More talks about Madison lot plans
Borough targets April approval for plans for 180 apartments
LANSDALE >> Plans for a series of apartment buildings to be built atop the Madison Parking Lot are nearing final approval, but borough officials still have a few questions for the developer to answer.
“We’re all trying to work with you guys. We want to see this happen, but you’re going in with a set of plans from the last submission, with ‘will complies’ and a response letter,” said Planning Commission Chairman Sam Carlo.
“Either we need to detail exactly what’s going to happen, tonight, which is going to be a long and torturous process, or amend the plan and come back in next month,” he said.
Plans have been developed over the past several years for developer Equus Capital Partners to build a complex of seven apartment buildings totaling roughly 180 apartment units atop the current parking lot north of Madison Street.
Equus vice president of development John Knott, engineer Jason Korczak of Bohler Engineering, and architect David Schmauk showed the Planning Commission the latest version of their plans, which they said addressed questions raised last month about trash disposal and storage on the site.
“The last time we were in here, last month, one of the bigger topics was trash, and since that time, the applicant has done some investigation of a private hauler, to determine if the trash enclosures we are providing on the site are adequate,” Korczak said.
In the latest plans, a large trash enclosure is located at the base of a pedestrian bridge that crosses the nearby railroad tracks, between an apartment building running north-to-south along the lot and another running diagonally, parallel to the nearby rail tracks. The trash enclosure at the base of the bridge would be served three or four times per week by a private hauler responsible for the whole complex, and inside the buildings themselves, each floor would be served by a trash chute that would drop to a ground floor.
“It’s assumed that those containers will be rolled out toward the drive aisle, and I’m assuming the best option will be to roll them out to the loading area,” Korczak said.
Planning Commission members asked for more details — what would the enclosure look like? How early would trash be taken out? What about larger items, like appliances or furniture?
“We usually have a community manager and assistant manager on site every day of the week — not both of them every day — but there’s a representative on the site every day, in addition to a maintenance person,” Knott said.
Those details were discussed in a meeting with borough staff earlier this month and noted in the margins of last month’s plan, but commission members asked for an updated version of the plans showing what they look like. A second trash enclosure would be located at the eastern end of the development, near where an electrical transformer stands now, but commission members asked for more detail before they pass on the plans to borough council for final approval.
“We just want to know what the trash enclosures are going to look like. You need to detail them at some point, and it would be pretty simple to do now,” said commission member Nate Burns.
Review letters from the borough’s fire marshal, engineer and traffic engineer were all discussed, Knott said, and the applicant has agreed to all of the conditions contained in them.
“I do not think we took any shortcuts. We are saying tonight, we will comply with those — I don’t know how many — pages of comments of letters we received. I think we have done a lot of work, and a lot of follow up, to get to where we are tonight,” Knott said.
Each of the seven buildings in the complex would feature first floors coated in brick, with second and third floors (and fourth and fifth floors on the largest building) clad in grey concrete enclosing white bay windows. Corner units would feature balconies of black metal, Schmauk said, and the buildings with ground floor retail spaces would feature awnings that could be decorated by a restaurant or other business that occupies it.
“By and large, the buildings don’t have a front and a back. You’re lighting the entire perimeter of the buildings, to make it a nice, safe environment,” he said.
During public comment on the plans, John Black of Second Street asked the commission to reject the plans, citing the noise and fumes from the nearby rail lines as potential hazards for those who would live there.
“I live about a hundred yards from the tracks at Third and Richardson (streets), and especially during the evenings in summertime, our neighborhood is filled with the thick, bluish haze and pungent stench from the diesel locomotives,” he said.
Studies have linked long term exposure to diesel exhaust with heart disease and lung cancers, Black said, and he frequently has to clean the outside of his home to remove soot that has collected from the nearby trains.
“Another concern is the noise. I can’t see how families would be able to have conversations, or how children could do their homework, with large locomotives and freight trains rolling back and forth just a few yards from your apartment. Who wants to live next to that?” he said.
Council President Denton Burnell pointed out a quirk of the borough’s schedule: since the March planning commission meeting was held after, rather than before, borough council, the commission will meet again on April 17 before council’s next action meeting on April 19.
“I hate holding you up for another month, but it doesn’t sound like we’re holding you up. We just need a little more clarification, and we’re good to go,” Carlo said.
Lansdale’s borough council next meets at 9 p.m. on April 5, with committee meetings starting at 7 p.m., and the planning commission next meets at 7:30 p.m. on April 17. All meetings will be held at the borough municipal building, 1 Vine St.; for more information or meeting agendas and materials visit www.Lansdale. org or follow @LansdalePA on Twitter.