commissioner very hard to vote against any zoning variance for this development. Thank you. MR. KAPLIN: Excuse me. I

95 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 just want to know, thats the first we have heard of this. MR. ALLEN: Okay. You will hear plenty more. MR. KAPLIN: You heard me say before that we put $520,000 on the table. I mean, what youre talking about, if the right of way is available, and we cant make the right of way, sounds to me its not a lot of money. MR. ALLEN: Its not. The right of way issue is something for the Township to deal with. MR. KAPLIN: Thats right. MR. ALLEN: It really is just a few hundred yards of sidewalk. Certainly the largest neighborhood impacted by this development would be able to walk. MR. KAPLIN: I dont even think I would have to ask Mr. Snow whether Im allowed to commit to that. But if we could get your neighborhood in favor of our proposal, Im sure that we would find a way to fund that sidewalk. MS. DIJOSEPH: Okay. Thank

96 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 either. MR. BENOSKY: 609. MR. WIRTSHAFTER: The next question is, how many are in the plan for total parking spaces and parking lot? MR. KAPLIN: Well, we can get that question. I think that what you will see is the surface parking remains around the same. think so. MR. MATTEO: I dont think so before? MR. KAPLIN: No, I dont you. MR. WIRTSHAFTER: Three questions first. Bob Wirtshafter, W-I-R-T-S-H-A-F-T-E-R, 1428 Cloverly Lane, Rydal, 19046. My first question is, how many existing parking spaces are there at the shopping center now? MR. KAPLIN: Im not sure whether Adam could tell you. He has the plan. He may be able to tell you. MR. MATTEO: Was he sworn in

97 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. WIRTSHAFTER: But youve expanded the road. You put in this landscaping. So there cant be as many as there were before. MR. KAPLIN: We will get you the number. But Im giving you generally the parking spaces remain the same. The parking, the additional parking is in a structured garage. MR. BENOSKY: 609. MR. KAPLIN: 609. Can you tell from the other plan that Cornelius did whats the number? Its pretty close, isnt it? MR. MATTEO: Michael? MR. NARCOWICH: The plan I have dated I think its March 22nd, 2009. MR. KAPLIN: Larry, can I have our engineer who prepared this plan answer? MR. MATTEO: Sure. We were trying to assist. MR. KAPLIN: Adam, go ahead. --ADAM BENOSKY, having been duly sworn, testified as follows: ---

98 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 correct. MR. KAPLIN: And then the existing? MR. BENOSKY: 609. MR. KAPLIN: So by redesigning the parking lot, there is some number of additional surface parking? MR. BENOSKY: That is MR. BENOSKY: Adam Benosky, B-E-N-O-S-K-Y, Bohler Engineering, 1600 Manor Drive, Chalfont, Pennsylvania. The approximate number of parking spaces in the proposed plan is 1,193 total spaces. MR. KAPLIN: How are they broken down, Adam, if you can? MR. BENOSKY: We have 659 spaces for the non-residential parking thats in the front field. The residential parking is 399 spaces. So the total between the structure and non-structure is 617 surface spaces thats on the ground and then 576 spaces in the structured parking or the parking structure. MR. KAPLIN: How many

99 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 did. MR. KAPLIN: Okay. MR. WIRTSHAFTER: Then I want to testify. Now hes going to -- I need to testify. --ROBERT WIRTSHAFTER, having did. MR. KAPLIN: Okay. MR. WIRTSHAFTER: Yes, you rest of the parking is in the structure? MR. BENOSKY: Yes, sir. MR. KAPLIN: Okay. I hope that answers your question, sir. MR. WIRTSHAFTER: My third question is, you said something before about one of the intersections was F -- one of the intersections had an F grade, therefore, when you go through and add the few more cars to that intersection, its still F, and that isnt your responsibility. Is that pretty much it? MR. KAPLIN: No, thats not what I said. I didnt mention the word F. MR. WIRTSHAFTER: Yes, you

