1209 Rydal Rd 
				Wouldn't you love a couple of these in 
				your neighborhood? How about one right next to or beside your 
				house?    
				 Our zoning code gave 
				developers the idea that they could just do this.  So far the 
				neighbors have them on "hold" - we're waiting for their next 
				proposition  - and the Commissioners, under pressure from 
				residents,  have revised the ordinance so this can't so 
				easily be done 
  
				  
				 
				
                
                   
				THE NUTSHELL   :  
				
				 After 
				finishing  3 parts of the Conditional Use Hearing, taking 
				countless hours and costing untold wasted dollars on behalf of  
				individual residents as well as the taxpayers...... the 
				developer  cancelled part 4 til who knows when.  We 
				are expecting another proposal any minute .. and the new more 
				restrictive, ordinance will not apply to them.  
  The land at 1209 
				Rydal Rd is at least partially on/in a Steep Slope  
				Conservation District,   Floodplain Conservation 
				District and Riparian Buffer Conservation  Corridor.   
				They failed, in 2021 to win the right to build 34 units / 50 
				homes  ( 18 Townhomes and 16 duplexes =50 homes total - see 
				more on that below ) after telling residents that our Manager 
				told them this would be fine and would get the Township's 
				blessing. Residents disagreed - and began to wake up.   
				  They returned in March 
				2023  with their new proposal for a Life Care Facility and  
				a Nursing Home.  Still not OK with any of the residents and 
				not in compliance with the law. There were then 2 more 
				submissions - the final one was on  July 31, 2023. The 
				first day of the Hearing was set for October 16th, where they 
				did not have a big enough room to accommodate everyone and so 
				they just vetted those requesting party status. See summaries of 
				the first 3 hearings just below this.  Again.... we are 
				expecting this proposal to possibly be completely revised.......  
				the fact that Commissioners are entertaining a revision of the 
				ordinance should stand as proof that they will not get the usual 
				"special favors" approving this. And that is 100% because 
				residents were willing to make a lot of noise. 
  
          
                
                   
				NEXT  : Waiting for a date. They cancelled on 1-30-24 . 
				It would have been 
				
                PART 4  OF THE CONDITIONAL USE HEARING
                  -- all which were all held at PENN STATE ABINGTON 
				( not in the Township Building )but  in the larger Sutherland Building Auditorium   
				1600 Woodland Rd  Abington PA  because of the  # 
				of people expected. Many also attended by zoom.
  It was,, 
				and is my firm opinion that 
				they should not have been dragging everybody through 
				all of this  when it appears  CLEAR that they NEVER 
				can meet the rule that requires them to conform with the 
				Character of the Neighborhood and to not do harm to the 
				neighbors. The Commissioner should ask them to stop dragging it 
				out until they can prove that they can meet just those REQUIRED 
				conditions. Why should they be allowed to drone on endlessly 
				about all the other things, and rob taxpayers of their money, 
				when it clearly does not  appear in a form that legally  
				could be passed.   Let's hope they finally realize it themselves and 
				don't come back with anything either similar.   
				 
                
                   
				Part 3  OF THE CONDITIONAL USE 
				HEARING was held  
				11-29-23  
				
                
				
				Development Consultant, Greg Ellmore was presenting for the 
				applicant. He is from Oregon. Scroll down in this link  to find the documents from the 
				prior meeting .
				
				He shared hypotheticals re: the conceptual layout and floor 
				plans included in the application and re: the operational 
				aspects of the proposed facility. But the facility they are 
				building will be leased to someone else. So he cannot 
				definitively  confirm much of what he eas testifying to 
				like: how it will be run and how many employees they will deem 
				necessary, and when deliveries will be scheduled, etc.  He 
				had concluded this would be a benefit to Abington, but admitted 
				under questioning he wrote his analysis before he ever saw 
				Abington   and that he  had no idea how many 
				vacant nursing home or memory care or senior  facility  
				beds there were in the many facilities just withing 5 miles of 
				this one....let alone the many others in Montgomery County. He 
				really could not assess whether it would be a benefit or add to 
				a problem that already exists re: empmpty beds. 
    
				He confirmed that David Mermelstein and Moshe Barzani were the 
				owners ( the Chaverim Realty Partner guys) and David Mermelstein 
				is also an owner in a nursing hom 1.4 miles away that is 
				shuttered.  A resident was forbidden to ask questions about 
				Mermelsteins'  Senior facility in Jenkintown, the Chelsea  
				that is now closed /vacant.  He had not spoken to the 
				Wastewater director about any anticipated problems  adding 
				130 toilets and circa 100 or more kitchens plus a commercial 
				kitchen.He had predicted only 5 ambulance calls a month, while 
				one Commissioner tesified that his relative in a similar 
				facility had 3 ambulance calls in 1 week.  
  
				Ultimately Mr Ellmore  seemed to have no direct knowledge 
				of any of the facts that would actually determinine if it were 
				or were not good for Abington.   And despite the 
				pictures loudly declaring the opposiite, he said in his opinion, 
				it conforms to the "character" of the neighborhood.   
				 
				
  
                
                   
				PART 2 OF THE CONDITIONAL USE HEARING  WAS HELD  10-30-23   
				
                at PENN STATE ABINGTON    
				--  
          	  The applicant presented only their first witness, a Civil 
				Engineer. His presentation was followed by 1.5 hours of 
				relentless questioning from a variety of residents with party 
				status. Resident  opposition was very clear and every 
				question was well thought out, bringing many of the concerns to 
				the fore. You can watch the whole meeting here 
				
				https://abingtonpa.viebit.com/player.php?hash=4c05F7vSnRf4xoal 
				 And the documents from that meeting are here:  
				
				
				https://d3n9y02raazwpg.cloudfront.net/abingtonpa/62a3c7af-7400-11ee-b4aa-0050569183fa-ca2b9c28-b9cf-4f17-b573-dd2752d4679e-1698325832.pdf   
				
				  
          	   
				  
				
				
          	  
          
				
                
                   PART 
				1 OF THE CONDITIONAL USE HEARING  WAS HELD  10-16-23 
				 It appeared, at first, that the Township 
				was not going to be able to hold this first day  of the 
				Hearing because they had not arranged for a room big enough to 
				accommodate all those coming, which would be a violation of 
				Sunshine Law.  So they agreed just to hold the decision 
				making part for those seeking Party Status. 
				
				Anyone within 750  ft of the 
				property would be granted automatic party status upon their 
				formal request. Others were granted party status based on their 
				reasons that this affected them. Still others 
				will not know if status is granted until the next meeting, on Oct 30th.  To 
				enable this meeting, those 
				 
				 not 
				seeking party status were asked to  stay home, so as not to 
				overwhelm the room. You can watch the meeting 
				here 
				
				https://abingtonpa.viebit.com/player.php?hash=kFYaN30UBZjnUi6Q 
       They also were 
				requiring for party status, that those who had already filled 
				out all the information, but on a different form, would have to 
				refile the same information on the other form. Really?  Just plain 
				needless disrespect from our Solicitor.
     Another 
				truely ridiculous thing was that, knowing  seating was an 
				issue, the Manager and his multiple Assistants still had the room 
				cordoned off with a full one half of the room being allotted to just a couple of 
				employees - while the residents squeezed into the other side and 
				had to sit way in the back where it is harder to see and hear.  
				Tons of empty carpet space with no chairs.    Manager 
				Manfredi started those shenanigans when he wanted a new Township 
				building and was trying to prove the room was too small.  More 
				than once we've had to stop a meeting to have him get chairs 
				that he took away  or to make special arrangements for 
				people standing because he refuses to act in resident interests. 
				
