Pattye Benson

Community Matters

Tredyffrin Township

Tredyffrin Township Needs an Economic ‘Call for Action’ From its Elected Officials

August 2, 2011
5 Comments

Nearly 6 months ago on February 2, 2011, I wrote a post called, ‘Another Store Closing in Tredyffrin . . . A Suggestion for a Business Task Force’. The post detailed another store closing its doors; at the time, it was Tuesday Morning. This post was written immediately following the supervisor interviews for the appointment of an interim supervisor (to fill vacated Warren Kampf’s seat). One of the reasons I wrote the post was that I was struck by the fact that in the interview process, all the supervisor candidates listed economic development as one of the most important issues facing the township. Here is an excerpt from the February 3, 2011 post on Community Matters:

In light of the many empty storefronts in the township, the supervisors listed attracting new businesses at the top of the challenge list. I agree that encouraging new business growth is essential but equally important, is how can we support the businesses that we have?

I wonder if a township business task force would help . . . a volunteer group of local retired executives, small business owners, and corporate representatives. The group would meet monthly with a mission to spearhead ways to improve existing relationships and provide assistance and a resource for township businesses. This important support group for the business community could provide regular updates and suggestions to the Board of Supervisors. Just an idea . . .

Subsequent to this post, I had further discussions with several of the township supervisors on the creation of a task force to help our small businesses and to encourage new corporate business development in the township. At the April 4, 2011 Board of Supervisors meeting, supervisor Phil Donahue made a motion for an ‘Economic Development Committee’, which would include himself and supervisors Michelle Kichline and Mike Heaberg. The motion was seconded by supervisor Paul Olson and passed unanimously. Here are the relevant township minutes from the supervisors meeting which detailed the committee:

Mr. Donahue made a motion to form an Economic Development Committee, to pull together information, gather facts, and begin a dialog putting our best foot forward and creating the right environment for Tredyffrin. Mr. Olson seconded the motion.

Ms. Kichline said she, Mr. Donahue and Mr. Heaberg would recruit members of the business community and surrounding regions to serve on the committee, which would advise the entire Board on the role and scope for where we want to go with large and small businesses. Mr. Heaberg said we are looking for creative strategic thinkers in the community.

Resident Carlotta Johnston-Pugh said she didn’t see a lot of diversity in the community and thought this would bring more companies to the Township as well as residents. Mr. Donahue said the first step will be having an opportunity to discuss ideas like that with residents. At the end of discussion, motion passed.

It has been 4 months since the supervisors passed the motion to create the Economic Development Committee. I attend all the supervisors meetings and in checking meeting minutes, I could find no further reference to this committee. Understanding that there may be ‘behind the scenes’ movement on the Economic Development Committee my supervisors, I would still ask what is the status of the committee? Besides supervisors Donohue, Kichline and Heaberg, who are the members of the committee? How often do they meet and what is their mission?

In my early discussions with supervisors, I had suggested that the committee needed to include a balance of small business owners, corporate representatives and interested members of the community. As a small business owner and former member of the Paoli Business & Professional Association Board of Directors, like many other residents, I have a stake in the development and encouragement of our business community. As is the case in many parts of this country, we have seen little improvement in our economic climate and our community needs a grassroots effort to help our businesses succeed and to encourage new growth and development.

I was prompted to write today’s post by an article in the Philadelphia Business Journal, www.bizjournals.com . Newtown Borough in Bucks County is looking at various ways to help their struggling businesses and will hold a roundtable discussion to brainstorm ideas. Council members in Newtown are optimistic that the roundtable will open up communication between the residents, business owners and elected officials. I was optimistic that Tredyffrin’s Economic Development Committee would provide a similar type of forum for our community that would include residents, corporate representatives and small business owners in the discussion.

It is so disheartening to hear of more and more businesses failing – leaving empty office buildings and storefronts in the wake. In addition to an update on the Economic Development Committee, I would also like a status report on the Paoli Transportation Center. A few weeks ago, I wrote of the train station and was given the impression from our State Rep Warren Kampf, Willistown, and Tredyffrin township supervisors that the transportation center remains a priority. If the project is a priority, I believe that the community should expect an update.

