Op/Ed: Chadds Ford as defendant unfair

This is very concerning. A big developer and their experienced and costly legal team working for months and years is not a fair match to a township and community who are trying their best to protect their resident's health, safety and wellness from a plan that was proposed and put together well over ten years ago. How could a hearing being held in 30 days be considered fair? Does that seem like enough time to fairly represent why our township does not think that this is in the best interest of anyone who uses our roads? Why would anyone think that Chadds Ford would not be an integral party necessary to sign off on this. A big developer and their legal team's objective is not necessarily to do what is the best interest of Chadds Ford Township and appreciate our Chadds Ford Supervisor's commitment to protecting our community and all who travel through. I sincerely hope that the Judge will give an opportunity for our community members to share how they think and feel on this massive shopping center and gigantic road expansion bound to change everything about our health and safety. Please join your neighbors on Chadds Ford Neighbors Against More Traffic and consider joining the 350 other neighbors who have signed the change.org petition and given their heartfelt sentiments against this dated, dangerous and unwanted shopping center and huge Ridge Road six lane expansion.

Carolyn Cavallo Daniels
Chadds Ford Township
Original Chadds Ford Live article:
https://chaddsfordlive.com/2017/07/26/chadds-ford-now-a-defendant/

 

 

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (4 votes, average: 4.00 out of 5)
Loading...

Comments

comments

One Response to “Op/Ed: Chadds Ford as defendant unfair”

  1. singert says:

    Pettinaro wants to bypass Chadds Ford Township’ Approval ?

    I’ve been sitting here at Concord Township’s supervisors’ meetings for the past three months contemplating or just how this Court Case is going to end up. Applicant Pettinaro’s 2008 Application for development of property at the corner of Ridge Rd and 202 has one of it’s two entrances on Ridge Rd. Because of the proximity to Chadds Ford Township and the direct access down Ridge Rd , the Application to Concord Township additionally required the endorsement of Chadds Ford Township. Chadds Ford Township’s participation in the approval process is warranted, given this Development’s considerable impact on traffic volumes up and down Ridge Rd into such intersections as Ridge & Heyburn, Heyburn & Baltimore Pike and Ridge & Ring. For commercial gains Pettinaro has chosen to take advantage of the intersection of Ridge and 202 despite regional impacts. The Developer has one goal and that is to make the development as commercially viable as possible, that’s his business.

    So we need a rational to eliminate Chadds Ford out as a hurtle to Final Approvals, let’s try that they tacitly approved the development over the years by signing off on various engineering documents unrelated to the subject of traffic impact. Therefore why would Chadds Ford Township need to give final approval ? We can only hope that the Courts are reasonable and side with Concord & Chadds Ford Townships and uphold the original requirements of the Application. Their goal is to limit traffic impact to Rt 202, not rely on rural scenic roads totally unprepared for heavy traffic volumes.

    I have to give credit to Concord Township for upholding the conditions of the Approval Process when they rejected Pettinaro’s request which proceeded this Court challenge. Concord and Chadds Ford are now partners working together as they should be, development along the 202 corridor impacts both Townships.

    Thomas A Singer
    235 Heyburn Rd

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.