  ___________________________________________ 
				 REVERTING TO CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER 
				
                
                  
				
				 
				
				
				
          	  
				9-26-23    
				
				
				
				
				 THE PLANNING COMMISION REVIEW  RESULT:   PLANNERS UNANIMOUSLY  VOTE 
				AGAINST RECOMMENDING THE PROJECT  Their "advisory only " 
				recommendation will go to the Commissioners for the hearing .
				
  The proposal on the table as 
				of the 9-26-23 Planning Commission Review was this : After dividing the 7.316 acres 
				into a  1.622 
				acre site and a 5.696 acre site, there will be 3 buildings total--- 
				 --- Lot 1 : The original 7 
				bedroom home, carriage house & cabin on a 1.622 acre lot  
				would remain residential     --- Lot 
				2 :    Building #1: A Senior Care Facility consisting of a 74 
				unit/82 bed Assisted Living facility.          
				11 of those units are Memory Care. Those 74 units are in
				 Building One on Lot 2
				  --- Lot 2 
				: 
				Building #2 : An Independent Living Facility  
				with 46 units /55 beds
  So there will be 120 units added - 
				plus the original hom.  
				
				 
				
				
				A recommendation to  deny it 
				ultimately came   from the Planners
				
				  
          
                
                  
				
				
				
				10-16-23 
				   
				
				 
				
				
				THE CONDITIONAL USE 
				HEARING  
				
				   
				
				
				 
				
				
				   BEFORE THE COMMISSIONERS
				
				   
				
          	  
				
				 
				
				
				 A recommendation 
				to  deny it will come from the Planners - and from pretty 
				much every citizen that attends --- complete with sufficient 
				legal reasons that  make one wonder how it got past our 
				Engineer, our Legal review,  our Manager  and the Ward  
				Commissioner  Tom Hecker. 
				
				They are not supposed to be forwarding things that have such 
				obious contradictions to code.....   
  
           
				
				
                
                    
				DOCUMENTS : Here is the full 
				  
				
				Application as of 9-26-23 Planning Commission meeting .There are  
				253 pages 
				 
				
				https://d3n9y02raazwpg.cloudfront.net/abingtonpa/cc209181-9802-11ed-96ab-0050569183fa-ca2b9c28-b9cf-4f17-b573-dd2752d4679e-1694788212.pdf
  
				
				
				 
				
				
				
				
				   
				
				
				
                
                   
				WAY TOO MUCH FUNNY BUSINESS 
                    
				The 
				Township clearly hoped to get it passed before 
				the residents knew much of anything about it - and the more we 
				review, the more irregularities we are finding.  We are still awaiting an 
				explanation as to how ALL the professionals failed to follow the 
				law..... the Solicitor, the Engineer, the Zoning Officer, 
				the Manager, the Montco Planning Commission, and EVERYONE who 
				handled or reviewed this 
				document. How could ALL  of them ACCIDENTALLY missed 
				the required Planning meeting. Please ask Commissioner Hecker to provide a public answer 
				. 
      
				
				 
				
				 
				
				
				
				
				
                
                  
				 isn't 
				that PROPERTY zoned r1 residential 
				?    
				
				
				
				
				
				
				
				
				
				  
				Yes, it is in an R1 neighborhood.  But as noted above,  in 
				2017-while Steve Kline was their Commissioner, he was also 
				leading the  "Zoning Rewrites" creating a very much changed 
				zoning  ordinance for the entire Township . He wrote in 
				this institutional use  to all the "R" ( residential) 
				neighborhoods, including into his OWN constituent's 
				neighborhoods
				
				without telling them,  It shouldn't have been there ... 
				Had he told them, so they understood what he was doing,  
				they would have been out in droves to protest that change.  
				They should have been told and not had their rights taken will 
				no notification.. He was ASKED to do just that..... He said he 
				would, but then did not . In fact, he made the process so 
				complicated and cumbersome it was akin to making sure no one 
				knew. More on this below uner "HOW DID THIS HAPPEN"  
				 
    
				
          
                
                     
				The date for the Conditional Use Hearing  must occur by 
				theoretically by  October 31st unless 
				the developer agrees to extend the time again. There is some 
				question about that actually being the deadline - because it was 
				the developer that missed the 8-22-23 Planning Review  
				which put it off a month and 
				the developer who sumitted 3 different versions..... The running 
				clock should go from the last submission , shouldn't it?   But we'll 
				save that question for another day.      
				
          	  
				
				
				  
				
				 THE MAIN ISSUES 
				-   
				   ---  It is required  to 
				conform with the character of the neighborhood - clearly it does 
				not. Not even close  ---- It appears more parts may be  in the Steep Slope Overlay  
				District than are being admitted  see  discussions and 
				the maps below . ---- Our SALDO ( Subdivision and Land 
				Development Ordinance ) warns against odd lot shapes - which 
				this creates. -----The requirement not to disturb vegetation on 
				a steep slope would be grossly violated   ---- It will exacerbate existing  
				water runoff problems in an area with major flooding issues - 
				see Flood Map below   ---  
				It will set a precedent for others who don't believe they need 
				to adhere to the codes. ---  The parking is ridiculously inadequate - due, we 
				believe, to fudged numbers of workers, visitors etc., 
				---  Traffic would be a 
				huge issue , through these bucolic neighborhoods  ---  
				Noise / nuisances would surely result, ie: how many ambulances could be expected that disturb others at all 
				hours   ---  The possibility of it becoming 
				a non-profit means that there would be no financial benefit for 
				the Township   
				---  The value of  nearby homes plummets 
				with giantic institutions beside  or  behind them - 
				possibly as much as 1/3  ---  The value of other local 
				houses would be impacted by the sales of those next to it but in 
				the same neighborhood ---  Was density  
				properly calculated? Don't steep slopes, floodplains and 
				riparian corridors  reduce available land?  ---  When the rezoning 
				was done in 2017, they knew the residents were never properly 
				notified of the changes....          
				....It was their 
				own Ward Commissioner, Steve Kline, who put forth these 
				regulations without holding a          single meeting, as he was asked to 
				do, for the homeowners 
				impacted by his actions   
  ... so 
				much more FUNNY BUSINESS  AND so many more QUESTIONS : 
				 There is some conjecture they are just using this as 
				a threat to get something else allowed - like the Townshouses - 
				that are ALSO not going to be in conformance with the Steep 
				Slope and other requirements.  There is a reason the house 
				only sold for $600K - because the steeply sloped land is not 
				easily developable without a "special favor  for special friends " 
				- which the Township has tried several times to do (see below) 
  --- 
				ATTEMPT TO HOLD HEARING BEFORE PLANNING REVIEW  The Township tried to shuffle this quickly to final Hearing in 
				June 2023 before any required Planning Review, as required by 
				law,  and before even 
				the contiguous neighbors had seen ANY of the documents . It is 
				unheard of for neighbors not to have had
				
				 
				
				
				a single presentation before walking in to a Hearing.
				
  ---- DOCS POSTED LATE In June, the  Manager  posted the 
				documents late, and neighbors had no access to them until 4 days 
				before the scheduled  Hearing. 
  ---- 
				DOCUMENTS NOT MADE KNOWN TO RESIDENTS  Even after the 
				application was posted, the residents were not told they were 
				there and available with one or two clicks. Despite having asked for them, 
				without help, they would  would have no idea where to 
				look .  Their Commissioner, Tom Hecker,  knew the 
				complete documents were available but didn't tell them.Not just 
				that they could have digital versions - but where they were 
				posted. .  
				
