The Super
Wawa
on Old York
Rd at Hilltop and Baeder Rds, Jenkintown
Across from ( what may soon be the former ) Barnes & Noble
- & from Chili's
Please check all details
on this page for accuracy . If
there are discrepancies
please let us know
so we can correct anything that needs correcting.
This
is what preceded the current status page :
1-8-13
On
the heels the debacle
of the passed ordinance we now
receive a schedule for the land development of the
Jenkintown plot ( across from the former Barnes & Noble )
The revised plans were submitted just prior to the ordinance
hearing - but were not in the hands of most of us at the time of
the hearing. We had no clue what was in them . The
Commissioners ( along with the developer) decided that was not
important , as the ordinance was not about this land
development . Yet the hearing focussed virtually exclusively on
this parcel - only without the real plans. It was mind-boggling to
watch. Like St Michael's - there is one travesty after
another to remove the rights of those who elect the officials and
pay for the staff that is executing this.
Land Development Notice Final
Plan Review LD-1 2-04
Notice is hereby given that the
Township of Abington will hold the following public meetings at
the Abington Township Administration Building (1176 Old York Road)
Planning Commission, Code Enforcement Committee and Board of
Commissioners, to discuss the application of the Provco Goodman
Jenkintown, LP.
MEETINGS DATE AND
TIME
Planning Commission Committee January
22, 2013 @ 7:30 p.m.
Code Enforcement Committee January 28,
2013 @ 7:30 p.m.
Board of Commissioners February 7, 2013
@ 8:00 p.m.
This is the application of the Provco
Goodman Jenkintown, LP, for the properties located at 808, 816 and
830 Old York Road, Jenkintown, Pa. The applicant has submitted a
land development application to construct a building of 3,500
square feet for a proposed bank use, a 4,691 square foot building
for use as a proposed Wawa and canopy to house six fuel stations.
In addition the applicant proposes other modifications to the site
that include a drive-thru lane to the bank building, on-site
parking for 70 vehicles, an on-site storm water management system,
additional landscaping, lighting and the required repairs to the
existing retaining wall. The property is zoned within the (PB)
Planned Business District of Ward # 7 of the Township of Abington.
The application and plans are on file in the Code Enforcement
Department and may be reviewed upon request. If there are any
questions and/or comments that you may have, please feel free to
contact me at 267-536-1017. Mark A. Penecale Planning & Zoning
Officer • These meetings are subject to change if additional
review time is required by Township Staff or requested by the
applicant.
______
The traffic study is here:
http://www.abingtonpa.gov/resident/downloads%20for%20plans%20&%20maps/Wawa%20Traffic%20Study.pdf
The ordinance that was ( sadly ) passed is here
http://www.abingtonpa.gov/resident/downloads%20for%20plans%20&%20maps/Ord2032WaWaApprov.pdf
The traffic Overview is here
http://www.abingtonpa.gov/resident/downloads%20for%20plans%20&%20maps/Traffic%20Review%20-%20Propose%20WawaBank.pdf
And although the plans should be there - as of 1-11-13 they
are not on this page
http://www.abingtonpa.gov/resident/plans%20and%20maps.htm
12-6-12 POLICE
INVOLVEMENT AT THE
ORDINANCE HEARING
-
( is it possible the wrong people were escorted out..... just an
opinion) The township wide ordinance was approved - despite
no "township-wide" discussion - with only 2 Commissioners
reflecting the sentiment expressed by the vast majority of
residents and amidst more "funny" business, smoke and mirrors than
can be imagined....
The
ordinance (2032) for a "Motor Vehicle Fueling Center "
was approved amidst genuine outrage over both the process
and the results by an overflow crowd
expressing displeasure at most of what transpired.
One resident, who refused to be gaveled and not allowed to share
important comments, while the developer had had so much time to
share his, was wrestled with on the ground,
after falling or being pushed while resisting the Abington
police officer attempting to remove him for over-talking his "3
minutes". His glasses were broken and he hollared out "my
foot" several times. An
edited videotape is being circulated and makes it look as though
the officer and the resident just had a brief moment or two of
discord and then the resident was escorted in away in an easy
manner, giving a totally different impression of the incident from
what actually took place.
The ability of 7 Commissioners to completely deny the
wishes of the residents
directly affected,
who knew and understood the details that would befall not
only them but other neighborhoods, was astounding. 7
voted yes to the
ordinance to
allow intense
gas station and mini-mart
development with 24 hr service
in locations all over Abington Township and
against all the advice & testimony of nearly every involved
agency (except the Council that has the developer on its board)
and directly affected resident . The residents'
arguments had nothing to do with "not in my backyard" and
everything to do with safety, property rights, health, welfare and
good zoning --as well as a process that includes all voices
equally . The skewed procedure was
not even focused on the ordinance at hand but on land
development in a stupefying joint effort by Commissioners and the
applicant to muddy the procedures completely. The
Commissioners were either incapable or unwilling to discuss the
ordinance in full as it affected others township wide
But for a handful of "friends" who spoke in favor, almost all
of whom did not live near the development that will be the
first one under the new ordinance, the crowd was overwhelmingly
opposed with well spoken arguments.