100 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 been duly sworn, testified as follows: --MR. WIRTSHAFTER: Im a Ph.D. in geography. I was on the faculty of Penn and city planning for twenty years. And I would like to say that the transportation plan that they have got is flawed. But I dont think tonight is the night for that because I think youre talking about that at the land use time. MR. MATTEO: That is correct. MR. WIRTSHAFTER: But I would say that the way they presented it makes the implication that the capacity of this space is not affected by the traffic. And I believe that is totally incorrect. There is a limitation to how much capacity this area can take. They have added virtually no additional parking for this greater, you know, parking shopping center they have created. Almost all of the additional parking is for this expanded number of tenants. So that they have not in any way really improved our access to this place where theres already some difficulties.

101 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 If they were to fill all of those shops, we would have issues of parking on the road. We would have additional traffic that would be generated by people trying to find parking spaces. All of that is not factored into this equation at all. Also the way they generated their transportation study does not fully incorporate all of the fallout of the bottlenecks. They have not taken those bottlenecks into where the other places where cars will go. They have not adequately modeled the bottleneck thats created by the Washington Street Bridge. And I will be happy to testify to those. But the real issue here is one of density. And you do not, under any obligations, have to grant a property development that is putting way too many people into this space. I would be happy if it was an eighty people, eighty apartment, luxury apartments. That might be enough. But what they have done now is taken what was a smaller development with a lot of parking in their original plan a year ago,

102 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 there was a lot more off-street parking, and now they have given that all to these apartments. So thats another change that Ive heard from last year that people need to recognize. So I would say to you, that, yes, theyre not under obligation to fix that intersection. But that intersection, the way it is and the additional load on that intersection, does affect the capacity, the care and capacity of this area. And, even if it was zoned for high density, you would still have to limit the amount of development there because of that. So thats my testimony. MS. DIJOSEPH: Thank you. --JODIE ABRAMS, having been duly sworn, testified as follows: --MS. ABRAMS: Jodie Abrams. Im not sure I want to give my address, but its 1536 Warner Road, Meadowbrook, A-B-R-A-M-S. I have a few things to say about the never ending debate concerning Baederwood. Its time for this project to happen.

103 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Im tired of driving past the almost empty shopping center that used to be the vibrant Baederwood. Im tired of driving up and down Old York Road and seeing For Sale signs and For Lease signs on abandoned stores everywhere. Im tired of driving to the Main Line and Warrington and English Village and everywhere else but where I live to shop, to be entertained and to dine and to feel a sense of vibrancy and excitement. Let us face it, our neighborhood needs a real shot in the arm. Enough of the parochialism that I hear at these meetings from the vocal minority that want nothing ever to happen out of fear and paranoia that someone is trying to trick them. Baederwood was a busy shopping center for many years before this, and we all survived the traffic. I have faith in our elected officials that they will not put us in jeopardy. Its time to show confidence in our Commissioners and our Township consultants and to let them do their jobs. No one is pulling the wool

104 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 over anyones eyes here when it comes to traffic issues, storm water issues and environmental issues. The average person who speaks at these hearings has no expertise when it comes to these complex issues. Our Commissioners do and so do our paid consultants and engineers. I have driven past other Brandolini shopping centers and, in my opinion, we should be delighted to have anything close to the type of projects Brandolini has done in places such as Concordville and Collegeville. Again, Im tired of seeing projects likes these and saying to myself, why cant we have shopping centers like this in our own backyard? As far as the condos are concerned, Im not here to say that I think 175 units is the right number or 350 units is the right number because I dont know and Im not qualified to express an opinion on that. Im here to say that enough is enough. Lets get this project done, and lets trust our experts to make sure it gets done the right way. MR. MATTEO: Thank you. ---