  --- RESIDENTS FUTHER  MISLED  Their Commissioner, Tom Hecker, 
				besides not telling them where or how to find the documents, 
				actively misled them further by passing out 
				one single cover  page of the application to some -- and a 
				couple of people got a couple of pages - maybe 3 or 4.  He falsely led 
				residents to believe that's all there was -  The residents, 
				having been thus misled, posted his single page on 
				their facebook site, calling it "the application". The actual 
				application ( see the 
				"Documents " link above) was originally over 120 
				pages and is as of September  246 pages.
  
				
				 
				
				
				---- violations of policy, 
				code and law This is far more serious than just "late documents"
				
          	    
				which would give residents no time to consult 
				attorneys, do research or get  united with one another. 
				Everyone knows this is wrong. But it is far more serious 
				than residents just not having the documents .........  The 
				question of how many professionals saw and handled this, knew 
				that it should have gone for a Planning Review in front of the 
				public, but allowed it to move forward knowing that had not been 
				done  iseems to be a serious matter of corruption and/or 
				collusion to deprive residents of their rights and to favor the 
				developer.  
    . No  development application  goes to a 
				hearing without many sets of eyeballs making sure everything is 
				correct, all  laws have been considered and the i's are 
				dotted and the t's crossed.  This was a violation of our Zoning code
				and our public meeting 
				(posting) rules and  of the PA 
				Municipalities Planning Code.  Conditional Use applications 
				are required to go to the Planning Commission first, with full 
				documentation provided to the public. The Zoning Officer / 
				Engineer/ Solicitor/ Manager / Commissioner / Montco Planner  .....all reviewed 
				this and surely knew it had to go for a public  Planning 
				review.  
				 No one should be  be let off the hook for this. 
				Answers are due. It would have to be VERY purposeful to get 
				through that many layers of oversight.   
				
  --- STEEP SLOPE  The Township has 
				said  
				the building areas are not in the Steep 
				Slope Overlay at all - when, in fact, on p 19 of the application documents they, 
				themselves, claim that it is.......and on 9-26-23 they 
				acknowledged the same ... they declared  exactly what % 
				of their proposed plan IS in each of the 2 Steep Slope Overlay 
				categories - nearly the maximum in each category. . They contend they are right up to the maximum limit 
				in each category. So why would the Township Engineer have said 
				they were not.  And they only managed those percentages by 
				"gerrymandering" the lot to make odd shaped lots to accommodate 
				this "close shave"      
				 A Township steep slope map 
				found in the Comprehensive Plan conveys steep slope area that is 
				directly in the area being developed. But that map may not be 
				accurate ...the applicant's submission showing steep slope areas seems 
				to be aligned with information from the county that shows less 
				land in the Sttep Slopes.  Given that the 
				documents were withheld for so long, the residents should have 
				been  
				given more time to investigate irregularities such as these.       
				--- TAXES  What are (and were)  the taxes 
				--   Taxes were reduced after the developer bought it 
				--- while he was simultaneously claiming the property to be way 
				more valuable than elsewhere shown since he believed it could 
				support institutional building  this dense, he was also 
				saying the taxes should be reduced.  Neither  the tax assessment 
				nor the sale price  
				seem to accurately reflect 5 or 6  buildable single family 
				R1 lots,  or lots 
				that allow this much institutional  intensity. The  property 
				comes  with   a gigantic house 
				that  admittedly needed repair , but even with  a need 
				for repair might be worth more than the entire purchase price 
				itself  ---  as well as a  Carriage house, that has 
				bedrooms and bothrooms above , a 4 car garage and 1/2 bath 
				below.  THEN you can add the value of the buildable land 
				which could be worth as much as $100K to $300K a lot - depending 
				on cost and location of utilities. 
  --- MAY WE 
				HAVE THE CORRECT LOT SIZE PLEASE
				 
				-  This  
				developer bought the beautiful home ( seen below ) on what is  
				noted at the County to be 7.79 acres, then previously described 
				as 7.5  acres, but now described as a 7.316 acre lot.  
				 --- SOME  GOOD NEWS: LOW  SALE PRICE 
				MYSTERY SOLVED - Developer Chaverim Partners paid only 
				$600 K for ALL OF THIS IN in 2019. We recently obtained 
				information  indicating the sale price reflected that the 
				house and grounds needed a lot of work and that  a  
				sooner rather than later sale was preferred.    
				
				 
				
				
				     
				 
				 ------------------------------------------ 
				
				THEY ARE PROPOSING 2 LOTS     
				 
                
                    
				  
				 
				LOT 1    
				   
				   
				        
				This will stay: 
				7 Bedrooms, 5 full 
				baths, 2 half baths + 5 fireplaces  
				
				Plus  Carriage House w/4 car garage 
				&1/2 bath, 2 
				additional bedrooms, a full bath 
				upstairs, 
				new heating system 
				Plus a small "Cabin" 
				  
				
          	    All were bought together on 
				7-1-19 for $600K with the full 7.9 acres.   
				We have been given to know that there was a lot of 
				upgrading/up-dating and outright repair that was needed, and the sale 
				price apparently reflects both that and the desire for a speedy 
				sale by the previous owner.  Investigating the details of creating building lots 
				would have slowed that up.   
  The property 
				appears on Redfin now  (9-23)   
				with an estimated value of  $979K including  all 7.79 acres 
				
				https://www.redfin.com/PA/Rydal/1209-Rydal-Rd-19046/home/38247017 
               
				  
				
				
          	       
				
				 
                
                  
				 
				 LOT  2 
				
				 
				
				
				
				 
				 will have 2 Buildings  on what is now 65.4 acres  
				per page 40 of the application Building 1 has 
				
				 
				 
				67 units with 71 beds
				 ( in another place it says 74 
				units will 11 that are Memory Care) 
				 
				Building 2 has  
				
				
				46 units with 55 beds - fully equipped and classified as a Life 
				Care Facility ( Continuing Care ) use         
				even though they are called  Independent Living Units
				
				 
				
				 
				  
				  
				
				
				 
				
				 
				 
           So, there will be 3 buildings on the 7.79 acres  ....... and over 120 
				beds  
				 
				
            )))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) 
                  
          
				
          	    
          	  
				 
          
                
                    
				FLOOD PLAIN CONCERNS  
				
          	     
				  
				
          	    ))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
  
				 
          	  
          
				 
          	  
                
                   
				 
          	  THE   
				 STEEP SLOPE CONSERVATION 
				DISTRICT
          
				There is so much in the Steep Slope Ordinance that applies -
				see the whole ordinance here with 
				highlights 
  
          	  
				 
          
                
                    
				STEEP SLOPE ISSUES 
				 
				
          	          1) Montco 
				Property Map -(Is it a duck?)      Find 
				the target area by thinking of it as a duck with a bill          
				
          	        
				  
				   
				2  
				Find the "duck"  Then see: Location Of the Buildings on p49 of Application 
 
  
				 
				  
				  3) Find the duck -- Steep 
				Slopes from  page 50 of Application   Black is 
				over 25%  -  Prohibitive slope  Grey is  15% 
				to 25%  - Precautionary Slope  
          	     see the whole Steep Slope 
				ordinance for the explanation of these  
				     
				
          	               