Those that spoke in favor addressed few, if any, of the
specific issues that had been brought up that will affect all of
Abington .
We do have a system for
dealing with this kind of outrageous injustice .
If you believe that communities
have any right at all to have a voice in their own affairs,
you should know who voted yes and you should let them hear about
this behavior at the ballot box . This
will involve getting candidates from both parties to oppose them,
so it WILL require you to not stay in your house and think someone
esle is doing it . Candidates from both parties assure that
that it does not become a political issue rather than about
putting out people who do not represent those on whose behalf they
are legislating.
Here are the Commissioners who voted yes:
DiJoseph ( Ward 12 ) // Meyers ( Ward 8 ) ///
Wachter (Ward 2 ) ///
Gaglianese (Ward 3 ) /// Gillespie
(Ward 13 ) // Luker (Ward 5) // Kalinoski
(Ward 6) //
These 7 had no
interest in hearing community voices nor of their advisors (The
Abington Planning Commissioners, the Montgomery County
Planning Commission,
the Environmental Advisory Council, all stand opposed--and it
violates the concepts of
Comprehensive Plan and the
Old York Rd Corridor Study creating, for instance
situations with NO buffers against residential. )
Commissioners Kline and Bowman voted no-----
but did not really hear the residents - they would both have
allowed this intensive use in this improper location if it had
certain other conditions, such as the proximity to the train.
That would have provided nearly the same result. That
Commissioner Kline is heading a Zoning Rewrite of the entire
Township is somewhat frightening, if he thinks good zoning
enables cross-highway vehicle turns and encourages pedestrian
traffic at
such busy and already dangerous intersections .
Commissioners Ring
and O'Connor voted no, but contributed nothing to the conversation
to protect residents interests. It is more likely that with
close elections coming up they were afraid to try to sustain the
backlash of a yes vote. That is strictly an opinion, but had they
been working fully in the residents interests, they had plenty of
opportunity to cross-examine or elevate the cogent points on
behalf of the residents, without any 3 min time limit as residents
had and with the ability to anticipate answers would be given.
They did not .
On the heels of the St
Michael's debacle, it was again a
sad day for Abington. Other than the Ward 7 Commissioner (
the home team's Commissioner is always expected to support them -
that's how no one ever gets voted out ),
the only Commissioner who actually reflected clearly what
the Community was saying was Commissioner Spiegelman.
And for that we thank him.
Having seen Commissioner
DiJoseph in meeting after meeting removing residents rights
by interrupting them, gaveling them and treating them with little
or no respect, I personally would recommend to her residents that
they ask her to step down immediately. Her residents
should be looking for a Republican and Democrat
replacement to replace her (so that no one can claim "politics"
and new candidates have equal opportunities to describe their
responsiveness). If
her residents do not have the will to do this, then the rest of
the Wards will continue to receive the consequences of her
stewardship until she steps down.
Someone did tell me that she might not be running in the upcoming
election, but I have had no official confirmation of that as of
this date.
When our leaders
prefer police power to providing the proper time for
residents to be heard , then change is absolutely necessary.
Voting out bad leaders
IS how our government is supposed to work .
If you watch this meeting when it comes on TV,
I am certain you will agree that these people have not
acted in the interest of
the health, safety and welfare of our community .
Again, this ordinance is not about the Wawa but
it is about rezoning the entire township -- and about building
intense in and out traffic at one of the most
dangerous intersections in Abington. And about putting
intense activity next to residential. There is nothing
that warranted these actions. Commissioners can undo it by passing
new legislation that revises the former legislation from last week
--- I also believe there may be a mechanisn that allows them
to overturn any decision they have made. Please help us by
demanding that your Commissioner send back responses on these two
ideas to share with the rest of the public on this issue .
The day before this vote a new proposal was
submitted by Goodman for this property. So the vast majority
of us were unaware of what current proposal was even on the table
at the time of this meeting. The procedure will now continue
through land development plans and through to the completion
of the Wawa.
