Two of our members are burning up the editorial pages this week in Main Line Life! Our thanks to Main Line Life for reprint capability and as way of a footnote - Scott Zelov at the meeting the other night agreed to something we are still trying to get all details on - however, when this paper "went to bed" this news was not known and he was quoted in the Inquirer as was mentioned in one editorial. Also after this paper "went to bed", Lew Gould led the charge to have township land appraised prior to turning it over to Mr. Dranoff. So, it's a non-stop ever changing time in Lower Merion!

Let the board know what your vision for Ardmore should be
By Sharon Eckstein

Lower Merion Township is currently involved in contract negotiations with Dranoff Properties who was recently selected by the board of commissioners to be the developer of the Ardmore Redevelopment/Transit Center Project. This contract negotiation phase is one of critical importance; it sets the terms of the relationship with the developer, sets the parameters for the development project, and results in a binding legal document. The residents of Lower Merion deserve a place at the bargaining table since the township owned land parcels are being given to the developer, and as taxpayers this township owned land is really "our" land. Moreover, the terms of this contract will establish the framework for the Ardmore Redevelopment/Transit Center Project, a project that will forever alter Ardmore.The Save Ardmore Coalition (SAC) has always been troubled that the township has never set forth its vision for Ardmore. This is not only unfortunate but also misguided. How can we build when we have no clear goals? The following questions have frequently been posed by member of the community but have never been answered:

What is the redevelopment supposed to result in?

What is the end product? How many new residential units should be built?

How many new retail shops? How many more offices?

How many surface parking spaces must be maintained?

Why does Bryn Mawr have height maximums of three to four stories while Ardmore is permitted up to eight stories within 500 feet of the train station?

Why has the township avoided crafting a vision statement for Ardmore?

Why has there never been a master plan for Ardmore and its development?

The Save Ardmore Coalition (SAC) urges the board of commissioners to clearly delineate its vision for Ardmore now. This vision must be specific and clear. Our vision for Ardmore is one of thoughtful, phased, small scale development - buildings of three to four stories maximum height, retail that serves a resident population of diverse economic backgrounds, and that views Ardmore as a whole by evaluating the Ardmore Redevelopment/Transit Center Project together with the numerous other proposed projects in Ardmore at the Verizon Building, on Schauffele Plaza, on Athens Avenue, on Ardmore Avenue and on Cricket Avenue.

More questions remained unanswered. Why hasn't the township retained an independent planner to objectively assess and then determine how many new residences our infrastructure can support? Why are developers' needs and visions shaping the process rather than the vision of all stakeholders? The township's intention during the Ardmore RFP process has been to give the five publicly owned land parcels, currently used for surface parking, to the developer for free. Why would the township want to give away all available land immediately? Choosing to not give away all the land parcels at one time does not undermine development in Ardmore. In fact, it increases the likelihood of thoughtful future development because it enables greater flexibility and allows for more possibilities in the future.

All Ardmore stakeholders agree that the new train station should be built and understand that the $5.8 million federal earmark allocated to cover its cost will be lost if the township and SEPTA do not move forward on this project immediately. The federal earmark, as Rep. Gerlach has clearly noted in the past, is only to be used for a train station and not for private development purposes. Why hasn't our township focused on getting this station built? Why, instead, has the township focused its energy, and millions of taxpayer money, on the Ardmore Redevelopment Plan (which still has not resulted in anything being built)?

The Save Ardmore Coalition urges the township to enter into a contract with Dranoff Properties to develop the Bernicker Lot, which is next to the township building, and to build the train station. This contract must include SEPTA/AMTRAK since they are the official recipients of the federal earmark. The negotiated contract should only be for these sites at this time.

While Dranoff Properties is working on these projects, the township must be working on its vision for Ardmore and needs to clearly state what its desired end product is. Not one of us would retain a contractor to renovate our kitchen without telling him what we wanted the end result to look like. We also would not buy cabinets and appliances without first measuring our room to see what it could hold. Likewise, the township cannot pursue redevelopment of Ardmore without telling the community and the developer what it wants the end product to be. It cannot let developers develop projects without first determining what our infrastructure can support. Moreover, one would hope that the commissioners would want to craft a vision for Ardmore that reflects the desires of Ardmore residents and stakeholders as well as residents of Lower Merion. A town that retains its unique character, which has new buildings in scale with current ones, and that only develops in well thought out phases.

Since all Ardmore stakeholders believe that development in Ardmore must occur in phases, SAC believes that it logically follows to enter into a contract with Dranoff Properties that guarantees phased development concurrent with a visioning and planning process. Towards that end, the township should contract for the two projects of the train station and the Bernicker lot development only. After completion of these projects, the community together with the township can assess the impact of these projects on Ardmore. Also, by that time, the Ardmore community will have a clearer sense of the status of the six other residential and mixed use development proposals being pursued by the five other developers as well as the proposed development by Suburban Square of the Ruby's lot.