				And here is the  whole Application where the above 
				maps are found :
				
				https://d3n9y02raazwpg.cloudfront.net/abingtonpa/cc1e1d79-9802-11ed-96ab-0050569183fa-ca2b9c28-b9cf-4f17-b573-dd2752d4679e-1692189359.pdf
				
  
				  
				5) County Map showing contiguous  residential properties 
				that will be so affected
  6)
          	    Another map:  a  Steep Slope Township Map in 
				pinks and fuscias can be found on page 19 
				at this link . This map differed greatly from the  
				county map and from the applicant's surveyor - which are  
				similar 
          	     to one another  
				
				
				https://d3n9y02raazwpg.cloudfront.net/abingtonpa/d2858411-07e7-11eb-80dd-0050569183fa-ca2b9c28-b9cf-4f17-b573-dd2752d4679e-1607360004.pdf
  
				))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) 
				 
          	   
				
				 
				
				 
				
          	    
                
                    
				
				HOW DID ALL THIS HAPPEN ?   Yes, it is 
				in an R1 neighborhood.  But as noted above,  in 2017-while Steve Kline was their 
				Commissioner of this very Ward, he was also leading the  Zoning Rewrites --- 
				and he added this institutional use into his own constituents 
				neighborhood without telling them, In 
				the end, he personally was making decisions that he was told 
				were going to affect people  in exactly this way,  He 
				was asked to hold summary sessions on the vast changes he was 
				making. His constituents  and others throughout the 
				Township  were instead clueless that these sessions were 
				even going on, let alone what the changes were. He was ASKED to 
				make sure they knew. Instead, he made pretty sure no one knew.
         
				Kline  now sits on 
				our Township Zoning Hearing Board (VP at the time of this 
				writing), is also Chair of the Montgomery County 
				Planning Commission  which is responsible for helping to 
				craft, enabling and approving  changes just like this county-wide 
				on most all zoning matters. Perhaps most 
				notably,  Kline was the project 
				manager at the infamous Colonade (now rebranded as 100 York Apartments) where 
				the very lives and /or health of hundreds of families are 
				still at risk 
				today because of a failure to follow codes and because of the 
				way the conditions there were left at that property.  
				Approvals of  use and occupancy certifications were 
				followed by a Whistleblower  lawsuit naming Kline and the 
				Township, yet new families were allowed to occupy units that 
				continued to have the same problems that existed  long before Kline's  
				supposed "renovations" to fix them. Water leaks, 
				electrical and other failures throughout the building, 
				impact hundreds of families today, just as they did 10 years 
				ago.....  Kline was, effectively the "boss" of the zoning 
				and code officials. Do you thing he should be on the Zoning 
				hearing Board? 
      Now many Rydal 
				familes are being directly impacted by Klines failure to inform 
				his  constiuents of  the changes to the R1 zoning, 
				or to protect them on his own, since he was to have been working 
				in their interests. If they knew, they could have asked to have 
				that removed.  The same 
				residents having to now consider the cost of hiring lawyers, the cost of their time 
				fighting to protect the value of their homes, the same residents 
				having the quality of their lives reduced,  might not be thrilled to learn that they also 
				have already paid dearly for not just the expensive 
				Whistleblower suit that Kline's actions triggered,  but for many other Kline 
				inspired costs such as the insanely  costly Grand 
				Jury inquiry, that produced  recommended penalties for 
				Kline and for Michael Clarke, our current Solicitor... but which 
				advice 
				was fully ignored by the Commissioners, despite us all 
				having footed the enormous bill.  Kline maintains a positions of authority 
				both in the 
				Township and at the County, where undoubtedly more lives will be 
				continually affected and Michael Clarke impacts lives every day as 
				Solicitor, including the lives of those  at 100 York, where 
				little has been done to see that codes are adhered to, and where 
				changes to the codes, that could have been immensely helpful, 
				were practically nil. The Inquirer also did a disturbing 
				investigation  that you should read about what appears to 
				be "Pay to Play" politics and Clarke's involvement there. Tom Hecker, 
				as president of the Board  presides over all of this - and 
				his addition was, frighteningly, to openly deceive his own residents and allow improper 
				procedures in scheduling  the 1209 Rydal Rd Hearing  
				that would have served to "sneak through" a fast approval for 
				the Conditional Use. 
      
				These "surprizes" to residents, who have to put their 
				lives on hold to get up to speed and fight them,  create a constant crisis 
				in one place after another. Codes that arent enforced Township 
				wide that include a deteriorated mold-filled building being sold 
				as a "Luxury Apartment" at 100 York, the BET monstrosity 
				intitially proposed on  the YMCA property, 365 apartments 
				proposed by PRIET on Bloomingdale's parking lot, a Comprehensive 
				Plan based on false figures and deceit of the residents, and 
				hundreds of other problems day in and day out are the result of 
				a Township putting a priority on the financial gain of a few - 
				over the quality of life  for the people they serve... and 
				who pay their salaries.  We cannot leave life and death decisions, or decisions 
				about the quality of our lives in the hands of  those who have already 
				shown that they cannot be trusted.   
      
				Again, to focus, the "Institutional Use" employed here  was inserted, under 
				Kline's, Hecker's and Clarke's watch, into every residential 
				district in Abington, without the knowledge of the people 
				impacted.  
      
				There are plenty of places for such institutions. We 
				have areas zoned for just that.        
				  This should 
				be removed from the ordinance, before the next residential 
				assault.    
				
          	    
				
				
				))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) 
				 
				
				    
				ERRORS? Please check all details  for accuracy 
				before relying on them .    If there 
				are discrepancies
				please let us know 
				so we can correct anything that needs correcting.     
				
				
				
				)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
  
				
				
				 
				
				    
				 
				
				 CHRONOLOGICALLY  
				....  WHAT 
				A MESS - 
          	  
				      Their first attempt was to put in 
				lots and lots of Townhouses  .  
  
				
				  April 2017-  
				
				
				Steve Kline leads the Zoning 
				Rewrite Committee - which adds  the institutional use to 
				the R1 Zoning. He is, concurrently, the Commissioner of Ward 1.   
				Although Kline has been implored to let the residents of each 
				Ward learn what is being added to the Zoning, his own 
				constituents are not notified about the addition of the 
				institutional use until  June of 2023, when a proposal for 
				2 Life Care facilities is made.... 
				
				 
				
				  June 2019 
				- Chaverim Realty Partners, LLC is born - 
  
				
				
				
				   
				July 1, 2019 Chaverim  purchases 
				the property in the picture above with 5-6  additional 
				buildable lots for $600,000 total. We have learned that there 
				was a great deal of maintenance  needed...  including 
				an expensive roof over 25 years old, updating throughout, 
				windows,  trees that needed removal, etc  - perhaps 
				even up to $1M in all. With several likely building lots that 
				could go for upwards of $100K and possibly up to $200K or more  
				each - depending on cost to install utilities, etc -  the 
				actual worth of the  property would seem to be  
				substantially higher - though, in wanting to sell sooner rather 
				than later, the family may not have wanted to pursue anything 
				with such complications ...  or maybe the specific 
				potential of the lots may not have been made known to them. We 
				don't know.  The tax  (that had been as high as $34K 
				per year) show an 18% reduction soon after the sale.  
				
  
				
				  August 2021 - The new owner's 
				Contractor MB Crafters, meets with residents proposing  (56 
				units ?) - A couple of Singles some stacked Townshouses and 
				duplexes or quads - and tells them that they were told by the  
				Township that  this would be approved.
				