BELOW ARE DETAILS FROM EARLIER
POSTINGS
__________________________
CURRENT PROPOSAL FOR A MOTOR VEHICLE FUELING CENTER
Dec 4, 2012 The propoal will
be presented again . In general, though it has changed so many
times , the proposal is
for an ordinance - but has become merged with a Super Wawa
(a Wawa with 6 double sided gas pumps- 12 pumps in all)
at 800
&
808 Old York Road,
(near Baeder & Hilltop Rd) by local developer Bruce
Goodman’s
Provco Goodman
company. This has caused a great deal of confusion.
THIS IS AN ORDINANCE NOT A WAWA :
First you should understand that although plans have been presented
for one location, this vote on Dec 6th is not about just a
wawa in this location - it is about giving other property owners the
same rights.
PROPERTIES
The Jenkintown
appearance of this Ordinance: if the ordinance passes and
gives Goodman this right, there would be 3 sections ultimately in
the talks. The former Texaco station property at the corner of
Baeder/hilltop and York would be bought and
become a bank. The next property N. On York Rd. would be the
Wawa itself, with prepared food, retail, ATM etc . And next to
that store, going north would be the canopy with six double-sided
pumps underneath it. The
gasoline and the Wawa store
property comprises
a little over 2 acres. Currently zoned PB - planned
business (
click here for the drawing that was valid 10-23-12-
driveways and small changes may have been made to recent ones. )
VARIANCES ? The
first proposal was for for variances and exceptions ( 26 or so of
them - including one that said he could have whatever additional
variances he needed) . When that prospect looked bleak ( he
didn't have any hardships to receive such approvals) he tried next
to finagle around those approvals by rewriting the text of the zoning for the
land he owns. To win that approval he simply needs to have the
majority of the 15 commissioners agree with him and vote yes.
SPOT ZONING ? In order to try to make it appear that it is not "spot zoning", his
text amendment would not just apply to his own property, but would
apply to any property in Abington that fit the same conditions.
Great . Now others neighbors- we know not which- will go
through the same loss of their rights, but without any grounds to
protest, if this passes.
2000 FEET DISTANCE He had also regulated in such a way, that his competition could not
build within 2,000 feet of him . His team testified 11-19-12 that it
wouldn't be good to have to similar entities close together ( yet we
heard recently the CVS might be placed right next to the Walgreens
in one of his properties)
800 FEET FROM A TRAIN STATION
-
Originally to have this same benefit
,tproperties would have to be within 800 ft of a train . We understand
this last feature - or at least the 800 feet part of it - was
removed from the latest submission so many more properties
in the township would now gain rights via this ordinance. And
we have no analysis of what ones they might be and how these
other areas might be affected . Properties could possibly be merged
while residents nearby suspected nothing.
PROTECTING OUR RIGHTS The absurdity
of these requests is matched only by the fact that there are some in
our Township all too eager to endorse them, rather than to protect
our zoning laws, to protect the rights of the residents that live
here and build community here, and to prevent developers from using
our own zoning laws as they are private tools for success. He is simply asking for much more than the
rights that he bought with the property, and these increased rights
for him will come at the expense of the neighbors that live nearby
as well as all others who live and travel through our Township and
who will be facing the traffic that this inconvenient location will
generate.
(This paragraph written prior to the November submissions)
The actual ordinance : You will find the
most recent submission here
Drawing of the project : Here is
the drawing that was valid 10-23-12
"Side By Side" summary of some of
his rights by current law vs. what he wants to have - please click here
- This was done prior to the
November 2012 document submissions but gives you an idea of the
extent of his request to have rights that trump everyone else's .
Every developer should be required to give this kind of analysis
with every submission - because many submissions are so
complicated that even those voting on them do not understand them.
The rights that he currently has on the property
are found in our codebook . The property is zoned
PB which is Planned Business . Patience:
this loads slowly Planned
Business District Zoning -
Pages 42 to 51 of the Abington Twp zoning code
NEXT MEETING
Dec 6th -
hearing
- to pass the ordinance that will allow
Mr Goodman to rewrite our laws in his interests. the
planning commission turned it down 11-19-12 The Environmental
Advisory Council also gave it a thumbs down. A dozen neighbors
spoke- all of them against it - and prior to this many neighbors
have made their voices heard. Any Commissioner that is
voting for this is not hearing the residents that they serve, nor
their advisors.
WE SHOULD HAVE A PROFESSIONAL COMPARISON
What's missing is a side by side
comparison of the rights he bought and
the way he wants to change it . We tried to do that
ourselves but it should be done by officials and professionals
whoo know the code . Especially knowing that
this will affect other property ( and residences near this
property. The work to do this comparison should be
done once, fully, by the developer to provide each time he submits
a plan , and it should be checked by township personnel and made
available to residents. As we can see clearly in this case that no
number of submissions seems to be a problem for the developer. So
he should bear the costs of this "adventure" .
