Every time another meeting occurs on 130 Cricket Avenue, we all can't help but wonder why they don't just quit while they are ahead? And Jim Ettelson, have you no conscience? How could you represent our township as a political leader for so many years, and then this? Wasn't eminent domain enough?

So now neighbors wait to hear their fate. Will the Zoning Hearing Board hear what all of us have heard including commissioners and township staff? That 130 Cricket is an utterly ill advised plan that isn't about being altruistic, but is instead all about being opportunistic?

And listen up Cricket Avenue, while these last two meetings were going on, some of our members were in Cape May. Check out their photos. Ardmore, especially around Cricket and many of the neighboring streets have the bones to create a Victorian District. Wayne's neighborhoods have them and North Wayne is protected, so why not Ardmore? Why not create a Victorian District off the Historic Business District? Wouldn't that be a look more fitting for our Main Street Oriented town? keep on fighting Ardmore, after all, you don't want to happen to you what happened to the small neighborhoods of Bryn Mawr, and of course we hope Bryn Mawr wakes up to TRID sooner rather than later...and regarding TRID, this is NOT a new topic of dislike for SAC - we started writing about TRID in JUNE, 2005:

..."From the federal funds, to the TRID legislation, to the eminent domain component hidden in the Growing Greener initiative, these officials share responsibility and culpability.

TRID legislation (recently passed in PA), for example, should terrify anyone who lives near a train station. TRID (which stands for Transit Revitalization Investment District), which was recently enacted by the Pennsylvania State Legislature, enables municipalities to seize ANY property within a half mile of a railroad station by EMINENT DOMAIN, and then turn it over to developers for redevelopment. Ardmore is on the brink of being turned into an urban canyon, and it can happen ANYWHERE.

What can be done? Among other things, we need to change the faces of those who govern us as the opportunities arise from elections, AND in the interim, please contact your state, local and federal officials. Speak up at local meetings, whether in front of the local government officials or at a rally or civic association meeting. Write your newspapers..."

In Bryn Mawr, it doesn't matter if the township won't ever exercise eminent domain, we're not talking about them. We're talking about the railroads who are enabled through TRID to utilize eminent domain anywhere within a half mile of a train station. In Bryn Mawr, that could mean anywhere on either side of the tracks - Montgomery or Lancaster Aves. So unless Lower Merion Township gets SEPTA/AMTRAK or whomeever in the future to waive their right to exercise eminent domain in a legal agreement, it could happen. It is utterly irrelevent that it may or may not ever happen, it is the point that it could happen. Why allow eminent domain wiggle room? This is within the Township's control if they choose to exercise that control, right? If progress doesn't need to occur in Ardmore with eminent domain, then it doesn't need to occur in Bryn Mawr either. How quickly some folks forget that implied eminent domain, or even the ability to exercise it is just as bad as actually having it occur...

Here's the latest on As The Cricket Turns:

Pushing the envelope on Cricket Ave.
By Cheryl Allison

The long summer of the Cricket Avenue condo case is over, but it will be close to Thanksgiving before the outcome is known.Lower Merion's zoning board wrapped up hearings in the Ardmore matter Sept. 6.... A decision is due 45 days later, or around Nov. 15.

To recap: Development partners Craig Snider and Mark Weiss of Wayne are seeking a special exception under a provision of the zoning code for subsidized apartment housing. They would tear down the large Victorian house on the one-acre lot at 130 Cricket Ave. and build a three-story, 37-unit condominium building.

That's about three times the number of units permissible under the property's R-6A zoning. To earn the greater density, they plan to offer 19 of the units to eligible first-time home-buyers under a state mortgage program.

They say the project follows Smart Growth principles in its proximity to a transit hub at the Ardmore train station, and could help meet a need for moderate-income "workforce" housing in pricey Lower Merion.