Economic development in Tredyffrin Township needs to be more than political campaign promises . . . the decline of our business community is a serious issue and we need help to stabilize and save our community. Should we hold our elected officials accountable? Or, . . . do you think that the severity of the economic situation is beyond the scope of township supervisors? Can local officials make a difference with our local economic climate? My answer to the last question — is that they need to try.

With last week’s unexpected closing of Jake’s Frozen Custard in Paoli after only 10 months, I was again reminded of the fragileness of our economic environment. Our elected officials – local and state – need to help save our existing small businesses and encourage development and growth of new business in the township. These are not passing problems that somehow time will magically erase. Previously, I volunteered to serve on the Economic Development Committee and I am confident I could get many more to help – we just need direction.

The next Board of Supervisors meeting is on Monday, August 15. I am sending a copy of this post to our township supervisors and State Representative requesting that the community receive an update on the Paoli Transportation Center project and on the township’s Economic Development Committee. I am asking for an economic ‘call for action’ from our elected officials.

Tredyffrin: Open for Business . . . and Closed

July 29, 2011
17 Comments

The economy is taking its toll on businesses across America and unfortunately, locally we are not immune. There is such joy when we see signs of growth and development in the area retail and restaurant market but a sense of sadness when we see the closed signs. It is particularly tough if you know the owner and developed a relationship with one of these entrepreneurs who dared take the journey in spite of the economic warning signs.

Such is the case for me with Jake’s Frozen Custard in the Paoli Village Shoppes and owner Missy Shaw. With enthusiasm and Midwestern charm, Missy opened Jake’s 10 months ago and this week a ‘closed’ sign hangs on the door. Missy’s smile and good humor was contagious . . . her spirit (and her frozen custard) will be missed!

If Jake’s closing has you looking for respite from the summer sun, remember other local favorites Whirled Peace and Rita’s Water Ice in Paoli and Handel’s Ice Cream in Berwyn.

Another Paoli business that opened with fanfare last year but recently closed it doors — Doggie Style, a boutique-type pet supply shop in the Paoli Shopping Center . . . don’t know if it saw it’s first anniversary.

However, there are some openings in Paoli to report – Shoppe Flare, specializing in gifts and monogrammed items, opened on Lancaster Avenue across from the Paoli Village Shoppes. Re-Max Realty on Lancaster Avenue is now sharing space with a new Dunkin’ Donuts store. The newly opened store with a drive-through window is only a couple of blocks from the existing Dunking Donuts. According to the manager of the new store, the same person owns the two locations. Until the lease runs out on the old store across from the train station next year, both locations will be open.

If you have driven down Rt. 252 in Devon lately, you will notice much activity in the Valley Fair shopping center. The construction on the new McKenzie’s microbrewery is well underway. Retrofitting the old Charlie Brown’s restaurant, McKenzie’s is planning a September opening — we’ll have to wait and see if they meet their planned timeline. In the same shopping center, the new Mealey’s furniture store is also moving forward in their construction.

The long empty box store that housed Linens & Things in Devon may have a new tenant. The interior of the store has recently been gutted and new checkout counters installed . . . no more specifics, although a hopeful reader suggested maybe a Bottom Dollar grocery store. Speaking of the Bottom Dollar grocery store chain, remember for a while the Chesterbrook residents thought that Bottom Dollar was headed for the empty Genuardi’s space. Although the Bottom Dollar deal fell through other rumored tenants have surfaced, including a farmer’s market and recently a Movie Tavern. A fun concept with a full bar and food menu (plus movies) this idea for the Genuardi’s space is also ‘dead on arrival’. Apparently, the prospective Movie Tavern developer did not think that Chesterbrook shopping center provided sufficient visibility. (If you are interested, a Movie Tavern recently opened to rave reviews in Collegeville).

There are new rumors swirling for the old Duffy’s catering property in Daylesford. If you recall, a controversial high-density mixed use development plan by developer ARC Wheeler failed to win public support in 2007 and the property has remained vacant and undeveloped. Apparently, there is new discussion for the 13-acre site – nothing firm yet but I have heard assisted living or retirement center development plans.

As of last month, the Whole Foods in Devon is now selling beer for take-out and in their new Mile Post Pub. Looks like a new Starbucks location for Devon . . . Township planning commissioners reviewed a sketch plan for the construction of a Starbucks and drive-thru in the Devon Village Shopping Center at last week’s planning commission meeting.