Once
a proper comparision is done, so we actually KNOW what he is
changing , that comparison should be posted so that all who are
approving this actually understand it . Every Township
resident is impacted by these decisions. And they have
traditionally been done by keeping the information as difficult to
get as possible. That is outstandingly evident in this case . It makes no sense to have
a comparison tediously redone by all who need it in order to
vote, comment or know what is happening to their homes and their
Township. And it mind-bogling to think that those who vote won't
even understand the consequences of what they are changing.
OTHER WAIVERS WERE ACHIEVED THROUGH A 3RD PARTY
The orig request was 4,983 square – requesting 12
fuel service stations - (6 pumps 2 sided)
Toni Roni's applied (
while no one was paying attention) for exceptions and/or variances on the
corner property ( the old Texaco)Those exceptions, now approved,
stay with the property. Goodman proposes to buy
the Old Texaco - recently approved for a Tony Roni's restaurant (
with firther setback reductions etc) and proposes to build a bank there . Now with the
reduced setbacks. His Wawa plan then was presented with
entrances & exits through this property to Hilltop Road.
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST ?
There have been questions asked about possible conflicts of
interest given that Bruce Goodman sits on the Economic
Development Council ( even though he does not live in
Abington ) and his attorney, or someone who has acted as his
attorney for some issues, according to some reports apparently sits on the
Montgomery County Planning Commission that was charged with
approval and providing comments on this project. That is
unconfirmed and if you have information on that ,
please share it. He
and those connected to his various projects may not have voted, but
their influence itself might be something for us to consider.
How do we make up our Boards and Committees?
Are resident with resident concerns on these Boards or are they
largely made up of developers who have a different agenda and more
of a bottom-line view of what should go where.
ALERT TO OTHER ABINGTON DEVELOPMENT RIGHT NEARBY -
Residents who were concerned about this development because
of the increase in traffic should be acutely aware of the
not-yet-built areas that are either already approved, or going
through design and approval now, in this Township area. These
include the 50 -90 some new units at Rydal Park, 246 units now zoned
in at the Baederwood, 97 units at Rydal Waters and 72 units
recently proposed at the Noble Station. In addition to
these, add tens of thousands of square feet of additional retail,
Medical Center etc
and a desire to zone similarly on all the rest of the Fairway area
properties. I don't think the residents locally, except for
just a few, have any clue
that all these things are in the works or how they will impact
this small area of Abington that already contains some of the
busiest and most dangerous traffic areas of the Township. In
addition, the newest proposal has the intent of creating a TRID (read more here ) and the
added value from the improvements is to be funneled back to these
developers, enhancing their properties, rather than going into
the community as was touted to be the benefit of all the
development.
OTHER
WAWA' S
BEING DEVELOPED IN A SIMILAR MANNER IN NEIGHBORING TOWNSHIPS
BY ..SURPRIZE - THE SAME FACES..... MR Goodman is not just writing
new zoning laws for Abington --Upper Moreland and other
areas are also
among his "conquests"
Upper Moreland DID set ha hearing date…. October
2nd
2012
http://www.montgomerynews.com/articles/2012/10/02/public_spirit_willow_grove_guide/news/doc506b9026515ee982325652.txt
RECENT
ACTIVITY
ON THIS PROPOSAL
November 19 -
Planning Commission Meeting : we
had been told that the planning commission meeting of Nov 27, 2012
is where this issue would probably continue- however just several
weeks earlier than November 19 date, Thanksgiving week, was
announced--- and all who requested to be alerted had not been.
Nonetheless with a dozen residents testifying, and a negative
review from the environmental advisory Council, As did meet a 5-3
demise and was turned down by the planning commission members.
Oct 25, 2012 - The hearing scheduled for this date was cancelled
on Oct 23rd
October 23, 2012
- 7:30 Planning Commission
- did not approve the plan . Called for a traffic study
Sept
25, 2012 A newer proposal was submitted
Sept 13th - 8 pm
Commissioners set the hearing date as October 25. (This was then
cancelled
Sept
19th , 2012 - This ordinance was pulled from the Planning Commission
agenda at 11:26 am -
supposedly due to comments made by the
Montgomery Co Planning Commission .
Sept 12
Here is the
Sept 25th
2012 submission to change the zoning ordinance to allow for Motor
Vehicle Fueling Center -
Please be patient as these pdf's are taking a
long time to load :
Sept 12, 2012 Comments from the MontgomeryCounty Planning Commission
August 2, 2012 - The first proposal to rewrite the text
of the Zoning Code was submitted
USE
THE TOOLS AVAILABLE TO YOU
AsAsk your Commissioners and your Township manager
(click here)
specifically to :
1)
...post a SINGLE webpage on this with links to find meetings,
updates & all the plans
2) ...tape all meetings on this topic & air them on our public
channel - the devil is really in the details
-then you can review or catch up on a meeting you missed .