				 The unhappy residents are told to circulate petitions, 
				to petition the people who told them to circulate the petitions 
				to deny it. 
  
				
				  May 22- 2023 - Chaverim Realty 
				Partners, LLC  is back and requested a Life Care Facility 
				and a Nursing Home
				
				. Note that the announcement does not even so much as give 
				the number of units - you have to make an appointment to get 
				that info.... 
				Notice is hereby given that the Board 
				of Commissioners of Abington Township, on Thursday, June 8, 
				2023, at 7:30 p.m. at the Abington Township Building, will hold 
				a public hearing and take action on the following 
				matter:Applicant:   Chaverim Realty Partners, LLC 
				Property:     For 
				the property located at 1209 Rydal Road, Abington, Montgomery 
				County, Pennsylvania and is identified as Montgomery County Tax 
				Parcel No. 30-00-61132-00-2This is an application requesting 
				Conditional Use approval pursuant to Section 301 of the Abington 
				Township Zoning Ordinance to permit Use E-10: Life Care Facility 
				(Continuing Care) and Use E-12: Nursing Home in the R-1 
				Low-Density Residential Zoning District. A 
				copy of the application is on file with the Office of the 
				Township Manager and may be reviewed by appointment only between 
				the hours of 7:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m.  
				Please contact the Township at tcastorina@abingtonPA.gov or 
				(267) 536-1003 to schedule an appointment. Additional 
				information regarding access to the public meeting is available 
				on the Township’s website at abingtonpa.gov.  Comments or 
				questions are encouraged to be submitted in advance of the 
				meeting to tcastorina@abingtonPA.gov.  
				If a member of the public would like to participate but requires 
				assistance or accommodation, please contact the Township at tcastorina@abingtonPA.gov or 
				(267) 536-1003 prior to 10:00 a.m. on June 8, 2023.  
				------------------------------- 
				   
				There is almost a purposeful attempt here at duping the public - 
				requiring them to individually make a private appointment to 
				come in and see the documents, one by one rather than providing 
				an information session, or even providing the  number of 
				units or telling them when and where they can receive the entire document in digital form, so it  can be 
				easily reviewed and easily shared.     Any application for 
				development should  be available to the public the 
				minute it is accepted as an official document by the Township, 
				and no Commissioner should fail to alert their constituents at 
				the earliest opportunity. The Commissioner is always notified 
				when development in their Ward is proposed.  
				
          	    
				
				
				 
				
				  June 2023 - The subdivision acreage  has been  
				rearranged - taking some acres from the larger plot to add to 
				the smaller one and a few other changes made per recommendation 
				by Engineer (?). They needed 5 acres to have the 
				Institutional Use   So the house is now on 1.6 acreas 
				and more than 5 acres is left for the 2 institutional uses . 
  
				
				  June 2, 2023  - Ward 1 
				Commissioner Tom Hecker and Ward 11 Commissioner John 
				Spiegelmand meet in a Penn State Parking lot - rather than in 
				the Township building board room, where the application could be 
				shown and reviewed. Residents are given just a page or 2 of the 
				application to see - and a limited # of  residents are in 
				attendance - and this is just days before the Hearing.  Today 
				by 5:30 the agenda packet was posted (a full day late) - the 
				documents are found  on page 7 to page 132 here :
				
				The application is at p7 to p 132 here : 
				
				https://d3n9y02raazwpg.cloudfront.net/abingtonpa/cc1b20e0-9802-11ed-96ab-0050569183fa-ca2b9c28-b9cf-4f17-b573-dd2752d4679e-1689773588.pdf 
				
				
				
  
				
				  
				June 3, 2023   The project was withdrawn 
				from the June 8, 2023  Hearing that was scheduled .... 
				since it had never gone to the Planning Commission as
				required which was brought to everyone's attention . 
				See Zoning code p 120-122 to see that it SHALL go to the 
				Planning Commission. 
				  
				
				 Before a hearing can be set - the item should have / would 
				have received review and scrutiny by 1) the Zoning Officer 
				(Allison Lee )  2) the Solicitor (Michael Clarke)  3) 
				the Engineer ( Pennoni ... Allison Lee again? )  4)  
				Our Township Planner ( Michael Narcowicz)  5) the 
				Montgomery County Planning Commission  6) the Manager ( 
				Richard Manfredi)  and 7) the Ward Commissioner (Tom 
				Hecker) .  How could it be that NONE of them saw to it that a 
				Planning Commission Review and report was scheduled and received  
				- none noticed that no proper public presentation had been 
				given. Tom Hecker knew  his constituents  had none of 
				what they needed . They failed not just the adherance to the 
				laws and codes that they all know well and work with every day - 
				but also  they failed at a very simple moral obligation to 
				see that the  residents were properly informed and had what 
				they needed.......
				
				
  
				
				  July 2023  - it was put on   the July 
				25, 2023  Planning Commission schedule, supposedly to be 
				followed by an August 8, 2023  Hearing.  The Subject 
				Property is a 7 .316 acre parcel with frontage on Rydal Road and 
				Woodland Road that is improved with an existing single-family 
				dwelling. The Applicant proposes to subdivide the Subject 
				Property into two parcels. Lot 1 will consist of 1.272 acres and 
				contain the existing single-family dwelling. Lot 2 will consist 
				of 6.281 acres and the Applicant proposes to develop a senior 
				care facility consisting of a 74 unit/82 bed Assisted 
				Living/Memory Care facility contained in Building One and a 46 
				unit Independent Living facility in Building Two (the "Senior 
				Care Facility"). Since the first submission, the Applicant has 
				revised the subdivision lot boundary to comply with the 
				dimensional regulations of the zoning district in which the site 
				is located per the zoning ordinance. Under the current 
				resubmission, with the revised lot boundary, the Applicant is 
				now proposing to subdivide the above referenced 7.316-acre 
				property into two (2) parcels as follows: • Lot 1 – will consist 
				of 1.622 acres which contains the existing single-family 
				detached dwelling to remain; and, • Lot 2 – will consist of the 
				remaining 5.696 acres of vacant land which is proposed to be 
				developed for two (2) new senior care facilities totaling 120 
				units. 
				
				
  
				
				   July 2023 - 
				CANCELLED & WITHDRAWN  they realized before July 25th that 
				their new schedule would not, of course, allow the Planning 
				Commission its proper time to prepare a report and for  
				revisions to be made if any conditions were imposed by the 
				Planning Commission,  and then of course the  
				application with any required revisions  would have to be 
				approved by the Board for  advertisement. So ....  it 
				was withdrawn completely before July 25, 2023 . They will be 
				back, we understand, with a completely new application.  
				
          	    
				
				   Aug 18,  2023 - A new application 
				is now available for the Planning Commission Meeting on 8-22-23 .
				 Supposedly the deadline to take action is Oct 31, 2023 . 
				That can be extended if the developer agrees. If he doesn't 
				agree, the Township can turn the project down. So the deadline 
				is not absolute. However, if the Township doesn't get an 
				extension or turn it down, it can be "deemed approved" 
				
				   Aug 22, 2023  - 
				CANCELLED Planning Commission Review. 
				
