Development Category

Category: Development

Newtown Crossing vs. Arcadia: Residents Speak Out

Residents of Newtown Crossing and neighboring Eagle Ridge crammed into the Public Meeting Room at the Newtown Township Municipal Center last night (October 11, 2017) to voice their opposition to Arcadia Green’s latest proposal to build 85 single-family homes adjacent to these developments. This proposal would destroy a home on High Street (#295) to make way for an egress road. Traffic would then pass through other roads in the Newtown Crossing development to access Newtown Bypass – a limited access road. Such an egress road was necessary because a previous plan was rejected because of problems exiting the development onto Bucks Road to gain access to the Bypass.

The meeting was the beginning of a quasi-judicial hearing before the Board of Supervisors (BOS). At least a dozen residents, including Bucks County Controller and former Newtown BOS member, Mike Gallagher, who lives on High Street, stood up and obtained “party status” in the hearing, which means they can give testimony for the record and be cross-examined by council to Arcadia.

However, they will have to wait until AFTER the elections to testify – the hearing was “tabled” until November 8, 2017.

Mike Gallagher reminded the audience that “it’s not a sprint, it’s a marathon” and urged people to attend future meetings, including a Planning Commission meeting later in the month (perhaps Oct 24) where Arcadia will be available to answer other questions.

Nevertheless, many other residents made comments before the board about their personal issues regarding this proposed development. At one point, council for Arcadia tried to shut down the comments but her request was denied. The audience broke into cheers and applause when the commenter said “we want to speak truth to power!”

One resident requested a map be made available to better understand what’s being discussed. I was able to take a photo of the PRD plan (see it here).

Several people complained about the traffic through their development via the egress road, which would endanger children and pets who are used to play and roam on quiet streets such as High Street. School buses would also be affected, noted another resident.

One person said she moved to Newtown because it was because she was “reaching to part of America that almost doesn’t exist anymore. Newtown,” she said, is “so ‘Norman-Rockwellesque’.” She lamented the possible loss of open space next to her development where her children go and play. Another resident defended the open space as a haven for wild animals including, she said, coyotes and bald eagles!

The most heart-wrenching comments came from a elder retired police sergeant whose wife died last year. He told a story of living in motels for years after he had to abandon his home do to a fuel spill many years ago. When he found a new home in Newtown Crossing he and his wife were happy at last. Now, however, he faces the loss of that happiness on top of the sorrow of missing his wife.

Posted on 14 Oct 2017, 01:48 - Category: Development

Newtown Area Residents Comment on Wawa’s Low Bypass Berm

As I reported in the Newtown Patch, Rick G., a Newtown Township resident, emailed me with an inquiry about recent work being done at the Wawa site on the Newtown Bypass: “I saw that the land for the new Wawa has been excavated and am surprised that the berm they constructed looks much lower than berms on the rest of the bypass,” said Rick.

A Much Lower Berm

It’s true – it IS much lower and for a reason: so that Bypass traffic can have clear sight of the Wawa and its fuel pumps. This was made clear to me at a township public meeting where it was noted that “There is a ten (10') foot embankment at the Bypass line of the Subject Property and the Applicant is planning to cut that embankment to approximately four (4') to five (5') feet high. The berm has to be cut down in order to provide visibility ...” (read “Newtown ZHB Issues Official Provco/Wawa Decision”).

Rick was “hoping the berm would obstruct the view from the bypass to help preserve the rural ‘ambience’ along most of the bypass. The berm across the street looks like it's 4-5’ higher and obstructs the view of the church.”

I decided to see for myself what was going on with the berm by driving by the site with video rolling. I posted what I saw on Youtube (view it here..). To date (29 July 2024) the video has been viewed more than 1,900 times!

My Post to Nextdoor

Although many people have viewed the video on Youtube, it has not garnered many comments from Youtube viewers. I decided, therefore, to post a link to it on Nextdoor and collect comments from local residents as well as answer their questions. The following is a selected compilation of these comments and my responses. You can read ALL the responses here…

As you can see, my “neighbors” on Nextdoor are “really interested” in my post!

Why Did I Create The Video?

James D. [Fairfield and Makefield] asked “What point are you making? Are they in violation of an agreement or statute by allowing their building sign or gas pump canopy to be visible ? What exactly is your conspiracy theory or as you called it ‘grassy knoll’.” [James was referring to my description of the berm as a “grassy knoll,” which first appeared in my Patch article.

My response: “No, they are not in violation. The point is that the agreement alters what one resident called the rural ‘ambience’ of the Bypass, which traditionally has been considered a ‘greenway.’ It is one reason why I voted against this project.”

Eric Jacobs [Sturbridge] also asked why? “John you wrote: ‘It is clear that with the planned elimination of the berm along the Bypass and Lower Silver Lake Road, that the building sign and gas pump canopy will be clearly visible.’ Well, this isn't news. It was part of the whole fight over having the Wawa there, the location of the canopy, which way it would face, and what signage would be allowed. Of course they wouldn't build the Wawa there is it wasn't at all visible from the road. But you know this because you were involved in the hearings and votes on the Wawa. So I'm trying to understand the reason for your post about this now? It seems like it's just designed to stir up community annoyance at an already-done deal. Or are you saying they are building it out of compliance with the plans which were approved by the township?”

My response: “Eric - Hi. I made the post after Rick G., a Newtown Township resident, emailed me with an inquiry about recent work being done at the Wawa site on the Newtown Bypass. ‘I saw that the land for the new Wawa has been excavated and am surprised that the berm they constructed looks much lower than berms on the rest of the bypass,’ said Rick.”