A different kind of ‘closing’ occurred in Mt. Pleasant on July 21. Ruled accidental by Tredyffrin police, a fire totally destroyed the playground equipment at Mazie Hall Park. An early estimate of $60,000 in damage, the township playground is insured. Looking ahead to a timeline for repairs and a new ‘opening’ for the local residents, a meeting was held last night with township staff, supervisors and Mt. Pleasant representatives. Sean Moir, chair of Parks and Recreation attended the meeting and provided the following update from the meeting:

There was a meeting tonight between township officials and Mt. Pleasant community leaders to discuss the Mazie B. Hall tot lot fire. Paul Olson, Michelle Kichline, Mimi Gleason, Dean Wilkins, and myself were representing the township.

The township has filed an insurance claim . . . The Park Board has been asked to come up with replacement options for the community. Once the options have been compiled, they will be presented to the community and we will try to provide the best affordable solution.

It’s hard to predict the timing since we don’t know when the insurance company will get back to us.

Here’s hoping that the insurance company can move quickly to settle the case and get the playground at Mazie Hall Park ‘open for business’.

T/E School District Offers Explanation of Conestoga’s Omission from Newsweek’s ‘Best High Schools in America’ Rankings

July 26, 2011
17 Comments

Following-up on Newsweek’s listing of America’s best high schools; I emailed an excerpt from my Community Matters post to TESD administration, school board members and to Karen Cruickshank, president of the board. I asked for comment or explanation of why Conestoga High School was missing from the Newsweek best high schools in America list when neighboring high schools (Lower Merion, Radnor, Great Valley, etc.) were listed.

There has been a response from the school district and from Karen Cruickshank. Like many of us, Karen too was disappointed that Conestoga was not on the Newsweek list and volunteered that she had received phone calls from realtors asking the same question as to ‘why’. She assures me that the error will be corrected and that T/E will participate in the Newsweek high school survey next year.

To offer an explanation as to why Conestoga High School was not included in this year’s ‘best of the best’ rankings by Newsweek, Karen sent the following response she received from T/E administration:

I am writing to respond to the message concerning the Newsweek Best High Schools List. As you are aware, Conestoga was not included in this year’s Newsweek list of “America’s Best High Schools.” In following up with Newsweek, we learned that an email was sent in mid-May to all secondary schools requesting information. The email, Newsweek explained, was sent to a Conestoga High School counselor. The counselor, however, reported that the email was not received. We subsequently sent our data to Newsweek, and we would have placed around #100 on the list based upon their calculations. We have since corrected the Newsweek contact information to ensure that we are included in its analysis in future years.

Althoughk nowing why Conestoga HS did not appear on this year’s Newsweek rankings may not satisfy everyone, it does help explain the omission.

According to the administration, the Newsweek email was not received by the school district. After the fact, the school district did submit Conestoga’s survey data to Newsweek but apparently did not make the submission deadline. Additionally, the administration offers that Conestoga should have “placed around #100”. Since the data was public when sent to Newsweek, I will ask the school board to provide the submitted information. Conestoga’s statistical data will be posted when I receive it.

Regardless of how you feel about rankings, it’s the world we live in . . . whether you are looking at colleges or finding a doctor, some of us find the information useful in making decisions.

Township Board & Commission Vacancies . . . Appointments Without Partisan Politics

July 21, 2011
4 Comments

Last night was the first meeting of the township’s new Historical Commission. The seven members of the HARB (Historical Architecture Review Board) were appointed to the Historical Commission. The new commission was established with nine members.

A Community Matters reader reminded me that I should advertise the two vacancies on the Historical Commission. We need one of the positions to be filled by a certified architect and the other would be for someone with a background/interest in historic preservation, history or archeology. I and three other Historical Commission members are working on a Chester County historic resource mapping project which has been fun – we’re locating and identifying all properties that are 75 years or older in the township, that were not included in the historic resource survey the HARB did 6 years ago. Unfortunately, we have discovered a number of the historic resources no longer exist.