This is actually important .
3) ... post all
the taped meetings on-line with time reference points and
fast forward features
4) .. create an email list for all
updates and - invite ALL residents
via Township & Commissioners
lists to be on it so they can receive updates in their box if they
desire
5) ...provide a meeting space ( already paid by your taxes
) for neighbors to hold their own open
discussions
whenever they choose - not called by or moderated by authorities.
6) ... provide
residents with a summary of all changes being proposed
in ( 2 column/compare style)
7) Finally:
neighbors, please make
your
own
meetings open to all - if you try to limit transparency
hoping to benefit only your point of view, then you will find it limited for yourself
--- you will
be part of the problem not the solution
Email me if you need
help contacting others. I also have a great deal of information about
how our processes work and what is happening elsewhere in the
Township that might be helpful to your situation.
SUMMARY OF THE RESIDENT'S
9-11-11 MEETING
Sept 11, 2012 Residents' Meeting : The residents of Ward 7
were without a
Representative. State Red & former Ward Commissioner Madeleine Dean was present to help
facilitate as were Larry Matteo and Mark Penecale from Zoning .
Here is
the
ordinance that was handed out . At
the meeting a brief presentation was given, then residents
asked if they could speak before further presentation .
The zoning is labeled Ordinance2032 and the August 2
proposal includes six pages of the ordinance and three renderings
. In their rendering the
property on the corner that used to be a Texaco station now is a
bank. It is connected
to the next property
which will include the Wawa pumping stations across from
Chilis and then to the next sectionwith a Wawa convenience
store, across from Barnes & Noble.
In the drawing there are two driveways from the Bank
property onto Hilltop Road, both across from the Jenkintown Day
Nursery.
Residents spoke of the traffic,
which they have said is
already ran this and backed up at rush hour on Baeder road, and
tricky and dangerous at that intersection.
Some residents were apparently unaware of the plan of
immense proportions that is planned right
across Baeder Rd
behind Noble Plaza - please
read more about that here -- and watch it this week on TV
channel (Verizon 24, Comcast 43) .
I cannot tell you how important it is for you
to ask your Commissioners and Township staff to have these
meetings put online. All
committee meetings should be online because, as Commissioners keep
pointing out, that is where the nuts and bolts of these issues are
discussed.
The developer is seeking to change substantially many of
the provisions of the zoning that the property currently has. As
one resident pointed out he knew the zoning limitations of
the property when he bought it.
He seems to have no desire to build anything within those
confines. In order to acquire a variance you would
need a hardship. So the
attempt to rewrite the ordinance is a way of getting around that
hardship issue. Because of
this , it would be important for residents to speak up at the
September 13 meeting and ask Commissioners not to set a hearing
for a new ordinance, or entertain any ordinance that so
dramatically affects the rights of so many others.
The property owner has sufficient rights to develop this
property - just not in this way.
One resident spoke up about many of the points that make up
the substantial changes and others added comments on these,
including a legal representative for one resident and a
representative from the Jenkintown Day Nursery and a member
of the Economic Development Council ( an advisory body of which
the developer, Bruce Goodman, is a member. )
Among the points made:
1) by having the
back exits out to Hilltop Road all of the neighborhood roads would
surely be used
by all of the traffic heading to
& from the Wawa as they seek to avoid the backed up
intersection.
2)
traffic cannot go north when it comes out of the Wawa which will
create a problem at the intersection
and possibly in other places along York Rd of with people
trying to turn around
3) lighting will be a 24-hour a day
issue and needs to be specified. It is not dealt with sufficiently
.
4 ) green buffers are completely inadequate and there is
absolutely none shown along old York Road
5) signage has been
grossly increased in this version- originally 50 ft.² now he is
giving himself 65 ft.².
The
original height of the signs was 20 feet, this ordinance asks for
25 feet. Originally they
were three canopy signs
41sf-the new ordinance allows for
five. His directional signs
for in and out originally were for at 32.4 ft.² each.
Now there are eight at 50
ft.² each. Outrageous
increases over what should be allowed .
6) noise will be a
problem - heaters generators delivery trucks -
in the experience of many, the deliveries,
the garbage
trucks, etc. for such an operation are often excessively noisy.
Three extremely cogent points made by residents
:
One resident
asked who IS it that approves such a thing - when the developers
write the ordinances themselves and disregard all the rules
already in place . The answer here is, in effect, that the
first request for variances would have had to have been almost
certainly turned down because there is no hardship other than the
developer's own economics present. But by doing this, they have
only to ask the 15 Commissioners, many of them friends and
long-standing colleagues of this developer. They seem, as other
instances would support, to have the ability to re-zone at
will, especially when not challenged legally or very forcefully.