As I mentioned at the beginning of this article, I decided to see for myself and, as I often do, I documented via video my experience driving by the site and shared it on youtube as I often do. It's one way that I have to gather opinions from residents. Posting the video to various sites including Nextdoor helps me gather those opinions.

My response (continued): “Of course, this is a done deal and Wawa has every right to lower the berm just as I have every right to my opinion of it and to ensure that they are doing it according to the approved land development plan approved by the Newtown Board of Supervisors. I hope to make sure that our engineers are monitoring the process to ensure that.”

Why Newtown?

John Cloud [Newtown Borough] lamented that “Urban sprawl is what makes America. You'll see a McDonald's built soon enough. The cities aren't making enough profit with their high taxes and people can't afford to eat out, so it's gotta come out here to Newtown. Once there's an IHOP on the Newtown bypass the destiny of future development is set.”

“The point I'm making … is that capitalism cannot be stopped. Consumerism is down in high cost areas due to stagnant wages, layoffs, and inflation. Companies are migrating here. Pennsylvania has a low minimum wage, so of course they're going to come here, buy up land, endure legal pushback from the community for years until eventually they win. We've already had the drawn out legal battles with the Wegman's, the 5G tower, the parking lot in Newtown boro, and the Stone Meadows farm (and both did not succeed in what they were launched for, to stop development), what is this Wawa issue going to achieve now?” [See my answer below under “Why Complain Now?”]

Signage

Annette Fu [Roberts Ridge Park] asked “Please clarify. The sign wasn’t supposed to be visible? I’m on your side.”

My response: “The visibility of the sign and fuel pumps is allowable but regrettable as far as I am concerned. There will be a nice BIG Wawa sign [Monument Sign #1, see below] right on the berm at the corner facing eastbound Bypass traffic.”

List of Allowable Signs

Since the issue of signs came up, let me describe ALL the signs that will adorn this site when completed.

1. Monument Sign #1

"Wawa" Sign: Sign located at the intersection of the Newtown Bypass and Lower Silver Lake Road. Sign shall be installed no further than 10' from the Property line along the Newtown Bypass and will be double faced to be visible from both directions. Sign is proposed to be 8'4" high measured from proposed finished grade at base of sign. Sign area is proposed to be 35 SF and approximate dimensions of 10' wide x 3.5' high. Sign will not be internally illuminated but shall be externally illuminated at night.

Sign will not display gasoline prices.

"Welcome to Newtown Township" Sign: Sign is proposed to be 4' high measured from proposed finished grade at base of sign. Sign area is proposed to be 98.8 SF and approximate dimensions of 30' wide by 3.5' high. I suspect that this was included in the deal to appease certain supervisor(s).

2. Monument Sign #2

Sign located at the full movement driveway on to Lower Silver Lake Road. Sign shall be installed no further than 10' from the Property line along Lower Silver Lake Road. Sign is proposed to be 8' high measured from proposed finished grade at base of sign. Sign area is proposed to be 35 SF and approximate dimensions of 7' wide x 5' high. Sign will be internally illuminated, will display gasoline prices and will change by a mechanical scroll.

3. Building Mounted Sign #1

Sign located on the Front Facade of the building facing the Newtown Bypass. Sign area is proposed to be 67.70 SF and consists of 44" channel letters and Logo. Sign will be internally illuminated.

4. Building Mounted Sign #2

Sign located on the Rear Facade of the building facing Lower Silver Lake Road. Sign area is proposed to be 36.90 SF and consists of 32" channel letters and Logo. Sign will be internally illuminated.

Why Complain Now?

Eric Jacobs made some good points in closing:

“John - Thanks for your reply. I think it's inevitable that residents will find things to object to, and in the months ahead as the full Wawa station emerges. Some people objected before when the proposal was under consideration, and will still object; some people may have been unaware of the controversy before and object now when they see it. But as an elected official in Newtown, I don't think it serves any good to rile people up to complain about something that complies with the zoning and development agreement. I DO think it is great to keep an eye on the project to make sure it complies, down the the letter, with the approved development plans; if the developers cut any corners or try to sneak in any changes, that needs to be reported immediately to the zoning official or solicitor in order to hold them to their agreed plans.

“So… if the berm they're building doesn't comply, report it to the proper official to issue them a stop work order. If the berm they're building complies, then don't post about it as if this is news or a change in plans. You wrote that your justification is that a resident wrote you because they "hoped" the berm would hide the station, but you knew (or found when you looked into it) that the approved plan didn't call for a larger berm. Why didn't you tell the resident that, instead of publicly posting something which made it seem like the developer is doing something wrong?

“When construction is done and the station opens, you have every right to hold it up as an example of why further development along the bypass is undesirable. But as we know, just complaining that we don't want more development is NOT effective.”

What Can Be Done

“What I think you CAN do, as a Supervisor,” suggested Eric, “is look into (or have the legal people look into) whether there can be any tweaks to the zoning ordinances to insure that any future proposed developments require larger berms, no or minimal visual disruptions from the bypass, etc. My 2¢… Thanks for listening.”

For me, this is not complaining about development per se. It’s more about preserving open space.

My response to Eric: “One other option suggested to me is for the township to seek a grant to preserve open space by buying land along the Bypass. Just saying that it traditionally has been considered a "greenway" does not count for much these days.”

I did a little research and learned that the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources’ Bureau of Recreation and Conservation assists local governments and recreation and conservation organizations with funding for projects including conservation of open space. The application period for the recreation and conservation grants opens the third Tuesday in January and closes the first Wednesday in April each year.

Posted on 29 Jul 2024, 8:42 - Category: Development

Pages: ... [10] [11] [12]