If I am going to name the vacancies on the Historical Commission, I thought it would be good to review all the boards and commissions in the township . . . and see where there are other vacancies. Municipal boards, commissions and advisory committees exist to further the township’s success through the volunteer participation of citizens in the daily business of community government.

The following vacancies currently exist in the township. If you visit the township website, www.tredyffrin.org you can read the requirements and mission of each of these boards.

  • Cable TV Advisory Committee (CATV) – 1 vacancy
  • Environmental Advisory Committee (EAC) – 1 vacancy
  • Historical Commission – 2 vacancies, (one position is for certified architect)
  • Municipal Authority – 2 vacancies

How does the process work for board appointments? I assume that my appointment to HARB (and now the Historical Commission) is similar to other boards/commissions. If you are interested in serving and have the background, experience or skill requirement you send a resume and letter of interest to the township at tredyffrin@tredyffrin.org . The supervisors are notified of your interest and an interview time is scheduled. It has been awhile ago, but I think there were 4 supervisors at my interview.

I want to believe that all board appointments are made for the right reason. Appointments on boards and commissions should go to those that are best qualified to serve in that position. In the past, there has been talk of partisan appointments to some of the township boards. In response to this kind of discussion, I have deferred to the HARB (now Historical Commission) and its members. Historic preservation is very specific and those that serve are passionate about the history of the community and its historic resources. As an example, our group has always been without the bias of partisan politics.

However, is the policy of nonpartisan appointments the same if you want to volunteer for other township boards, such as the Zoning Hearing Board or the Planning Commission? In my world, I would hope that the Board of Supervisors would treat applicants equally and choose the best qualified candidate, regardless of their political party affiliation. There should be a sense of fairness to the board and commission appointments. Citizens should apply and feel they have an equal opportunity to serve on any board or commission, regardless of their political affiliation.

If they are the most qualified and have a willingness to serve, all citizens should be welcomed. If any of these vacancies appeal to you, I would encourage you to submit your resumes. It is a wonderful way to volunteer and help your community.

Tredyffrin’s proposed sidewalk amendment is separate and apart from St. Davids Golf Club sidewalks . . . so agree Supervisors Heaberg, DiBuonaventuro and Kichline

July 19, 2011
7 Comments

I think that we’re making progress on the sidewalk saga of St. Davids Golf Club. Last night’s Board of Supervisors meeting marked the first of multi-public hearings planned to review the township’s proposed sidewalk amendment change to the land development ordinance.

If you recall, sidewalk discussion in the township began 19 months ago (December 2009) over St. Davids Golf Club and their pre-existing land development agreement to build sidewalks. Although the Planning Commission had repeatedly rejected appeals by the country club not to build the sidewalks contained in their agreement with the township, some supervisors did not support the building of the sidewalks. At that time, there was much heated debate between supervisors and residents, including the threat of a lawsuit against the township. Less than favorable headlines marked this dark time in Tredyffrin history.

Because of the turmoil created by the St. Davids sidewalk issue, a special sidewalk subcommittee was formed which met monthly for over a year. The subcommittee gathered public input, held public meetings and conducted a resident survey. They reviewed the “Green Routes Network”, pedestrian and bicycle network and applicable sidewalks requirements.

I attended the sidewalks subcommittee meetings and the group unanimously approved to send their recommendations to the Board of Supervisors. Their recommendations (including the sidewalks at St. Davids) were presented to the Board of Supervisors – earlier this year, the supervisors voted unanimously to accept the recommendations of the sidewalk subcommittee.

The supervisors asked the Planning Commission to review the sidewalk subcommittee recommendations and create a new sidewalk amendment for the land development ordinance. After Planning Commission input, the proposed sidewalk amendment was sent back to the supervisors for discussion through a public hearing, which brings us to last night.

I should mention that supervisors Phil Donahue and Bob Lamina were absent for last night’s supervisors meeting and public hearing. As vice chair of the Board of Supervisors, Paul Olson presided over the meeting and the public hearing. Mimi Gleason presented a slide presentation on the proposed sidewalk amendment as an overview before turning it over the supervisors for questions and comments.