Now is the time for members of the Ardmore community, as well as those in the greater Lower Merion community, to share their thoughts about the proposed Ardmore Redevelopment/Transit Center Project and the terms of the contract with Dranoff Properties. This is your final chance to speak out. Do you want phased development? Do you want a stated vision for Ardmore? Do you want an assessment by an independent professional planner about what our infrastructure can support? Do you think that the number of new residential units to be built in Ardmore should be an arbitrary number set by developers or by the consensus of the community? We at SAC urge everyone to contact the Lower Merion Township Commissioners by e mail, telephone or letter and tell them what you want for Ardmore. Ask your elected representatives to further your vision for Ardmore during these upcoming weeks.

Sharon Eckstein is President of the Save Ardmore Coalition.

Posted on Tue, Apr 8, 2008
Take a stand for Bryn Mawr, it's the right thing to do
By Carla J. Zambelli

Like Ardmore when I was a kid, Bryn Mawr was a playground to be explored. We bought sandwiches and sodas at Mallory's Market and used to hang out at the diner that used to be next to Parvin's Pharmacy, as well as the other diner with the tin ceiling that today is Carmine's Creole. We couldn't wait to see the next movie at the Bryn Mawr Theater, and when we wanted to go somewhere like Ardmore, we took the train or walked. I used to explore the surrounding neighborhoods. Pennsylvania Avenue was a fabulous semi circle of houses, many with welcoming brick paths right to the front door from the sidewalk. Central Avenue and Summit Grove Avenue had different architecture and many of the homes were twins and rows. Most of the homes had great little gardens. In addition to the gardens, there were the other signs of life: the sounds of children playing outside, dogs barking, and adults speaking to each other over fences, front porches, and across their tiny, yet tidy lawns.

The rear of the Central Avenue homes on one side of the street spilled over into the municipal parking lot. You saw a row of fairly tidy back yards, and in the summer you saw lots of flowers including roses and flowering vines that tumbled happily over back fences, as well as the occasional laundry on a clothesline, bobbing away in a warm breeze as it dried.

Time progressed and along came the plans for a hospital's future. Now if you walk through these streets, you are greeted by a barren, almost jagged landscape. In the stillness you can hear the faint echoes of the past signs of life, but the reality is a very ghostly area.

The people that chose to remain on Central Avenue, no matter how few, should be left to live their lives as well as being protected. When they die, or become infirm, they should be allowed to pass their modest homes through their estate plans or wills to their legal heirs. If the heirs want to live in these homes, they should be allowed to. If they don't, at that point the hospital should be given first right of refusal if they are still interested in land acquisition.

Am I saying that all of the proposed zoning and plan for Bryn Mawr is bad? No, I am not. It just needs some tweaking.

Of course, since I normally advocate for Ardmore, I also wonder why Ardmore can't have a master plan? Why can't Ardmore have those modest heights of two three and four story buildings being proposed for Bryn Mawr? How can Bryn Mawr seemingly be called a "village"? It's quite maddening, actually, but that is a conversation for another day.

Vice President Maryam Phillips has proposed an amendment for the proposed Bryn Mawr Village Zoning District that is brilliant in its simplicity, and I urge every Lower Merion Township resident to tell the board of commissioners' Vice President Phillips' amendment must be included and not diluted. It would set a preferred best practice for the future, as well as perhaps some day restoring what has been removed: a residential neighborhood. It would also hopefully keep Central Avenue residential. As I understand it, this amendment would allow certain parcels of land around Central and Summit Grove avenues to revert to straight residential zoning (R6) if development plans fall through at some point in time in the future.

It's so simple, and so win for everyone. It gives the hospital an "out" if their plans change, and it provides a chance to hopefully accomplish something good in the future: to replace some of the housing that was removed via demolition over the past couple of years. Do I also believe that these plans and proposed zoning should have some dedicated affordable housing? Yes. And not merely as the incentive carrot for a developer rabbit who wants to take advantage of bonuses.

According to published newspaper reports, Commissioner Scott Zelov has said he will not support Commissioner Maryam Phillips' amendment. Commissioner Zelov, who has done many positive things during his brief tenure in office, has got this one wrong. He is wrong because he has no crystal ball for the future. Just because we can't see an eventuality, it doesn't mean we shouldn't plan appropriately just in case. Covering all bases is merely good planning.

Please stand up and support Maryam Phillips' amendment and perhaps, if you are of a mind to do so, ask that some of my suggestions be incorporated into the proposed zoning for Bryn Mawr. None of these suggestions will destroy a carefully crafted zoning plan, they will merely accent it like a welcome accessory does a new dress.

By supporting Commissioner Phillips in her amendment, we set a best practice that could perhaps help other communities struggling now and in the future. Yes, we value our hospital, but even more importantly, our communities are nothing without our historic diversity and our people.

Please, in the 11th hour, take a stand for Bryn Mawr. It's just the right thing to do.

Carla J. Zambelli writes an occasional column for Main Line Life.