Another resident
brought to light the fact that this developer knew his rights when
he bought the property. And he seems to have no interest in
abiding by them.
And a third resident mentioned that this is a
community ...a neighborhood... and this kind of over-building can
shatter it. These are people's lives, homes, peace and quiet and
safety at stake.
Of crucial importance to the residents of
this area is the need to understand TOD's and TRIDS - these
are "Transportation Oriented " areas where the INTENT is to
increase the density and Federal & State grant $ ( your $ ) are
available for the development of the area. The Noble Train station is being slated
for just such a transformation by Township Commissioners and
staff. Knowingly. It has been brought up in many taped
meetings, including the Sept 5th Public Affairs segment which we
are trying to have put online.
A Zoning Ordinance Rewrite
Committee headed by Commissioner Stephen Kline is also busy
rezoning many areas of the Township
in this fashion . Again please demand to have the
presentation of the Noble areas
put on-line and to have the facts on the specific zoning rewrite
changes to date. Your request will be to the benefit of yourself
AND all your
neighbors!
QUESTIONS
WORTH ASKING
If the Commissioners are required
to protect the health & welfare of the residents that back up to
this property, how would they be able to pass and ordinance that
would give one landowner excessive rights against the will of the
people and to the detriment of their property values.
We are creating a history , with this
Board , of rezoning a property whenever someone comes and
wants more rights. Yet residents nearly unanimously want their
rights withheld and the esteheic nature of their township
preserved.
THIS WRITERS CONCERN :
that residents, who are largely opposed to this excessive development,
even while most do not oppose reasonable development, will not understand
how to have their rights up held in this matter. Getting
our own Zoning Board
to uphold the laws rather than to expand them for the chosen
few while others rights are trompled upon. This developer
arrived on the scene with an overt request for
whatever relief he needed to develop as he proposed
- outrageous that he would
think he could get it passed. But he has many connections and much
experience in this township and it is unlikely he would throw his
money away for no reason. He then imagined no problem in
rewriting our zoning laws himself and
explicitly to his benefit .
This should tell us how far astray we have
gone. There are only a handful of residents contiguous.
If the rest of the township does not join them to speak out about
outrages like this, then the laws and the upper hand will be won
by the money and not by the people who live and work here.
That the rights of some are being completely removed by Commissioners who choose
or vote to give excessive rights to others is a wrong we need to recognize and
correct. The Commissioner are charged with the health, safety
and welfare of their constituents. Good government takes our attention.
Learn the name of your Commissioner and of all the Commissioners
who will be voting on this matter. Hold your own large neighborhood meetings.
Neighbors rarely meet,
except in tiny groups. Most all the larger group meetings are controlled by Commissioners
and staff, because neighbors don't know how to contact one another.
So share your emails with one another and get the information sent
to your email box. Understand your neighbor's concerns and help
him understand yours - then decide together what is acceptable to
you in the community
where you live and stand tall together in demanding that your own
rights are preserved
If you all agree that you want a 12 pump station, tall signs and
lights, 24 hour noise, deliveries and traffic like you've never
seen, then together you can give the developer your blessing.
But more often these things are happening despite residents protests
because we just have not learned how to use the tools of
our democracy.
))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
PRIOR WAWA ACTIONS & LINKS
AS OF AUGUST 2012
THE ORIGINAL ORDINACE "OVERLAY" PROPOSAL
TO ACCOMMODATE A SUPER WAWA ACROSS FROM
CHILI'S & BARNES & NOBLE
-
Proposed
Ordinance 2032 would amend three sections of the Township Zoning
Ordinance creating "Use C-34: Motor Vehicle Fueling Center"
allowing developer
Bruce Goodman/Goodman Properties to open a Super Wawa with gas
pumps
The current
Jenkintown Wawa would close
Commissioner Spiegelman, who has
really kept his residents well informed
has posted details
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0Bw1QWL_iUGrsVmUtY01YXzNJUVk/edit
and a rendering
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0Bw1QWL_iUGrsLUJHQm5OVUlONWs/edit
Tuesday, September 11,
7:00PM: Baederwood neighborhood meeting on the proposed zoning
The meeting is billed as specifically for the residents of
Baederwood, since that's where the proposed Super Wawa would go,
but I believe no Abington residents, whose tax monies go to pay
for the personnel and expenses involved with the dispersion of
information on these issues that affect us all, should be
barred from any
informational meeting.