105 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 DIANE REED, having been duly sworn, testified as follows: --MS. REED: Diane Reed, R-E-E-D, 1056 Huntingdon Road in Abington. I just want to say that our property is very near the Elliott debacle, which is now Rydal Park, which is at this point not able to fund the wonderful development they had. And I wonder what guarantee we have that if Brandolini would not be able to do what it wants to do and tears down all the trees and so forth, what guarantee we have not to have another disaster like we had with the Elliott tract. Also, with the Elliott tract, all the trees were taken down. The storm water was handled. Its all underground now, so it doesnt water anything. The things that are growing up there are just scrub. If you take all of those trees down and divert the storm water, it all goes down to the Delaware River. It doesnt do us any good. My biggest point is, however, what guarantees do we have that -- oh, also, I was

106 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 not at the last meeting. But is it not true that the Planning Commission said or suggested 175 units? MR. MATTEO: Do you have a number? I dont remember that number. I have to check the minutes on that. The last proposal I believe was April of 08 at the Planning Commission meeting. I dont know if youre referring to that one or the most recent one. MS. REED: Most recent one. MR. MATTEO: Well, the first was 188, that number. I apologize. It might have been around that. Something like that. I dont have the records right here. MS. REED: Is it true that Brandolini is going to make the parking spaces smaller so that they get more parking? MR. MATTEO: Do you want to answer that? Marc, do you want to answer that? MS. REED: Are you not asking for some kind of whatever you ask for to get the parking spaces smaller? MR. KAPLIN: No. The parking stalls I believe are standard size. We are adding

107 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 more parking. The parking on the first floor of the structured parking facility is for the offices. The last gentleman that got up and testified was not accurate in that. We have reconfigured the parking lot. And based on what Adam said, were talking about more surface parking, not less, and parking on the first floor of the parking garage for the office. It wouldnt do us any good to build a development without the adequate number of parking spaces because nobody would come more than once. MS. REED: I have one other thing to say about the last person that spoke. Im old but I cant think that its going to do Abington any particular good to have it a destination for people from all over to come to Abington. And that just adds to the traffic. And York Road is already getting to be impossible. So thats what I have to say. MR. MATTEO: Thank you. MR. PEACOCK: Madam President, if I may. I do have to answer Diane Reeds question. I do have the minutes from the

108 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 limited? MR. PEACOCK: The residential component, we recommend it to be fifty-five years or older. MS. DIJOSEPH: Yes, sir? And may I caution those of you that are waiting, we have twenty minutes, so we will take that into consideration. --PHILIP LASKA, having been duly sworn, testified as follows: date on that? MR. PEACOCK: October 7th, 2009. It was the continuation of the first Planning Commission meeting that was held on September 24th, THE AUDIENCE: Was it age Planning Commission meeting. And those minutes would say that they recommend -- the Planning Commission recommends approval of the ordinance subject to the following qualifications, and one of those is maximum density would be 175 residential units. THE AUDIENCE: Whats the

109 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 --MR. LASKA: Philip Laska, L-A-S-K-A, 1204 Rosemont Lane, Abington, PA. The one not before me but the one before her mentioned were not traffic experts, and thats right. But I have a set of eyes and a brain. My wife and I bought our house about six years ago, and we watched the traffic increase a great deal. Now we have two dogs that I walk every morning between 5:30 and 7:30 in the morning. The number of cars that I see cutting through my neighborhood, which I live off of Huntingdon Road, near the Sunrise Retirement Community, is incredible. And the addition of 266 apartment units is only going to increase the number of people who are going to cut through my neighborhood to avoid Susquehanna Road backlog to get to 611, if you would, or wherever they want to go. The people in my neighborhood on my street, we vehemently oppose the construction of a 266 apartment building because we dont want to see this increased level of

110 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 traffic. We cant handle it. The children who live in our neighborhood, they cant ride their bikes because the cars are speeding by in excess of the twenty-five miles per hour speed limit. So, when the three of you go home tonight, think about your neighborhood and think about all of a sudden a bunch of traffic just going through there over the speed limit and think about how much that bothers us because we live here, and it really bothers us. So we are opposed to this apartment building being constructed and increasing the amount of traffic and really jeopardizing the safety of people. Because I see it every morning. Im really not happy about what I see. Thank you. MR. SKLAROFF: I am going to first ask two questions, and then Im going to testify. Question one, regarding the question I asked about the fire safety issue, one question. Has the assessment been made regarding the capacity of a fire truck to get to the residential areas? Yay or nay?

