St Michael The Archangel
Fox Chase Rd, Jenkintown
Adding 400+ capacity "dining room / social hall"
and other renovations
If
you find or know of anything that appears inaccurate
please let us know
so we can correct anything that needs correcting.
We are striving to put accurate information out for all to
understand .
UPDATE
In Early 2015 St Michael's was approved by the DEP
to build the 11,640 sf "Banquet Hall". The entire
process was a
disgrace from the time of the change of zoning to the final
approval by the DEP to allow the project to go through the
sewers.
Regarding the final step, when I asked how they
could possibly approved, I was given a most bizarre explanation for
how their thinking managed to "allow them" to approve something
that never added up on any sheet and for which many
crucial figures were neither accurately provided nor calculated
into the end result, in any meaningful or transparent way.
This process was a debacle from day one -- and
continues to be problematic for those of us who have read the
laws and done the math. I will hope to provide additional
information as soon as time allows.
Click here to receive news and updates
( & changes in meeting dates like the one above)
WHAT'S THIS ALL
ABOUT
?
St Michael's - which was once
all residential property and is ajacent to residential homes, is expanding
-for the 3rd time. The Proposal
that was been approved (5-10-12)
includes a 448 person capacity 11,640 sf
"Banquet Hall" with rear patio and deck and a new
dwelling ( Rectory ) for the priest and his family to live in,
additional parking spaces and for several years the
planning has included an on lot septic system because of a sewer
moratoium in the system to which it would flow if public sewers
were used. Neighbors with grave concerns ( and past
experience with ) about about noise, traffic, parking , fences,
tree maintenance, trespass, etc. have had their rights upended
by a lack of cooperation from Township officials to put them in
an information loop and to address the issues that prevail.
As of mid 2013, there may be some prosect of getting approval
for the public sewer , but the correct numbers for
adequate EDU's have never been reported according to information
and calulations by residents . This will undoubtedly affect
people downstream
SOME OF THE NOT SO PRETTY
DETAILS ..
Yes - even though others are required to pay to get off
septic use, it appears that this is headed for final approval
and they are going to be a large institution, with little
control over its numbers, that is allowed to put in septic. And
there are major concerns about the size of the
septic that has morphed so dramatically over the process of this
zoning change.
Besides
the septic, there have been multiple outrageous
procedural issues ....
Residents not having
had half of the facts before the waivers were passed
Residents not allowed at meetings and in fact removed from
meetings while being filmed unaware
Residents not given proper information or timely information or
having crucial information withheld
The unbelievable continuation during this time of myriad zoning
regulations violated for up to 20 yrs
What they will be allowed to build bears little to no
resemblance to what was advertized
At each step of the game, the plan was changed, and residents
were given only partial information
Zoning approvals were passed before many knew and understood their
rights.
Septic
plans were approved , despite all preliminary approvals being
conditional upon sewer use
Residents were treated rudely and refused the right to speak
even as outsiders were allowed that right
Had the entire plan as it now appears been presented at the
beginning the board would have almost certainly been obligated
to turn it down. Instead, each step of the way a new
change was added and residents comments and rights were
virtually ignored. And meeting after meeting after
meeting, the project grew .
Advertising 2008 : 6,000 sf building for
meeting, breakfasts (
and the like) & a rectory
Obtained 2012 : 11,640 sf
Banquet Hall with a rectory and an "Inn" ( see below)
If
you ask me, the original advertizing and zoning.
This
Church bought land zoned R1 residential and had a very small
church that was permitted because of its low impact on the
neighborhood. That church changed dramatically in nature and
residents have testified to the impact that is no longer so
pleasant, and rather than mediate that for the residents, the
current officials have instead approved a grossly larger
facility that will impact the community on a much grander scale.
the issue at hand is whether the rights of one property owner
should be able to usurp the rights of so many others. At
last count, the church had approximately 50 township residents
or families - a small percentage of its constituency. A
small group of public officials have skewed the rights of the
church owners, giving them rights that intruded upon those of
the adjoining neighbors.
Despite an 11,640sf
building and a (professed) congregation of
550+, a very low number of Banquet Hall visitors was used to
calculate the septic capacity needed 209 max per event) - while a much larger
number can use it - ( 448 can be seated auditorium style - and
that leaves much of the building supposedly unused) Ah yes - if
they only serve "danish" and not a full meal it will make
all the difference .... Yes you had to be there to hear that
one..... It has been a mind
boggling process to watch the people who are in charge of our
public health and to see how the regulations are "overseen".