                This 
				was requested by the developer... and should , one would think,  have pushed 
				the required decision date from Oct 31, 2023  out another 
				month--- but it appears that the extension of time was not 
				requested by or received by the Commissioners. Here's where you can find the 
				documents ( the application itself) from  this meeting.     
				
				
				https://d3n9y02raazwpg.cloudfront.net/abingtonpa/cc1e1d79-9802-11ed-96ab-0050569183fa-ca2b9c28-b9cf-4f17-b573-dd2752d4679e-1692189359.pdf
				  
				
				
  
				
				   
				Sept 26, 2023  The Planning Commission Review. 
				
				The Planning commision voted to recommend to the Commissioners 
				to deny the application 
				
				
  
				zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz 
				
				
				
				 
				
                
                   
				MISC DETAILS OUT OF 
				CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER 
				 
    
				
				
				   5-22-23   
				LOOK WHAT POPPED UP AGAIN  WITH A BRAND NEW PLAN for 6-8-23  
				     
				No documents were posted for this project.         
				June 8, 2023   7:30 pm  Applicant:   Chaverim 
				Realty Partners, LLC       For 1209 
				Rydal Road-- Tax Parcel No. 30-00-61132-00-2       
				Requesting Conditional Use approval pursuant to Section 301 of 
				the Abington Township Zoning Ordinance to permit :       
				Use E-10: Life Care Facility  (Continuing Care) and        
				Use E-12: Nursing Home in the R-1 Low-Density Residential Zoning 
				District.     
				
				https://www.abingtonpa.gov/Home/Components/News/News/6349/16
				 
				
				 
				
				     
				
				  Chaverim Realty 
				
				
				Partners LLC   
				
				
				     
				4122  Haverford Ave 
				Suite 11  Phila Pa 
				19104        The Registered Agent was Active Realty 
				
				
				
				1751 Easton Road Willow Grove PA 19090    
				  
				David Mermelstein Pres, 
				Solomon Mermelstein 
				Sec & Treas         
				-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
				    
				
				
				
  
				zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
				 
				 
				 
				
				
				So yes – 1209 Rydal Rd has the use by right to put 
				in Institutional uses – see page 350 – go down the 
				R1 column.  
				There are 3 pages of uses.  But it does NOT have the use by 
				right to violate the Steep Slope overlay.  
				
				
				 
				
				ABINGTON TOWNSHIP ZONING 
				ORDINANCE
				
				
				  - passed 4-17  The 
				maps that show what is zoned how, 
				are on page 352 and 353 
				(353 shows each parcel & is the most useful)  The 
				Use Matrix charts (burgundy-ish) that show you 
				what can be done in each kind of zoning 
				are at pages 347 to 
				351   
				(using the counter on the actual page – not the pdf counter at 
				the top of the page )  http://www.abington.org/home/showdocument?id=6053 
				 Up in the text of the ordinance is where you learn about 
				buffers, setbacks, driveways, greenspace requirements, etc – 
				search Life Care Facility 
				etc… 
  
				zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz 
				
				 THE CONDITIONAL USE 
				guidelines are found here : 
				
				https://www.delcocd.org/DevGuide.pdf  
				zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz 
				If there are any variances requested – they also have very 
				stringent rules that the TOWNSHIP HAS NOT BEEN ADHEREING TO. See 
				page 4 of the same guide as the Conditional Uses….
				 We won’t even know if 
				they do have until they post the documents tomorrow .  Make 
				sure Tom Hecker gets them posted EARLY in the day 
				so you can ask questions before the weekend  
				zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz 
				
				WHAT USED TO BE : 
				
				 Here is the very clear process distributed 
				after the 1st meeting,  
				 before Mr Manfredi came and before  he and  Tom Hecker, 
				as Chair of the Board of Commissioners,  
				obliterated your rights  
				
				
				  
				 There is no time it could have been approved on the same 
				night it was first presented. Until this new administration….
				 
  
				zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz 
				 
				
				HOW MANFREDI TRIED TO RECREATE 
				the laws and codes   – which seems to indicate if it is 
				Conditional Use – it must go to the Zoning Hearing Board – but 
				that conflicts with the Municipalities Planning Code and with 
				our own Subdivision and Land Development section of our Zoning 
				Code  --- see the  Citizens Guide to Land Development in 
				Pennsylvania – which I would think would be more reliable than 
				Abington’s chart created by Mr Manfredi & co. 
				  
				
				https://www.abingtonpa.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/13751/638206110131170000  
				 
				 
				This link above has a better view than the below chart.  The 
				chart is illegal. For instance, Conditional Uses do not go to 
				the Zoning Hearing Board ..... 
				
				
				  
				 
				zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz 
				
				6-23 --HOW WAS IT THAT NO ONE RECOGNIZED 
				NO PUBLIC 
				REVIEW HAD BEEN HAD ? On June 2nd, 2023  Tom Hecker met with 
				some of the concerned neighbors in a Penn State Parking lot.
				
				
				
				To be clear -  the June 
				8th, at 7:30 pm  was not 
				billed as an "informational meeting". 
				They said 
				specifically “
				Notice is hereby given that the Board of Commissioners of 
				Abington Township, on Thursday, June 8, 2023, at 7:30 p.m. at 
				the Abington Township Building,  will hold a public hearing 
				and take action on the matter.    
				     But before a hearing can be set - the 
				item should have / would have received review and scrutiny by 1) 
				the Zoning Officer (Allison Lee )  2) the Solicitor 
				(Michael Clarke)  3) the Engineer ( Pennoni ... Allison Lee 
				again? )  4)  Our Township Planner ( Michael 
				Narcowicz)  5) the Montgomery County Planning Commission  
				6) the Manager ( Richard Manfredi)  and 7) the Ward 
				Commissioner (Tom Hecker) .  How could it be that NONE of 
				them saw to a proper public presentation, the adherance to the 
				laws that they all know well and a very simple moral obligation 
				to see that the adjoining residents were properly informed and 
				had what they needed?  
  Instead, Tom Hecker and John 
				Spiegelman met them in a Penn State Parking lot - Tom passed out 
				a single page of the 125 + page application to some and a couple 
				of pages of that application to a few others and when asked if 
				it didn't have to go to the Planning Commission first, he said  
				"that's for Land Development" . He said there are no picures or 
				drawings here ( referring to the papers he was passing out .  
				But he knew they were required to post the full documents  
				by June 1st for a June 8th meeting.  He told them, since he 
				was a judge, he could not act for them at the hearing.  He 
				told them to sign up as parties tot he proceedings and do the 
				best they could.  He did not tell them that hte Planning 
				Commission, had they reviewed it first , could even have taken a 
				position at the meeting on behalf of  the Township...... In 
				other words, conceivebably they could have advocated for the 
				residents position.... if the Township agreed.  But without 
				a Planning Commission meeting first- that would not happen.
				 
				
				This 
				is, of course ,  unheard of. No development EVER should be “presented to the 
				public” for the first time  on the same day it is able to be 
				fully approved. 
				
				
				Comr Hecker  
				has so 
				severely “amended “ your meeting and public comment rules, 
				and so many times,  in his 
				time as President of the Board of Commissioners in Abington that 
				few have any idea what the rules are or where to find them.  
				And again and again they are violating the few rules that are 
				left.     
				 