111 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 question. MR. SKLAROFF: Right. Now the next question is directed to Adam, the traffic man. that stage. But what I can tell you, I already said it, that there are adequate means of fighting a fire. MR. SKLAROFF: Dont filibuster. The answer is, you have not made an assessment. MR. KAPLIN: I answered your answer that. But what I can answer is -MS. DIJOSEPH: You better use the microphone. MR. KAPLIN: Were not at MR. KAPLIN: Yes. MR. SKLAROFF: And whats the result of that? MR. KAPLIN: Fire -MR. SKLAROFF: Trucks. Fire truck. You know, woo, woo, woo. Fire truck. MR. KAPLIN: No, I cant

112 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 not. MR. KAPLIN: Excuse me. the expert? MR. KAPLIN: Please ask your question, and we will decide from our witnesses who will answer. MR. SKLAROFF: Right. I believe he stated earlier that there is raw data upon which the twelve-page report that we read, some of us read, are predicated based on whatever reference. And I would like to ask a yay or nay question. Part A of the question, may we have a copy of the raw data upon which those judgments that, quote, unquote, a small increase will occur as a result of this project, and, B, a copy of the precise methodology, not the reference, the precise methodology that was employed when coming to these conclusions? Yes or no? MR. KAPLIN: The methodology was spelled out. MR. SKLAROFF: No, it was Who is the traffic person,

113 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. SKLAROFF: It wasnt. MR. KAPLIN: Look, I will give you the answer. MR. MATTEO: Let him answer. MR. KAPLIN: The methodology, my understanding is, the methodology was spelled out. Im not sure -- Matt, was all of the computer printouts given to the Township? MR. BENOSKY: No. MR. KAPLIN: Were you asked for it by McMahon? MR. BENOSKY: No. MR. KAPLIN: We will be glad to give it to the Township. MR. SKLAROFF: So we will get a copy of the data, and we will get a copy of not just the reference to the type of methodology but a reference describing the policy procedures that was applied. MR. KAPLIN: We will give you the rest of the numbers that were run -MR. SKLAROFF: Thats one of the questions. MR. KAPLIN: I would

114 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 appreciate it if you just let me finish. You asked me what were going to give. MR. SKLAROFF: Right. MR. KAPLIN: If there is other material that was generated or collected, we will give the Township all of that information. MR. SKLAROFF: Okay. Including methodology, I hope. All right. Im ready to testify. --ROBERT B. SKLAROFF, having been duly sworn, testified as follows: --MR. SKLAROFF: Robert B. Sklaroff, S-K-L-A-R-O-F-F, 1219 Fairacres Road, Rydal, PA, 19046-2911. Im going to start with a quotation that I got from the BlackBerry here, and it directly contradicts a point that was made by the Chair suggesting that a lot of the comments here may be out of order. Now, granted, it was from Broward County. But they list eight criteria for zoning, and Im going to read only A. Its eight lines. Whether the proposed use or uses

115 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 would have hours of operation, lighting, odor, noise levels, traffic or site activity that would significantly diminish the enjoyment of safety or quality of life in existing neighborhoods within the area which could conceivably be affected by the proposed use. Therefore, I conclude from that that unless Broward County in Florida is distinctly different from here and their zoning laws are, that the discussion of zoning is highly on point relative to issues related to traffic, parking, et cetera. Part one. What I want to do is read the testimony which is terse regarding the traffic issues so that my entire database is perfectly known to Mr. Kaplin and everybody else. And, basically, I already discussed the Traffic Planning and Design report which was issued on July 13th and, therefore, presumably was based upon data that had been acquired prior thereto. It was attempted to reassure the reader that traffic volumes would not be greatly affected by the plan to construct hundreds of residences, expanded businesses, in a region thats already