Respectfully, nearby residents should be given ample time to be
heard - but the concerns of all
should be heard by all. Nothing that happens in
this Township affects just one small group of us. All should be
welcome to hear the concerns of their neighbors and to let their
neighbors hear their concerns. Where else will the rest of the
residents get proper information before the Sept 13th
meeting?
))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
Everything below
this line was written pre 9-12 and may be outdated or may be
relevant - please be sure you have current information - the
propasal has changed
( more than a
few times)
THE
ORIGINAL PROPOSAL SEEKING OVER 20 VARIANCES AND
EXCEPTIONS
Wawa Site Aerial View
Application and including the
requested variances
Original
application
& site plan
http://www.abingtonpa.gov/resident/downloads%20for%20plans%20&%20maps/dec2011%20(13)%20app%20wawa.pdf
The
February 21, 2012 7:00PM - Zoning Hearing Board will NOT hear this
application a letter was sent anround circa 2-12 that
the developer will bring this before the Board of Commissioners
instead of the Zoning Hearing Board
12-13-11
Zoning Hearing 7pm Township Building - Below
is a summary of some of the details of the zoning variances
being applied for by Goodman Properties . Here is one INCEDIBLY
disconcerting line from an enormously disconcerting application12-13-11
Zoning Hearing 7pm Township Building - Below
is a summary of some of the details of the zoning variances
being applied for by Goodman Properties . Here is one INCEDIBLY
disconcerting line from an enormously disconcerting application
The
applicant requests ......All other relief as may be deemed necessary
to allow for the development of this property as proposed.
Mr Goodman, you may or may not know, though not an Abington
resident, sits (or sat) on the Economic Development Board of our
Township . The Economic Development Board SHOULD in my own esteem, I
hope in yours, too, be safeguarding the quality of our
community. The use that he proposes for this property has nothing
whatsoever in common with the rights that he bought with the
property. He would like to violate nearly every wish and safeguard
that we have to make our community what we would like it to be
( and those are already too few ) .
I
hope you will read the list of variances being requested, be
mindful of the fact that part of the land he is using is zoned
residential and it abuts residential, and please ask yourself
how he would have the temerity to even think that this would be
approved. Being a saavy developer, who has extremely close
connections to nearly everyone that would be part of the
approval process, I doubt Mr Goodman would have wasted his
money without some sense that it WOULD be approved.
The
presentation is not just being made during the holidays, greatly
fortuitous timing, but the hearing will also be held on the
night of another emotionally charged convenience store
hearing . This means the presentation would likely drag into the
latest hours possible, when many would likely have to go home .
Please read the summaries ---and please do not let your voice go
unheard - holidays notwithstanding .
If this is allowed, I believe some resignations should be sought
. I would be glad to hear your thoughts.
Aplication excerpts
800
&
808 Old York Road, (near Baeder Rd)
Goodman Properties 215-885-8383c/o
Goodman Properties
636
Old York Road/2nd Floor
Jenkintown,
PA 19046
proposes a
Wawa Store of 4,983 square – requesting
12 fuel service stations ( 6 pumps
2 sided)
A use variance from Section 402.2.A to allow for a Use
C-8 Convenience Store
Dimensional variances have been requested from
Section 706
.C.8.f
to allow for the square footage of the store to exceed
3,000
square feet,
Section 402.3
to allow for a
reduction of the front, side
and rear yard setbacks,
Section
402.4.L to
allow for reductions of the required landscaped buffers
adjoining the front side and
residential property lines.
An interpretation of Section 702.B and 702.C
of the Zoning Ordinance concerning principal use.
In the alternative,
a variance.
A dimensional variance from Section 706.A to
allow for the retaining wall
to exceed 6 feet in height.
A dimensional variance
from :
Section 706.C.17
to allow for parking within the
buffer areas
Section706.C.25
pertaining to the number of employees per square footage of the
building.
A variance from Section 801
.C
to allow for the construction of the building to encroach into
the required setbacks.
A
special exception to allow for a change of grade of more than
three feet within 100 feet of a property line.
A variance from Section 801.L pertaining to safety
procedures required for a 24 hour operation
A variance from Section 801
.T
to allow for a 24 hour operation that shares a property line
with residential uses.
A dimensional
variance
to allow for the on-site parking stalls to be reduced to nine
feet in width
A variance from Section 1005 to allow for the support for the
free standing sign to be located within the 10 foot setback.
Variances from100S.2
.B
to allow for the proposed free standing signage, wall signage
,
canopy sign age,
directional signage and signage on the proposed
fuel pumps.
Relief
from Section 1007 as amended by Ordinance #1943 to allow for the
LED fuel cost portion of the proposed signage
to change copy more than once every
24 hours.
All
other relief as may be deemed necessary to allow for the
development of this property as proposed.
