Baederwood
Shopping Center
WHAT ABINGTON RESIDENTS ARE SAYING :
Your
comments welcome - click here - they will be posted
anonymously unless you desire otherwise but I require a name and address to know that an
Abington resident has made them.
DEC 29, 2011
coming ....
DEC 15th
THE FAIRWAY TRANSIT ORDINANCE - #
200O ( AND ORDINANCE # 2006 PROPOSING TO COMBINE ALL THREE
BAEDERWOOD LOTS) HAVE BEEN GIVEN THE THUMBS UP ( with
amendments? without amendments? we're not sure...)
BY YOUR PLANNING COMMISSIONERS ------- MEANING THEY WILL RECOMMEND THE
COMMISSIONERS PASS IT JAN 6, 2011
Residents are meeting Dec 29th at
7pm at the Brownstone next to Sunrise at Abington
Please join us. Or
send your comments by clicking here
______________________________________________
DEC 13 2010
Comments
ON NOVEMBER
17TH 2010, AT THE BEGINNING OF THE HOLIDAY SEASON,
RESIDENTS WERE PRESENTED WITH A NEW PLAN .... THE FAIRWAY
TRANSIT ORDINANCE . IT IS NOT JUST INTENDED FOR THE
BAEDERWOOD PROPERTY... THOUGH THAT IS THE ONLY PLACE IT IS
CURRENTLY BEING PROPOSED. IT HAS BEEN ADMITTED SOME ITEMS
( INCLUDING THE NAME) ARE THERE WITH AN EYE TOWARDS A MUCH
LARGER AREA......THE PLANNER HAS BEEN WORKING ON THIS FOR OVER A
YEAR AND WRITING THE ORDINANCE FOR OVER 9 MONTHS. THE
HOLIDAY RUSH TO PASS THIS IS ONE OF THE MAIN COMPLAINTS
RESIDENTS HAVE.
Dec 7th and
December 17th, residents met to prepare their comments for their
Commissioners, Planning Commission members and for the next
meeting. Here are the comments agreed upon by consensus at those
meetings & presented to commissioners and planners.
1) Request a Continuance / Extension
until residents are properly informed
2) Provide the tools that we need to be informed
provide a webpage with appropriate links
and all facts
provide email lists for all who want to
be informed of meeting dates & info updates
release the reports from the Lawyer &
Land Planner - show how their conclusions were
reached
3) If Brandolini refuses to extend the deadline
…..
allow
the legal process to start, if need be ……. it can be stopped
at any time we all agree
______________________________________________________
Among other things, we need more time to examine:
Invalid / Incomplete Traffic Studies
Lacking police accident reports, key intersection studies,
neighborhood roads analysis & other safety concerns
Rydal
Waters May Gain Cause to Sue
If we allow this, then they will have the same situation
and we may anticipate more challenges
Greenspace, Setbacks and Building Heights
A
definitive amount of greenspace should be preserved - not
offered as an "option"
Set BACKS from the road, rather than encouragement to
build up to it, preserve beauty & greenspace
Heights should be reviewed - higher structures should be
set back are 75 ' heights at all desirable ?
Conveyancing Individual Lots
p8 section
P (504.6.P)
Allowing
individual lots for financing or conveyancing without the
need for subdivision/land development approval could create
properties ( the Baederwood & others) that are difficult
to sell & to manage & have other consequences. Eliminate
p8 Section P .
Density / Mixed Use / Transit Oriented District
/
Ownership
We do not want residents ADDED to our Township - Mixed
Use Should NOT be forced
Transit Oriented Districts strive for / thrive on greater
density and include undesirable transit "stations"
Surveys
Residents
should never be directed to a survey which limits them
solely to the survey maker's choices & ideas.
Solutions - Compromises
Consider creating a Residential zoning with fewer
limitations than the SNR specifically for the 8 acres
( ½ of
the 8.32 acres borders on SNR (Sr Neighborhood Residential
) something less restrictive could be offered)
Or …..Seek a similar solution with an ordinance that is
crafted with the
residents concerns as noted above prominently
addressed --- the FTD ordinance does not do that. We hope
to work towards a solution with which both Township
officials and residents can be happy.
___________________________________________________________________
2006 Comments & questions
Comments from the March 13th,
2006 meeting included some of the following :
........that the area might not be able to support the amount of
retail that is planned and if it did
that the increased traffic would greatly impact the neighborhood
........that if the 500 residential units planned were going to
have children, the cost impact on the
school district would be a consideration
.........that the current businesses might not know their fate
for some time while the project was underway
and it would be difficult for them to invest in their own stores
.........that other capital improvements such as the expansion
of the Rydal underpass etc might result
in expenses that would end up being borne by taxpayers
.........that the traffic specialists there should already be
familiar with the problems in the area before
planning the
additional impact ( they seemed not to be)
.........that the underground parking that is planned is rarely
used in the Jenkintown Acme as residents
prefer
above ground parking
.........that there is a creek that runs under the property that
might make things difficult especially
for underground garages
.........that there are environmental concerns such as building
250 units in a partial steep slope area in the
rear and
whether consideration would be given to impervious surface
alternatives
......... that the variances needed would represent a
substantial difference in the number of units built,
in the
rear of the property, for instance ( 250 apartments versus
8 single family homes ? ) rather than
the very tiny little variances represented by the developers
.........that the plan itself was beautiful and that it might
represent a wonderful asset addition
with many
improvements for residents to enjoy over the current use of the
space.
__________________________________________
POSTINGS
3-14-06 If the area can support this
wonderful project
- it would mean that those that were shopping there in this
increased space would NOT be shopping in another area possibly
in our township. So while this area might thrive another might
suffer a loss as a result. The movie theater is the
only viable one for miles around, but the grocery shoppers, it
would seem, would have to draw from those that shop
at Clemens or Genuardi's or Acme to be viable. What would happen
to those stores?
lel@abingtoncitizens.com
3-19-06 Not only will the
traffic from 500 apartment units be immense, but in combination
with the additional cars from the increased shopping, the entire
quality of the area will be changed. This type of plan seems
better for an area which is already more dense, not this one,
which can not handle the traffic there as it is.
lel@abingtoncitizens.com
__________________________________________________________
 Please
feel free to post your comment here - either with your own email
or you may post anonymously & use ours .
Send
your the
information to:
lel@abingtoncitizens.com
|