116 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 routinely supports bottlenecked traffic on Susquehanna Avenue, et cetera. The four sites I listed. And the key one, of course, is the fact that missing is the bridge. And I also noted the suggestion that the redesign intersection of The Fairway and Rydal Road, which to me is tangential, would be financed. And the key concept I want to suggest be weighed by the Commissioners is a, quote, Primum Non Nocere, the first prior is do no harm. That is a quote the physicians learned from Galen of Pergamum. And, basically, we should not do anything we know that is already going to injure a Level F intersection. And the bottom line of this whole situation to me is that when you look at whats going on here and you listen to Ms. Abrams say that we should trust our elected leaders, I think with the health care reform situation, et cetera, the bottom line point is we are here as citizens. Whether were having a tea party here or not, the bottom line is we are here to give oversight and to give informed consent to all of you. And when that includes expert testimony, you

117 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 might say, from people from the citizenry from Penn, et cetera, I think you have to weigh it at least as much as what was given by the applicants for the program. Thank you. MS. DIJOSEPH: Thank you. --JOSEPH DRATCH, having been duly sworn, testified as follows: --MR. DRATCH: Joseph Dratch, 1186 Mill Road Circle, Rydal, PA, 19046, D-R-A-T-C-H. I was here at the last meeting, and I had asked a question. Im going to repeat the question again, because I know that everybody in here has the concerns about the traffic and the storm water and all of these other issues which are very important regarding the development. But I dont think thats why were here tonight. Were here about the zoning ordinance and about whether or not the ordinance should be changed. First, before I ask the

118 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 question, I want to say that I agree with everything that Mrs. Abrams said in her statement. My question, again, to Mr. Kaplin, and I see Mr. Herder here, is, at least I was left with the impression that should this zoning ordinance be turned down or denied, that there is a potential for litigation; is that correct, Mr. Kaplin? MR. KAPLIN: Its not a potential. The challenge was filed months ago. MR. DRATCH: Okay. I was not aware of that. I will ask Mr. Herder also since hes here. Could you please explain to everybody in this room what the potential hazards can be or what the potential problems could be for the Township in the event that you prevail in a lawsuit regarding this particular site? MR. HERDER: I will speak first, I guess, Marc, if thats all right. MR. KAPLIN: Go ahead. MR. HERDER: If by dangers you mean to the Township, if by that term you mean --

119 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. DRATCH: What the repercussions would be to the Township. MR. HERDER: Mr. Kaplins challenge is to the validity of the R-1 zoning parcel. And he asks that that be rezoned to PB. And the result to the Township would be that that parcel would then be zoned PB as is the front part of the parcel. MR. KAPLIN: Thats true as far as it goes. When you file a challenge, you have to file a plan, not an engineering plan, but you have to file a plan that shows what could be or what would be proposed to develop. Im going to digress just a hair because I think its important. The front part of the property is already zoned PB. PB allows virtually the same thing that we are proposing. It allows I believe up to some four hundred units if we develop structured parking. The problem with the PB District as its presently configured is you cant do a mixed-use project. It has a number of dimensional limitations that make either this type of development that were showing or any type of

120 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 modern mixed-use development as recommended by the comprehensive plan and corridor study impossible. So thats why we just didnt come in under PB, even though you could get more units. It doesnt work. But coming back to your question then, what our proposal is, is to have the whole site zoned PB, and we could then do a series of mixed-used buildings in accordance with the PB District. That would allow a certain amount or require a certain amount of retail on the first floor and allow residential above. Unless we can find it quickly, I dont want to give you a number. But it was a significant number of units. And thats what the risk is, and were here because -- well, you didnt ask me why were here, so I wont go there. MR. DRATCH: In other words, what youre saying is, the hypothetical, if this is denied, you could hypothetically come in for four hundred apartment units, hypothetically? MR. KAPLIN: Joe, I hate to do it, because, every time you say that, somebody

121 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 says, then youre threatening us. MR. DRATCH: What Im trying to do is make clear to the people that are here. First of all, by profession, Im a real estate developer, so you understand. Well, Ive been involved in these things. I know how they work, and I know what could happen. And I want the best thing for this Township. And I know this Board has been wrestling with this thing for many, many years. And its just too easy to make a statement, you know, deny this thing, without understanding the repercussions. And the fact is that a loss in the Courts could potentially take the development of this property out of your hands and put it into the Courts hands. And that is a very big risk for the Township to take on such an important project. And I think that its important that we sit down as residents, and Im speaking as a resident now, and try to work out some type of a compromise, some type of a way of seeing our way through this situation so that the Court doesnt take over.