				 
				Before Tom Hecker and Richard Manfredi began tampering with the 
				Committee and public meeting process, there was 
				: 1) 
				First a Code Enforcement and Land Development 
				Committee  
				 that 
				reviewed a project. It was filmed and aired 
				 2) From there it 
				was usually  sent to 
				the Planning Commission to work out specific details – It 
				was filmed and aired if it was a big project that residents were 
				concerned about, like this one .  Residents were allowed 
				Questions and answers and were allowed to return to the 
				microphone  if they just learned something new  or to 
				make final comment.  
				3) Then it 
				came back  
				to the 
				Code & Land Development  
				 Committee 
				for that Committee's  review of any changes the Planning 
				Commission made  - so the final version with corrections 
				could be seen and to recommend it to the Board of Commissioners 
				to advertise for a Hearing.  
				 4) The full 
				Board voted to advertize it  
				 5) The 
				Hearing was held . This process gave ample time forall to learn 
				what was happening, to research, to network with one another and 
				to get a lawyer if needed.  
				 
				Comr Hecker 
				and Manager Richard Manfredi   have so curtailed that 
				process that it is a giant GIFT to the developers, who are 
				whizzing large projects through with  flaws and without 
				proper review.  Hecker and Manfredit completely removed the  all 
				4 Committees - where your speaking rights were very robust and 
				where the meetings were filmed and aired.  
				The document are required to 
				be posted by the Friday before a meeting, but Mr Manfredi is famous 
				for failing to post as required. If he does post on Friday, he 
				posts at the very end 
				of the day, when any questions can’t get answered til Monday 
				--- so you lose the entire weekend before the meeting to work on 
				it.   
				 When an item FIRST comes to the Township, it is a public 
				document and as such should be posted witht he link distributed. 
				That also is not happening - so residents are losing valuable 
				time . 
  It is important to get the process straight ---- 
				lest you become the victim next.  
				_____________________________    
				 )))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) 
				     
				
				historical overview --- prior efforts to develop 
  
				
				
          
                
                    
				PHASE ONE 
				OF CHAVERIM rEALTY PARTNERS, 
				llc adventure    
				 
                
                  
				   
                NEIGHBORS CIRCULATED A PETITION 
  
				This is about a 
				proposal to take a 7.79 + acre lot - at least partially on a 
				slope, that could at most support 7 single family homes under 
				the current R 1 zoning, and to ask the Commissioners  to 
				violate the rights and wishes of the residents and allow this 
				developer to change the zoning in order to build  
				either 18 Townhouse units and 16 Duplex units (34 units total)  
				where only 7 should currently be  .... or maybe a mix of 
				Townhouse condo's, Duplex condos and single family homes  
				for even  more than 34 units ( again, where only 6 more 
				single family homes should be, if current laws 
				codes were upheld. )    This will  
				increase the bottom line of the  
				developer and undoubtedly detract from the value of the 
				beautiful homes that are currently there.   The developer's 
				wealth would come at the expense of the citizens' rights to have 
				their zoning protected.  
				 Sign the petition
				
				
				
				 https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdlcOkgpYWQ6epoQB-ChQcXnzDyVWmf5vzCL76H65BG60lZxw/viewform
				  or  Email
				
				lel@abingtoncitizens.com to be connected in 
				
				
				)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) 
				
          	  
                
                   
				1209 
				RYDAL ROAD        View the Property here  
				    
				
				https://www.redfin.com/PA/Rydal/1209-Rydal-Rd-19046/home/38247017
				  
				
				
				
				
				)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) 
				
                
                   
				VALUE:  It is  off  the market now.
				    Before Chaverim bought it, it was 
				listed  at well over $1M at one point   
				   From Zillow  10-21:  Zillow estimates this
				5 bd 6.5 bth 
				4947 sf  home at  
				
				
				$1,403,600  
				    https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/1209-Rydal-Rd-Rydal-PA-19046/9905064_zpid/
				 
				
				  
				So why did it sell at $600K? Yes, it needs work - but THAT much? 
				Almost a million? 
				
				
				)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) 
				 
          	  
                
                   
				VALUE:  The assesssed 
				value is $680,050  and the Common Level Multiplier is 2.24  
				indicating  a potential  calculation of market value 
				as $1.52 M  So why did it sell at $600K? 
				
				
				)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) 
				    
				6-5-21 OWNER  CHAVERIM  CORPORATE PRESENCE IS BORN June 5 , 
				2019     Chaverim Realty 
				
				Partners LLC   
				
				
				  
				4122  Haverford Ave 
				Suite 11  Phila Pa 
				19104     The Registered Agent was Active Realty 
				
				
				
				1751 Easton Road Willow Grove PA 19090 Montgomery    
				David Mermelstein Pres, 
				Solomon Mermelstein 
				Sec & Treas 
				
				
				
				)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) 
				    6-27-19  
				CHAVERIM PURCHASES THE PLOT  June  
				27, 2019  for   $600,000 per Montco 
				Property Records 
				
				
				Sale Date        27-JUN-19     
				Sale Price        
				$600,000     Tax Stamps    
				6000    Deed Book 
				and Page  6143-02991 
				Grantor            
				STEINBERG MARY ELLEN       
				 
				Grantee           
				CHAVERIM REALTY PARTNERS LLC Date Recorded 10-JUL-19    
				Sale Date        
				27-JUN-19 
				
				
				
				
				)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) 
				 
				
				
				   
				the 
				buidling contractor  MB Crafters   Moshe Barazani 
				
				
				
				 The business is registered on Ambler Rd in Abington on at 
				least one report - but the principal Moshe Barazani, 
				coincidentally ives just a few blocks away from Commissioner 
				Hecker. They are listed with 2 employees and annual revenue just 
				over $300K . There is not date on that report - but it came up 
				on D&B  in mid October 2021
				
				https://www.dnb.com/business-directory/company-profiles.m_b_crafters_of_pa_inc.fce627345a13b542bfa2724667ce85ff.html
				
  
				)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) 
				
				 
				
          	  
                
                  8-9-21  CHAVERIM'S 
				BUILDING CONTRACTOR MB CONTRACTORS  MEETS WITH RESIDENTS  Aug 9, 2021  
				 Craig Lerch ( realtor involved in the sale) introduces MB 
				Crafters , the building contractor .   They offer their proposal  for feedback. There is some 
				confusion over the exact realtionships - for instance , whether  
				MB Crafters is just the Builder/Contractor -or partner .  but we 
				are trying to clear that up.  Chaverim Partners is the only 
				entity  listed in the Montgomery County property records as 
				the owner.  
				)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) 
				     
				TOWNSHIP ENCOURAGEMENT TO VIOLATE ZONING ?  We are also 
				seeking to clear up who it was in the Township that encouraged 
				denser development  be offered .  Some stories have 
				the Commissioner saying that is not true - others have him 
				syaing that he will find out who it was .  SThere may have 
				been a  zoom call with the Township where the deeper 
				density was encouraged.  All that is yet to be sorted out.  Please let 
				me know if you have learned more about this, so we can keep 
				this page as accurate as possible.    
				
				
				
				
				)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) 
				
 
             
				A SECTION FROM THE PLANS as presented  8-9-21  
				16 duplexes on the left . 18 Townhomes on the right.  50 
				homes altogether on 7 acres . 51 counting the main house.  
				Totally out of sync with this beautiful, single family home 
				neighborhood.   
				
          	     
				
          	     
				
				
				
				
				)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) 
				 
          	  
                    
				PART OF THE 
                "TOD CHART" AS PRESENTED  8-9-21 
				TOD stands for Transit Oriented Development - and generally there 
				are monies available to builders to build densely around Transit hubs 
				- like the Rydal Train station. From our pockets to theirs - to 
				do things we don't want done. Yes - the TOD funds come from 
				taxes you pay.  Or, as they would have you believe, from 
				the tooth fairy.    
				