First to offer his comments, Mike Heaberg remarked that he was of the opinion that the ordinance change should only affect prospective land development agreements, not pre-existing land development agreements. John DiBuonaventuro agreed with Heaberg, suggesting that the amendment change should focus on future projects. Likewise, Michelle Kichline agreed with Heaberg and DiBuonaventuro. EJ Richter did not state an opinion on this issue but Olson repeatedly commented that sidewalks cost taxpayers money. Olson asked Steve Burgo how many additional miles of sidewalks could be built in the township, and followed that question with how much would it cost to build the sidewalks. Gleason quickly injected that the sidewalks would only be built as areas are developed and included in land development agreements. She explained that taxpayers do not pay for the sidewalks – sidewalks are part of subdivision and non-residential land development plans and developers are responsible for those costs.

It was as if Olson did not understand Gleason or refused to accept her information. The entire sidewalk amendment discussion continued to be laced with Olson’s talking about ‘sidewalks to nowhere’ and that there were better uses of taxpayer money, etc. It was then the public’s turn to speak.

Tory Snyder, who chaired the sidewalk subcommittee and is a member of the planning commission, very succinctly explained the Green Routes network and how the sidewalks, bicycle paths and trails fit into the overall master plan of the township. Although it was clear from Snyder that developers pay the cost of sidewalks, etc. in their land development agreements, Olson refused to accept the information and continued to remark about the state of the economy and that taxpayers could not afford to pay for sidewalks.

It was frustrating to listen to the discussion of supervisors and then members of the public of the pros and cons of sidewalks in the township – it was as if time had stood still and we were back in December of 2009, rehashing it all over again. The only difference between December 2009 and July 2011 is that no one mentioned the ‘elephant in the room’ – the sidewalks at St. Davids.

Heaberg, DiBuonaventuro and Kichline stated, that they were of the opinion that the proposed sidewalk amendment change should be for prospective development only, but did not specifically use the words ‘St. Davids’. Although there are currently eight open land development projects in the township (which include sidewalks in their agreement) clearly, St. Davids is the long-standing open sidewalk issue, stemming back years and what many believe is the impetus to amend the township’s sidewalk ordinance.

Unable to sit any longer, I needed clarification – specifically on the St. Davids sidewalk issue. I asked and received confirmation from DiBuonaventuro, Heaberg and Kichline that their opinion was that the sidewalks at St. Davids were separate and apart from the proposed sidewalk amendment. Kichline clarified further that the eight open land development projects (including St. Davids) would not be affected by the proposed amendment change. These supervisors reiterated that the proposed sidewalk amendment should be for prospective developments, not pre-existing agreements.

I then turned by question about St. Davids sidewalk to Olson and Richter. Olson repeated that these sidewalks at St. Davids were ‘sidewalks to nowhere’ and that people didn’t want them. He further suggested to me that would not it be better to take the money for the sidewalks at St. Davids and give it to the fire company. At this point, Kichline jumped in to tell Olson that his suggestion was ‘illegal’ – you cannot transfer money from one organization to another.

I prefaced my question to Richter by pointing out, that as a member of the sidewalk subcommittee, that she voted in favor of the subcommittee’s recommendations which included sidewalks at St. Davids. Her response was that she viewed that recommendation as a ‘starting point’. When I pressed her about the sidewalks at St. Davids, her response was that she was ‘neutral’. What does that mean? You believe either that St. Davids sidewalks should be considered in the proposed ordinance change or you do not. As I suggested to her, a ‘yes or no’ response was what I was looking for – but I received ‘neutral’.

So where do we stand on this topic? Summing up, the eight pre-existing land development agreements should be separate and apart as agreed by DiBuonaventuro, Heaberg and Kichline. No was from Olson and a ‘neutral’ from Richter. I asked the supervisors where we go with this and Kichline offered that she thought that Phil Donahue and Bob Lamina should weigh in at the August meeting.

The August BOS meeting will mark 20 months since this saga began and I think we are all ready for final resolution. I would like to see (1) a vote that the proposed sidewalk amendment is for prospective development only (the eight pre-existing land development agreements are separate from this amendment) and (2) a vote to enforce the construction of sidewalks contained in the pre-existing land development agreements.

It has been years since St. Davids Golf Club signed the land development agreement with the township and now the conditions of the contract need to be enforced. As a community, we need to close this chapter!

Kudos to Kichline, DiBuonaventuro and Heaberg . . . great progress last night and I am looking forward to final resolution in August.