122 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. MATTEO: Joe, are you asking questions or do you want to be sworn? MR. DRATCH: I am sworn. And I think that this is something that I know that you, the Supervisors, understand that and you understand it completely. But I dont think everybody in this room understands exactly what could happen. MR. MATTEO: Thank you. MR. DRATCH: Thank you. --RALPH FRIEDMAN, having been duly sworn, testified as follows: --MR. FRIEDMAN: Ralph Friedman. I live at 1420 Hunter Road, Rydal, Pennsylvania. Im here on behalf of myself and mainly for the Rydal Meadowbrook Civic Association. Youre being asked to approve a zoning ordinance change, and thats why were here. The Rydal Meadowbrook Civic Association is opposed to the proposed change. Most of the reasons have been stated. The density that it

123 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 proposes is of great concern to us, and we ask you to support the R-1 zoning as it now exists. However, we are in favor of a redevelopment of the Baederwood Shopping Center, and we would hope that there is some way that, and this all got spotty with Brandolinis cooperation, can come up with a solution to avoid the communication gap that has developed. Your Township Manager or our Township Manager was quoted in The Times Chronicle over the project at Williard (ph.) when he says it goes to the credits of the developer and the community leadership. They worked hard together for two or three years to get to a point where the community will be happy with whats there and it could be a successful development. There is no reason why that cant happen here. Last year I represented the Civic Association when Brandolini made a zoning proposal. I thought that we had begun profitable negotiations with their then counsel to move the thing along, but for some reason it died. Now, Ive heard the Rutgers quoted here today. And Im going to quote an

124 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 authority from Penn State University. His name is Joe Paterno. In the locker room he has posted, Take care of the little things and the big things will take care of themselves. Well, Mr. Snow, you didnt take care of the little things. These are the little things, the people that are here today opposing your proposal. Had you come to the Civic Association and heard what we had to say, maybe your proposal would have been different. Maybe it would be acceptable to us. Maybe it would be acceptable to the community. Im asking you to find a way, whether its appointing a task force, a committee, whatever, of community representatives and hopefully with Brandolinis cooperation we can sit down, work out the problems and get a project done thats going to be beneficial to everybody. Thank you. MR. KAPLIN: Ralph, can I ask you a couple of questions? MR. FRIEDMAN: Sure. MR. KAPLIN: My understanding is you said that you represented the Civic

125 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 correct. MR. KAPLIN: Its true, I wasnt there but Fred has told me. That variance, through two hearings, was vehemently opposed, wasnt it? MR. FRIEDMAN: I dont think it was vehemently opposed. I think there were objections just as there are to this. MR. KAPLIN: There was a lawyer, other than you, there who represented somebody else and opposed the application. MR. FRIEDMAN: I dont think so. I dont remember that. MR. MATTEO: Yes. MR. FRIEDMAN: I could be wrong. Who was that? I know, Marc, as a result of a meeting, we sat down. We began to talk. I thought we were working it out. However, I was representing the Civic Association as then Association when Brandolini filed a zoning proposal. By that, I assume you mean the request for variances before the Zoning Hearing Board. MR. FRIEDMAN: Thats

126 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 President of the Civic Association. I think Mr. Snow had some communications, something happened. MR. KAPLIN: Let me just tell you -- and I think its very important, because you used the word communication and all of that. And I agree with that. And I wasnt there. But thats why I became involved. Because Fred -- and Fred explained that you were here the last meeting. The first step was to get some more depth to be able to expand the building. In order to do that, you had to move the office parking to the back. And, in order to do that, we would have had to or Fred would have had to intrude into the R-1 just for parking for the office. That was just the first step. There were -- and I assure, Fred assures me, there were two hearings where they barely got to the substance, and they were opposed. So they, Brandolini, Fred Snow was opposed. And Fred felt that if the community cant even accept eighteen or some parking spaces in the R-1 ground to allow the start of the redevelopment, then nothing would have ever