If larger numbers attend and use the facilities the
septic system can fail. We sent the DEP a chart based on their
figures and got no response to it at all. In our chart, using
their numbers, the system fails, every way we worked it .
Failed septic can do more than just cause smelly air. It
can pose a hazard to neighbors in
proximity - and some neighbors right in the area of the septic
have experienced flooding and water problems over the years. We
think an answer to our chart is not only a courtesy but should
be a requirement.
Testimony of 800 -1600 in attendance on
holidays etc and with large numbers weekly even before the
addition, suggest that the numbers plugged in will be difficult,
if not impossible to enforce. So many of the regulations the
church had were overtly violated in the past - for over 20 years
in some cases, despite residents notification to officials.
Frequency
of use is also an issue that has been skirted and this affects
not just the septic situation, but also noise, parking ,
trespass etc. With weddings, Holy
Communions, baptisms etc for a large congregation, the concerns of
past use of amplified music etc has become more of a concern.
A church that bought in a residential area has obtained waivers
that could and probably will change the very nature of that
neighborhood.
The original
Masonry dwelling is designed to become what I can only
characterize as a Hotel/Inn/Guesthouse. It is for visiting
clergy. I'm not sure what else you call it when you
have a building separate from your dwelling where you
invite people to sojourn for a brief period. perhaps if
you have an Inn and you don't get paid, you don't have an Inn
anymore. But I would assume that there would normally be some
rules and regulations to the running of a Guesthouse or Inn that
seem to be falling out of the purview here. If anyone has
further info on this, please enlighten me. By the way, the
Masonry dwelling is larger than the new dwelling being
built, though the reason for needing a new one was under
the pretenses of it being too small. It was only to small
because several others had been invited to live there too - that
also contrary to standard housing code in Abington, I believe
The greatest concern of all, in the opinion of this
writer, is the manner in which residents rights have been
handled and the lack of response to zoning and code enforcement
issues and the treatment of residents both behind the scenes and
at the podium by those in charge in this township. Some
violations have been on-going for over 22 years - and were still
unfulfilled at the time of the approval of new conditions and as of
summer 2012, despite repeated pleas to the
Township to enforce them. The horrendous outcome for these
residents pales in comparison to the revelation of the methods
that were used to usurp their property and personal rights.
RECENT ACTIONS
Chronology --continued See
the prior chronology with all the actions ( that we know of ) on this
property
_________________________________
RESOURCES
List your
Email - (Click & say "add me")
To share information, meeting
times etc via email please click here and say add me to
St Michael's
....
The
Proposal - The
most recent proposal
including a 448 person capacity "Dining
Hall"
with
rear patio and deck and another dwelling r Rectory for the Priest to live in.
Soil Issues - A Full Soil Report on
the church property has been obtained
Sewer & Septic map
of the area sewer lines / Septic guidelines -discussion,
map, etc
Township Codes
- re:
Flood Plain Conservation District, Noise, etc.
1990 Letter of Intent and Plan from St
Michael's to Residents- stating :
no " large scale expansion " planned
Satellite
Map -
Map showing
satellite view of the property & neighborhood
Street Map -
Map showing street view of the property
QUESTIONS Click here for
Chronology details
CHANGES to THE PLAN THAT WAS ADVERTISED ORIGINALLY --
how many changes were they allowed to make .... ? The plan they
submitted for the original exceptions/ waivers look nothing like the plan they have now
. What was applied & advertised for was 6,000 sf, not 11,640sf
//// no additional parking not 40 more spaces
//pubic sewers not septic// classrooms and places for
religious training, not a Banquet hall/// etc, etc, etc .....
SEPTIC SUITABLE-- is it possible they will be allowed to put
on-site septic on a property that has a pond just
outside one end and wetlands type soil on the other end
- more
sewer discussion
SEPTIC SIZE---will septic system have to be large enough to
accommodate several hundred that will sometimes be using
it, or they be able to have a smaller system based
on using porta potties ( and who in the world would use
the porta potty when they are dressed up and a regular
bathroom is available...? ) what IS the full capacity - with the
deck & patio considered ? more
sewer discussion
DISAPPEARING FLOODPLAINS-- the floodplain district,
noted on the 1990 plan in the same spot where the banquet hall
is to be built, may have been required by the authorities back
in 1990 just because of the
soils - which are typical of wetlands and not great for building
on ( allevial soils). It is now believed that there may have been a simple
error by the Plan -maker in transferring the soil
configurations , which is why the floodplain looked like it was
right in the building site on the 1990's plan - but out of it on
the 2008 plan See :
soils and the floodplain
for more on these issues
CHELTENHAM'S WAITING LIST-- Cheltenham has a moratorium
so they have not been able to go out the front -The moratorium
has been on since 2005 - and
Cheltenham notified St. Michael's in letters before the approval of
the plans that they neither had capacity, nor did they have St.