Is Tolling 422 the ‘Only’ Solution to Traffic Nightmare?

July 18, 2011
3 Comments

Tolling of 422 continues to be a topic of discussion. A few days ago, Barry Seymour,Executive Director of the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission (DVRPC) wrote an editorial with claims that tolling is the best option to improve 422 traffic problems. This article reconfirms Seymour’s presentation last month to Gov. Corbett’s Transportation Funding Advisory Commission.

Here’s some interesting statistics from Seymour’s editorial:

About 65,000 commuters drive each day between Royersford and Collegeville; and within the next 25 years, that number will increase by 44 percent to over 93,000 commuters. Today, the average 422 commuter spends the equivalent of two weeks vacation stuck in traffic; by 2035, without additional capacity, time wasted will grow to the equivalent of four weeks, and the road will be in gridlock.

Seymour claims that 422 improvements will cost $700 million in improvements over the next decade and laments that few options are available for funding. With the Federal government dollars decreasing and PennDOT’s budget of $243 million over the next 8 years, what alternatives remain? If you support Seymour’s theory, you quickly conclude that tolling 422 is about the only way that to improve the daily commuter nightmare.

Because the Transportation Funding Advisory Commission will be finalizing and delivering its recommended plan to Corbett by Aug. 1, Seymour likewise is continuing to put forth his case. Expected in the plan will be a recommendation for a local taxation authority dedicated to specific roads in a given region. The idea of a local multi-county taxation authority is to direct funding for local improvements.

According to Seymour, “ . . . By 2035, a commuter who travels the full distance on the expressway would save more than 40 minutes daily or about $7,000 per year in travel time value.” With the clock counting down to the deadline for the governor’s Transportation Funding Advisory Commission, Seymour needs to make sure he has a voice in Harrisburg.

To read Seymour’s editorial, click here.

QVC Cancels Jane Fonda’s Appearance . . . Is Forgiveness Ever Possible?

July 18, 2011
27 Comments

It may have been almost 40 years, but what is the saying, “a picture is worth a thousand words”.

Jane Fonda continues to feel the sting for her anti-Vietnam War behavior of the 1960s and 70s. During a 1972 visit to Hanoi in North Vietnam, Fonda made radio broadcasts critical of US war policy. While there, controversial photographs showed her sitting atop a Viet Cong anti-aircraft gun. The photos angered Vietnam War supporters and US veterans and earned her the name ‘Hanoi Jane’.

It may have been forty years since Fonda outraged many with her anti-war antics but some have never forgotten. Although Fonda has expressed regret in the intervening years for those 1972 images, we learned this weekend that her apologies might not have translated into forgiveness. The day before her Saturday appearance, Chester County based QVC cancelled Fonda’s scheduled appearance due to the “extremist” pressure from political groups and threats to boycott the cable shopping show. After viewers called to protest the appearance of Jane Fonda on QVC, the show cancelled her scheduled appearance.

On her website (www.janefonda.com) Fonda writes of the QVC cancellation, saying —

“I was to have been on QVC today to introduce my book, “Prime Time,” about aging and the life cycle. The network said they got a lot of calls yesterday criticizing me for my opposition to the Vietnam War and threatening to boycott the show if I was allowed to appear. I am, to say the least, deeply disappointed that QVC caved to this kind of insane pressure by some well funded and organized political extremist groups. And that they did it without talking to me first.

I have never shied away from talking about this as I have nothing to hide. . . I love my country. I have never done anything to hurt my country or the men and women who have fought and continue to fight for us. I do not understand what the far right stands to gain by continuing with these myths. I am deeply grateful for all of the support I have been getting since this happened, including from my Vietnam Veterans friends.”

QVC is about making money – initially they thought an appearance on their cable-shopping network by Jane Fonda would register as sales. However, when faced with the possible boycott of their shopping channel (translated that could mean loss of revenue), QVC bowed to the pressure and cancelled Fonda’s appearance. According to many who support Fonda, QVC’s decision was based on demands from conservative political groups. Was this the right call by QVC to cancel Fonda’s appearance?

We preach forgiveness to our children but what about Jane Fonda . . . is forgiveness possible for her.

Community Matters © 2025 Frontier Theme