          	        
				
          	    
				
				)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) 
				
				 
          	  
                
                   
				THE
				PROPOSED HOUSING INFO below is from the bottom of the 
				chart shown above - It shows 4 single family homes, 9 townhouses and 
				16 stacked townhouse duplexes... but  SOME residents came away with 
				the sense that 18 Townhouses and 16 Duplexes were what was in 
				the plan. Others thought thtere was a mix like this.  Some 
				understood all to be condos. So as of this 10-21 writing, 
				confusion reigns.  
				
				
				
				
				
				
				  
				 )))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) 
				
          	  
                
                 
				The Plot in relation to its neighbors
				
				  
				
          	      
				 
				
				
				
				  
				
				
				
				
				
				)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) 
				
          	    
                
                  
				The plot in relation to the train  station - Where is the 
				walkable area? Who will pay for the sidewalks ? Who will 
				maintain them ? The intersection at Valley and Susquehann is 
				crazy busy at rush hour . Is it smart to drive pedestrian 
				traffic there . It is NOT for the benefit of the  current 
				residents who voted these legislators in to oversee their 
				interests. Any benefit will go to the developer and to new 
				tenants or owners of these residences .... at the expense of the 
				others already there.  
				
          	     
                  
				
          	    
				
				)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) 
				 
                 
				
				
				 UNDERSTANDING SPOT 
				ZONING
				
				
				 and 
				your disappearing zoning rights. You cannot simply request to 
				have your own property improved for your benefit alone by 
				changing the zoning for yourself, and not for others that have 
				the same kind of properties. So when developers add things into 
				our Zoning Code to benefit themselves, often other properties 
				get rights that the residents near the other properties never 
				even learn about and never have a say in - even though the law 
				intends that they should. Our Township famously does not reveal 
				these things or explain them to the residents impacted. 
  
				### When the York Rd Wawa  at the top of the Fairway got their 
				massive benefits ( the equivalent of 23 variances or waivers), other 
				properties were affected and would now ALSO be allowed to have a 
				gas station and 24 hour  operation.  Contiguous neighbors 
				to these other properties, however,  
				were not alerted.  
  ### When the former YMCA property got their 
				new rights as a gigantic gift from the Commissioners, significant changes to other properties 
				occurred. The impact of that was never explored. 
  ### Penn State just held many meetings about changes they 
				soon hope to have, without notifying the neighbors near other 
				properties that may get the same uses by right.  Manor 
				College will also change and those neighbors were never given 
				any proper explanation. 
  The same is likely to happen here. Spot 
				Zoning,  on it's face, is improper and illegal - but the 
				laws and codes are being twisted or ignored in unethical ways  
				that leave residents helpless unless they want to dip into their 
				own pockets and try to sue either a wealthy developer or a 
				Township that has immunity. Recent case law twisted the intents 
				even further by suggesting if the Commissioners WANT that kind 
				of zoning - if it is in theri "vision" then it is not spot 
				zoning.   
				
				))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
  
				
				
                
                  
				Now - as of 10-14-21 we have another 
				threat to our zoning .  The Township revealed at the 
				Committee of the Whole on 10-14-21 that they are planning to 
				unveil an even further erosion of your zoning rights. They want 
				to give themselves the right to "amend " the zoning ordinance 
				virtually at 
				will.  That means you would no longer have any strong 
				zoning protections for your property at all.  They tried to sneak this into a paragraph some years 
				ago that would have affected  most of the York Rd corridor 
				.  The simple phrase was discovered and there was an outcry 
				to remove it .  Now they put the assault on your zoning 
				rights into an agenda item that was billed as Public Comment 
				changes  --- and it would affect the entire Township.  
				More to come on this matter.         Whether our laws and codes work 
				properly or don't is in the hands of your legislators (even 
				though they falsely may tell you it is not ) .  Do 
				not allow them to continue passing legislation that removes your 
				rights  and puts everything in their hands. 
				Hold them accountable by 
				learning  what they are doing - but protecting your public 
				comment rights so you can inform others - and by learning how 
				your system of elections works, so you can find new candidates 
				to replace those that are "hard of hearing".   
				
          	          
				
				
				
				)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) 
				
          	    
				
				
                  
				HERE IS YOUR ZONING CODE -  near 
				the very end are the 
				uses that are already allowed in the R1 districtand the zoning 
				maps 
				
				
				
				 http://www.abington.org/home/showdocument?id=6053   
				Remember : whatever they put in it will apply to all other 
				properties that meet the same specs Township-wide. 
				
				
				
				
				
				
				 
				
				 
				
				
				
				 
				)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) 
				
          	    
				
				
                  
				On 10-19-21 
				there was a Comprehensive Plan meeting  with a focus this 
				session on Future Land Use . 
				The Land use map tell the whole 
				story. The blue dotted lines show the  1/2 mi  TOD's ( 
				Transit Oriented Districts)  - ( see the 1/2 mile around the Rydal Station)  
				where dense development generally is  encouraged . The TOD 
				around  Rydal Station includes 1209 Rydal Rd --- apparently 
				they didn't want to wait for public input and the hearing and 
				the plan to be officially passed.  The dense development 
				already IS  "encouraged" without the input of the 
				public. But the gray circles are  1/2 mi "Mixed Residential 
				Overlay" areas.  I would interpret Mixed Use residential to 
				be exactly what was proposed here --- but I am unsure how they 
				are differentiaing their TOD overlay from the  "Mixed Use 
				Residential Overlay". Does the TOD allow mixed use including 
				commercial as TODs often do ?  
  
				
				  
				
          	    
				
				))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) 
				
          	    
                  
				
				IS THIS IN THE INTEREST OF THE 
				HEALTH, SAFETY OR WELFARE OF THE RESIDENTS THESE COMMISSIONERS 
				ARE SERVING ? No. Really, it is not.  Despite that it is the 
				Commissioners'  duty 
				to protect our welfare, this is contrary to that.  Multiple projects are, 
				at this very moment,  
				being pushed through with no proper financial analysis  
				nor 
				
				any analysis whatsoever of any kind that 
				shows a  benefit to the 
				current residents 
				of the Township or shows 
				the full extent of the negative impacts. Some of these impacts may even be very costly, 
				may  devalue our homes, crowd our schools, raise our taxes,  keep us sitting 
				in  time-wasting, pollution-creating  traffic and 
				may require expansion of major facilities. Not to mention  
				changing the very character of our beautiful residential 
				neighborhoods, or showing any recognition that  a 
				great majority of residents again and again have vocalized that 
				they do not want to be "urbanized".    And you should 
				be sure to factor in  that your Commissioner is 
				not the only one who votes on this issue .  You can find 
				all the Commissioners
				here . Please 
				let them hear from you. And please send their responses here so 
				that others 
				 can know what they are 
				saying about all of this.
				
				
				
				  
				
				
				)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) 
				    
				Please join those holding discussions, lending their voices and 
				taking action.  Email 
				lel@abingtoncitizens.com to be connected in . 
				
				
				
				)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) 
				__________ 
				    
				We
				welcome your comments  
                to share either anonymously or with your name attached with 
                your  fellow Abington residents.   Send  any 
				updated 
                information, comments or questions  to:
                
                
				lel@abingtoncitizens.com 
                 
				
				
				 
				
				    
				ERRORS? Please check all details  for accuracy 
				before relying on them .    If there 
				are discrepancies
				please let us know 
				so we can correct anything that needs correcting.     
				
				
				
				))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) 
          
                
            
          
          
           |