Michael's on any waiting list for capacity - even as late as
12-09. So why did the plans not reflect that? Why were
residents not given this information? Why was no
application for EDU's made by Abington for St Michael's ? Are they on
the waiting list now ? Was there really
an intent to go that way?
more
sewer discussion
EASEMENTS -- residents approached with requests for easements
should be advised to consult an attorney .
Click here for more
NOISE--- noise issues have not been enforced and police logs
of the calls have not been kept - Noise is still a concern
From 2008 through to 2012 residents have not heard about
why this persists
click here for more
DRIVEWAY /PARKING -the driveway seems still not to be to code
despite recommendations that there should be a double wide
driveway. And parking is still a huge concern...click
here for more
BUFFERS - no definitive buffers seem to have
been specifically planned to screen the neighbors from the
activity-- despite testimony that there was life vegetation the
facility and that there would be ample buffers. Clearly
the developer's idea and the residents ideas differ. Will
evergreens be planted? Will the mature trees removed for
construction be replaced?
EMERGENCY ISSUES - there was a concern that easements
through the back neighborhood might be a " pathway "into the
rear community - perhaps sparked by St Michael's seeming
resistance to the double wide driveway . Could an easement
be requested in order to accommodate emergency vehicles? Residents
generally seem not to want a road that enters into the neighborhood.
CHANGING ZONING LINES - The Zoning lines changed from the 1990
map to the current one . It is possible that this happened
in a Township wide rezoning in 1996 -- no clear data yet
click here for more
SOILS-- the HA soils once required to be designated
as floodplain conervation district are no longer deemed so - but
there is still concern about these alleuvial soils whith septic
in the picture
See Soils Information..
WHAT WILL BE WRITTEN AS CONDITIONS?
Will buffer specs, noise enforcement and other
agreements be WRITTEN as conditions
The last time the Church was given their zoning based on
conditions, the conditions were ignored .
Residents together should be making a list.
click here for more
HARDSHIP - Wavers and Variances require a
"Hardship" to my understanding ( this application
included a variance and a Special Exception. The hardship given for building
the Rectory was that the Priest did not have enough space in the
current home. Upon testimony, however, part was used
for an office ( office space will be in the new building ) .
Upon further testimony it appears there were empty rooms in the
home and upon further testimony, apparently there was also a
lady living in the Priest's home . Upon even further testimony
there were apparently 2 ladies living there -- and a
portion of it dedicated to office space (?) other uses . ....
Renovation of the old home was, in testimony, not considered possible because of
the expense. But the decision was to keep the old home in
use even after the new rectory was built ( thereby requiring the expense
of maintenance of 2 homes ) and the cost of building a new 3000
sq ft new home -- seens to undermine the contention that the
problem was money. Their new plan requires far greater
expense.
The exceptions/ variances were all granted anyway.
CONSEQUENCES OF THIS WAIVER-- St. Michaels
did not have natural land rights to do what they were doing
without a variance/special exception. Yet because of the
exceptions being requested -residents, whose own rights should be
protected, are faced
with the endless hours, documents, testimony, calls,
meetings, research, plan reviews, and possible need for
attorneys etc etc . Residents also have had to pay tax money to
afford the staff time that also had these same demands .
The fees that the applicants are charged cannot
come close to the cost. These costs are borne by everyone
in the Township .
The end result creates enjoyment , benefit and
increased property value for one, while eroding enjoyment and decreasing property value
and causing a great deal of cost and aggravation for others. Should our laws/codes/regulations be upheld?
Or should our paid and elected officials grant exceptions as
they please - regardless of the voices of the residents
affected ? click here for
more
CHRONOLOGY view the exhaustive process
to which residents have already been subjected ........
_____________________________________________
THINGS
NEARBY :
SAINT
BASIL'S ?-
I believe that
the application to develop on St. Basil's property is currently
on hold - if anyone hears otherwise
please let me know.
ANOTHER NEARBY FACILITY THAT
HOLDS 300
2011 The former Ukranian
Church at 875 Fox Chase Rd has apparently been bout ( rumored to
be in the 700,000 range - we have not confirmed this information
http://www.prufoxroach.com/8097760__CMNCMN__875-FOX-CHASE-RD-8097760.html
______________________________________________________________
________________
We will bring more details as they are known and
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
|