127 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 happened. Thats the first part that I want the Board to understand about the communication and about the zoning hearing process. MR. FRIEDMAN: In response to that -- I dont want to waste time with the people here. I have copies of two letters that I wrote to Denise Yarnoff (ph.), who was then counsel, and a letter that I wrote to the President of the Civic Association concerning the breakdown with regard to the negotiations. It is my understanding, at least as far as the Civic Association is concerned, and I think the zoning Board would have gone along with it, that everything had been worked out. There was one issue that I think was problematic to Fred, and that was the size of the stores. There was some bickering going on over that. And that was the only hangup at that point. The issue with regard to the R-1 zoned part in the back to be used for parking was resolved. MR. KAPLIN: Resolved between

128 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 who and who? MR. FRIEDMAN: The Association and Mr. Snow. MR. KAPLIN: But when -MR. FRIEDMAN: I dont know about the other person. But it was never then -it was withdrawn from the Zoning Boards consideration. MR. KAPLIN: It was withdrawn after two contested hearings. MS. DIJOSEPH: Gentlemen, apparently the two of you are not going to agree on this. It is now five after 10:00. Two other people want to speak very quickly, and I am going to have to ask that. MR. FRIEDMAN: I just reiterate what I said. I hope you will find a way to piece it together and work on it. MS. DIJOSEPH: Your point is well taken. Thank you. --CARSON ADCOCK, having been duly sworn, testified as follows: ---

129 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. ADCOCK: Carson Adcock, 1714 Brook Road, A-D-C-O-C-K. Briefly, I did oppose that originally and our attorney called Mr. Snows office, and we may even be the other person youre talking about. But we said, as long as youre willing to restrict yourself only intruding from that one acre to the eight acres and if you would put that in writing, we would be agreeable to the plan. Mr. Snows office said they wouldnt hear anything of it, certainly implying that they wanted to go beyond that once they got that waiver. MS. DIJOSEPH: Thank you. MR. ADCOCK: My point here tonight was just to kind of conclude with something positive for the Board. MS. DIJOSEPH: Please. MR. ADCOCK: And especially to the fellow Republicans on the Board. I think theres a spirit of property rights -MS. DIJOSEPH: Sir -MR. ADCOCK: -- upholding the rights of the individuals that leaves me as a

130 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Republican, and I hope it resonates with you. MS. DIJOSEPH: Will you make your statement? MR. ADCOCK: Recent history shows us two things. Once you give away these property rights, you wont be able to take them back. Also, once you appease this demand, more demands are sure to follow. The prelude actually kind of alludes to that, doesnt it? As long as we go on validating lunacy and rewarding greed which you will not be surprised to find a steady stream of both knocking on our door consuming more and more time and energy and resources, deteriorating our political, social and natural environment along the way. Where will we draw the line? Members of the Board, I will suggest it has been drawn already, and what it shows is eight acres of residential property adjacent to a forty-two acre residential lot to its rear. If Brandolini didnt like owning or abutting the residential property, why did they purchase it in the first place? As those charged with

131 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 protecting the zoning integrity of Abington -- and I dont mean this in an insulting way, but certainly I would take it as a personal insult that Brandolini would come here with this expectation, that you would be willing to hand over the green space zoned for eight units in exchange for a high density lot zoned for 266. I doubt that when you ran for office, you were motivated out of a desire to find the path of least resistance. If decisions were easy and strength were not required, we would not even need a Board. This is moment to do what you came here to do. This is why you were appointed and elected as our Commissioners. Your time on this decision-making body will soon pass. I challenge each of you, do not set yourself up to look back on this opportunity with regret. Previous Boards have handed you a precedent of conciliation and conception. Hand the next generation a precedent of courage, wisdom and foresight. Please tell Brandolini and those of their kind who would come after, surely and clearly, we will not be intimidated or

