Whitemarsh Township commissioners hear 5 hours of testimony on Abolition Hall

Posted 8/23/18

by Brendan Sample With the debate over whether to allow a proposed townhouse development to be built on the property surrounding Abolition Hall having gone on for months, the Whitemarsh Township …

This item is available in full to subscribers.

Please log in to continue

Log in

Whitemarsh Township commissioners hear 5 hours of testimony on Abolition Hall

Posted

by Brendan Sample

With the debate over whether to allow a proposed townhouse development to be built on the property surrounding Abolition Hall having gone on for months, the Whitemarsh Township Board of Supervisors is getting closer to a final decision. After more than five hours of hearing from witnesses called by the Friends of Abolition Hall and statements from residents, the Board is on pace to begin its final deliberations when closing statements are given next month.

At issue is a conditional use permit that developer K. Hovnanian homes needs in order to begin construction of its planned 67-town-home plan. The developer also has an agreement of sale to buy the property contingent on the township’s approval.

Whatever decision the Board makes, it will do so without one of its members. Just before the hearing resumed on August 16, Vice Chair Melissa Sterling officially recused herself from the remainder of deliberations. She explained that her law firm has had direct involvement with Hovnanian, the developer behind the proposed townhouses. While none of the dealings have concerned the Abolition Hall development, Sterling chose to remove herself so as to ensure that the Board could be as objective as possible in its decision.

Picking up from last month’s meeting, FAH attorney Michael Fiorentino called four witnesses to the stand, including Friends convener Sydell Zove, who testified to the group’s overall involvement with the property since approximately 2006. Speaking as a fact witness instead of an expert and as the main witness for FAH, Zove expressed her concern over the potential loss of historical integrity, demolition by neglect and disregard of the wetlands on the property, among other issues.

“Conditional use is not a right, but a privilege,” Zove said. “The Friends of Abolition Hall never fought for no development on this property, but rather for better development.”

She also attempted to give testimony on several related documents, including a copy of the approved register of National Register of Historic Places for Plymouth Meeting, the real estate agreement for the sale of the property and several photos taken around the estate. After continued objection from Hovnanian attorney Julie Von Spreckelsen, however, Zove was not able to speak about the documents given her status as a fact witness, though several of them were still admitted into evidence.

During the public comments section later on in the hearing, Zove spoke in greater detail about her objections, criticizing Hovnanian for not giving proper examination to specific requirements of the conditional use it is seeking. Despite her concerns over the proposal as it currently stands, she also feels that there is room to develop a compromise. In addition to Hovnanian scaling back the amount of townhouses, Zove also cited the Township’s $9 million open space fund, which she felt could be used for certain fixes on the estate in conjunction with this development.

Another resident who criticized the developers for not doing prior research necessary for this project was David Miller, who also spoke out at last month’s meeting. He claimed that while Hovnanian may be adhering to the necessary zoning codes for the area, not adhering to the historical significance of the estate constituted a violation of code anyway. Miller ultimately suggested to both Hovnanian and the Board to drop any notion of an “all-or-nothing” development, as he felt that reducing the proposed townhouses by about a couple hundred feet would likely be enough for the objectors.

“There’s no improvement here,” Miller said of the plan, which was revised earlier this year. “This area has higher thresholds that have to be considered.”

Public comments overall were critical of the proposed townhouses and supportive of preserving the estate, with both residents and non-residents of Whitemarsh taking the stand to voice their concerns. Comments made were mainly about preserving the historic nature of the overall property, worries about stormwater management, damage to the wetlands, increased sinkhole problems and higher levels of traffic.

Both sides will have a chance to make their closing statements at the next meeting of the Whitemarsh Township Board of Supervisors, after which the Board will begin deliberating on its final decision. The meeting will be held on September 13 at 7 p.m. in the Township Large Meeting Room on 616 Germantown Pike.

Brendan Sample can be reached at brendan@chestnuthilllocal.com

news