Township officials, however, have questioned whether the proposal follows the spirit, or even the letter, of the law. At $320,000 for a one-bedroom unit, are the condos "affordable housing?" There's nothing in the state program the developers are using to guarantee they will remain so, although Smider and Weiss last week proposed some deed restrictions to address that issue.

There's also the matter of a separation requirement for subsidized housing projects. The code requires a distance of 1,000 feet, to reduce the impact of increased density and a reduced parking requirement on a particular neighborhood.

Snider and Weiss revised their plans last month to move the building back to a point exactly 1,000 feet from an affordable housing project at Spring Avenue and Simpson Road. The township maintains that the 1,000 feet should be measured from property line to property line. The developers' attorneys point out that the code does not specify the measurement....Dr. Patricia Sandiford owns the more than century-old twin and triplex buildings at 124 and 126 Cricket Ave. An engineering consultant she hired to review the plans, Joseph Gracci, saw numerous flaws.

For example, a calculation of impervious surface does not include the roof overhangs of the condo building, which, as the plans were submitted, was barely under the maximum impervious allowance. Graccie said other omissions in the calculations could boost the actual impervious cover even higher.

An emergency exit from the underground garage would open at the bottom of a driveway ramp with an average 15-percent grade. Another would open into a narrow side yard buffer, where no sidewalk is shown, also raising an issue of accessibility. Adding space to make those exits more accessible would add more paved surface, Gracci suggested.....But Gracci went on to testify that stresses from the new development could structurally damage Sandiford's older buildings. And he raised other questions whether the plans meet parking and other code requirements.

In their statements, neighbors and other community residents focused on the issues of affordability, the loss of the Victorian house and historic neighborhood character, and traffic and parking.

It's unrealistic, they said, to believe that all the residents of the new condos - market rate and subsidized - will only keep one car....Vicky Rodgers lives on adjacent School Lane... said she was also concerned about the developers' claims of affordable housing. Her two sons are volunteer firefighters at the station. One told her, "Mom, I have a good job, but I could never afford to buy this."

Cricket Avenue neighbor Kim Andrews, a former board member of Lower Merion Affordable Housing, pointed out that the neighborhood "is affordable housing now. We're all living in affordable housing."....Lori Salganicoff, historic preservation coordinator for the Lower Merion Conservancy, said the project will change the character of the neighborhood so significantly that the organization has placed 130 Cricket Ave. at No. 4 on its annual "preservation watch list,"....In this case, Chairman Kenneth Aaron and member Robert Fox, who have heard the Cricket Avenue case throughout the summer, were blunt.

On various issues, from impervious surface totals to whether the project meets fair housing laws, "Your testimony is 'We can do it and we will do it, but you haven't shown me anything that shows that," Fox told the developers.

Aaron reminded them their architect had said he could sketch mock-ups of the apartment units "within a day," but they had not asked him to provide the drawings. "I'm flabbergasted," he said.

And once again, a neighbors' recap from Cricket Ave homeowner Patricia Bedard, who has shown great courage in speaking her mind, because everyone at SAC knows it is hard to do:

After all of these months and many hours of listening to the applicant’s testimony, the basic questions regarding this proposed project are still very much at issue. I would like to recap the major issues regarding the neighborhood’s position.

Can this project even honestly be considered affordable housing in the first place? Condominiums priced at $320,000 are not considered affordable housing in most communities, and certainly not in south Ardmore. The fact that these properties can be sold at market value within a few years makes them even less so. It is very clear that the developers are abusing the spirit of true affordable housing in a community to simply increase the density of the project to unfairly maximize their profits. When someone like our commissioner, Maryam Phillips, who has been an ardent and tireless supporter of affordable housing in Ardmore for more than a decade, opposes an affordable housing project in south Ardmore, the project has some very serious flaws.

Lets say hypothetically that we can actually stretch the definition of affordable housing to include this project!