132 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A-L-O-E. I want to make clear, and I brought that up at the Commissioners meeting the other night, this is not a PB that youre going to be voting on. Its a new classification, a new zoning classification written by the applicant, by Brandolini. This application for -- what is it, full name of the application, Larry? The Baederwood -MR. MATTEO: Baederwood Limited Partnership. MR. ALOE: Baederwood Limited Partnership is what they propose to change this not only the PB section but the whole of the eight acres, 8.3 acres besides that? MR. MATTEO: That is correct. MR. ALOE: So what Mr. Herder coerced. Tell them the line has been drawn already and we tend to hold it. --PAUL ALOE, having been duly sworn, testified as follows: --MR. ALOE: Paul Aloe, Rydal,

133 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 said before or Mr. Kaplin said before is not true. Its not being changed to be PB. Its being changed to a zoning classification that they wrote. The Township Commissioners did not write this. They wrote it. I think that its imperative that we understand that there are many, many people who have already gone home, and I was going to ask all of the people that are against it, and I think you know, that ninety-nine percent, except Mr. Dratch and one other person, are vehemently opposed as this as it stands. I think what this previous person said is true. And I would like to see the zoning kept on the R-1 section. I would like to see Brandolini get started on building the Baederwood Shopping Center. You can take the two PB sections and put them together. But the only ones that can change zoning in Abington Township are you, the Board of Commissioners. The people cant do it. The zoning is important to all of us that live here and came in this community as a suburban community, not an urban community. We are not opposed to the

134 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 rebuilding of the Baederwood Shopping Center. Brandolini admitted at the last meeting that it would be three years before he would get around to building on the R-1 section. He also has a property up in Providence where he has two years to go before he could get that completed. Sentiment is against town centers. We are not a town center. Abington is a town of different communities, each distinctive in its own, and we came into this community because we like a suburban community. We want to retain that suburban community. We would like Fred Snow and Brandolini to help us maintain a suburban community. I say what worked out at the Willow property was great. I think if we get the proper cooperation between Fred Snow and Brandolini and the community we can do it again. We can build something there. But, in the meantime, lets get a shopping center. Fred, give us a shopping center now, not later. We need a shopping center there. You can come back later when you see that the time is right to see what could be done with

135 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 that R-1 section. Right now, lets get to work and lets do the Baederwood Shopping Center, what people want back again. And then, in the future, we will see what happens with the R-1. Three years is a long time away, and thats a long time to wait. Thank you very much. MR. MATTEO: Thank you. MS. DIJOSEPH: Thank you all for coming tonight. At this time, I must tell you a decision will not be rendered tonight. As you can see, this is a multi-layered project with many, many faucets. And we will have a transcript to review in time. And some conciliation. I think, very briefly, our Manager, Mr. Conway, would like to mention that the Township has hired or agreed to hire a planner who is going to be helping us. And, Mr. Conway, if you would want to add on to that a little bit for us. MR. CONWAY: Briefly, of course, as the Board knows, the Board took action at last weeks monthly meeting to authorize me to engage the services of a professional certified

136 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 planner to take a look at some of the numbers associated with both the PB option and whats being proposed this evening and help give the Board some added perspective against what is being proposed. So that process is underway. MS. DIJOSEPH: Thank you. So the point is, we are going to be moving forward, and I just want all of you to know that we do, very seriously, consider all of the testimony that we have heard and that there will not be any kind of private deals being cut. This will all be very transparent, and we certainly thank all of you for your input. Thats very important to us. (At 10:15 p.m., proceedings were concluded.) ---

137 1 2 3 CERTIFICATION _________________________

4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 ________________________ 20 21 22 23 24 MARK MANJARDI Official Court Reporter --I hereby certify that the proceedings and evidence are contained fully and accurately in the notes taken by me in the above cause and that this is a correct transcript of the same.