The property is zoned within the
(PB)
Planned Business District and R-2 Residential District of Ward #7
of the Township of Abington.
1.
Note:
This is scheduled for Dec 13th .
The next scheduled
meeting of the Zoning Hearing Board will be held on Tuesday,
January 17,
2012
.
That meeting
will start at 7:00 p.m.
and will be held in the Second
Floor Board Room of the Abington Township Administration
Building. located at 1176 Old York
1.
A use
variance from Section
402.2.A
to allow a Convenience Store
(C-8)
in a
IJB
and
R-2 Residential District.
2.
A
variance from Section 706.C.8.f to allow the gross retail floor
area
of the proposed use to
exceed
3,000 square feet.
3.
A
variance from the
requirements
of Section 402.3 to allow
a
35-£'00t front yard
setback where 60
feet is required.
4.
A variance
from the requirements of Section 402.3 to allow a 35.1-Joot side
yard
where
a 40-foot mi.nimum side yard setback is required.
5.
A variance from the requirements of Section 402.3 to allow a
rear yard
setback
of
20.7 feet where a 50-[00t rear yard minimmu setback is required.
1.
A
variance from Section
402.4.L
to allow a 5-foot front yard buffer where a 20foot minimum
front yard buffer is required.
2.
A
variance from Section !J.02.4.L to
allO\:v a side yard buffer
of
1-foot where
a
6fo
ot
minimwn
side
yard buffer is required.
.
A
variance from Section
402.4.L
to allow a residential buffer of 1.7
fect where
a
25-fo01
minimum residential buffer is required.
9.
An
interpretation
that the Convenience Slore usc includes all uscs
on
til::;
______Qremises.
In
the alternative,
a variance
from
the
requirements of
702.R and
.C to
allow the
principal
use to account for less than
90%
of
the
gross
Ieasabl·e
floor
area
ot~tITbUllliln:g,-----structure,
lot
or
premises
and
the accessory use to
occupy
more
than
10%
of
the
gross
leasable
floor area
of
the
building,
structure
or premises for commercial uses.
10.
A variance
from Section
706.A.6
to allow
a
maximum
wall
height to exceed
() feet
in the
rear and side
yard.
11.
A variance from Section 706.C.17 to allow parking witl1in the
buffer
area.
12.
A
variance from Section
706.C.25.E
to allow more than
two
employees
per 1,000 square
feet
of gross
leasable floor area devoted to retail use.
13.
A
variance
from Section 801.C.l
to
allow a building
to
be
located
Vvithin a setback
or
required yard.
14.
A variance
iI-om
Section SOl.C.S requiring
yard
requirements to be measured
from
the
inside
edge of
the resource righl of way or east:ment.
(Setbacks
from existing
easements).
J5.
In the
alternative,
a special exception
to
allow
a
3-foot grade
change within
100
feet
of the
property
line;
or
in
the alternative,
a
variance from
Section
80LI.11
to
allow
a 3-foot
grade change within a
100
feet of the property line.
1.
A
variance from Section
SOl.L.S(d)(e)
to
eliminate
the
requirements
of
"no
cash
on
hand or
exact
change
policies"
and
"cashier separation desif,'11s."
2.
A variance
from Section 801.T.3
.C
to allow a
24
hour operation of the Convenience
Store
as
not
detrimental
to the
health, safety
and
welfare of
thc
surroundi_ng
community
.
IS. A
variance
from
Section 902.1.A to allow parking stall size to be 9-foot by
18foot rather than tbe required 10-foot by 18-foot.
19_
A
variance
from
the requirements of Section 1005 to aJlow
a
supporting siluetmc for
a
sign
to be located
closer
to
an existing street right
of away
line than
J0
feet.
20. A variance
from the requirements of Section 100S.2.B
to
allow
for
the fanowing
SIgns:
1
One free standing sign measuring 49.99 square feet witi1
a
20-foot heighl
2
Two Builcling 11100.U1ted signs totaling 104.16 square
feet (166.69 square
foot and one 37.47 square feet)
3
Three
canopy
mounted
signs
total
ing
41
.01
square foot;
4
Four directional signs totaling 32.4 square feet with
advertisi.ng
5
Twelve
pump signs totaling
of3.0 squarc
feet
21.
A
variance hom
Sectionrmlv.BTto a 10wOITSite
llire-c1inmrl-sigrrs-containing-----adverlising.
22.
A
vaJ.iance from Section 1009.B.2 to allow ansite directionaJ
signs exceeding 4 square
feet
in the area.
Applicant sLlbmits tbat the requested Zoning Relief shall not be
contrary to the health, safety and \velfare of the surrounding
community and Abington Township.
_________________________________
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
|