There is still the issue that this project falls within 1,000 feet of other subsidized housing projects. We can splinter that definition 100 different ways, at the end of the day, the townships intent was that all of these projects fall under those guidelines. We know this because the commissioners sent the Township Solicitor to verify that claim on their behalf and the Township’s Director of Building and Planning has also done so. The Township, along with the neighborhood and entire community, has come out against this project. The only supporter from the Ardmore Initiative is a real estate agent who stands to significantly gain financially from the sale of this real estate.

What would the impact of this project be to the neighborhood, the community and the township?

Tearing down a classic, late 19th century Queen Anne Victorian duplex, very characteristic for the neighborhood, housing about 4 people and replacing it with a large, densely-built three-story structure, completely out of scale for the neighborhood, housing 70 plus residents, will have a significantly detrimental impact to the character, traffic, congestion, water run-off and overall general quality of life in and around Ardmore. That is nearly 20 times the number of people living in that same space currently! And that situation is likely to deteriorate even further by opening the door for these developers to do much the same along other sections of Cricket and Ardmore Avenues.

Complicating matters even further, Cricket Ave. is a narrow road with bus traffic and parking only along one side of the street. Parking is already a significant issue for this neighborhood. Who could better define the traffic implications to Cricket Avenue? The applicant’s paid legal “expert” who counts cars for 15 minutes two separate days at 4pm and 6:45pm (off peak, non-the less) and doesn’t know which side of the street allows parking, or the people who have lived on the street for decades and have had to cope with the rush-hour traffic and significant parking issues that already exist? The law would probably say the former; logic would definitely pick the latter. The legal profession is the only one I know that hirers “experts” to distort the truth under the guise of looking for it.

The notion that you can multiply the population on a double lot by 20 without a devastating impact to traffic, parking and overall quality of life to residents is absolutely ludicrous. And the idea that people buying $300,000 to $500,000 luxury condos will not have multiple cars is ridiculous. Where will the 50 plus extra cars be parked on a street already short of parking space? And where would their guests park? The liability to the township would significantly increase. With all those people and cars, and more likely on the way, accidents would surely escalate, particularly with buses trying to make it down that narrow street. It would be disastrous.

We do not believe that the applicants have made their case and everyone, from the neighbors, to the community to the entire township, vehemently oppose this project. The residents of Ardmore are unanimous. This project would completely and unfairly destroy the neighborhoods quality of life and our treasured, centuries-old neighborhood for nothing more than the unfair exploitation of our neighborhood for the excessive personal financial gain of these developers.

And an endnote? Lower Merion isn't the only township with development woes as a proposed nightmare on Lancaster will be coming to Paoli:

Despite protest, Tredyffrin approves Paoli zoning
By Daniel Kristie

Despite heavy opposition from Paoli residents, the Tredyffrin Supervisors voted 6-1 at a public hearing on Monday night to enact the new Paoli zoning, which, they hope, will transform the town into a walkable village with easy access to public transit.

Supervisor Mark DiFeliciantonio (D, at-large) cast the only no vote.

Once again, outsiders know better than residents. This project isn't about community betterment is it? Isn't it only about someone else's profit and the ratables a couple townships will earn at preexisting residents' expense?

Well not according to the editorial in the Suburban and Wayne Times. This editorial from a neighborhood newspaper struck a sour note with us when they said:

...Officials from Tredyffrin and neighboring Willistown have invested countless hours planning the rehab. It’s time to move forward. The new zoning is a step in the right direction.

Progress shouldn't feel like a community and neighborhoods and residents are being punished. Progress should be an equal, open, and honest partnership. Along the Main Line, are concerned citizen getting as good as they are giving?

Final parting shot? Up and down the Main Line, it's election season. If you don't like what is happening, change the face of who governs you. Don't just sit on your sofas and embrace complacency. Be an advocate for positive change. You pay taxes, right? You Vote, right? Who cares if you are or aren't a millionaire. In the confines of the voting booth we are all equal.

Pax.