Lower Merion to Charge Traffic-Impact Fees to City Avenue Developers

The Lower Merion Township Board of Commissioners voted 9-1 on Wednesday night to adopt an ordinance to create a City Avenue Transportation Service Area (TSA) and establish a traffic-impact fee for new TSA development, which could net the township up to $4 million in fees to spend on roadway improvements.

The approval of the traffic impact fee—which will be charged to new developers for off-site roadway improvements within the TSA—is separate from a proposal to rezone City Avenue for redevelopment. The redevelopment proposal awaits a vote from the Board of Commissioners after more public input is gathered.

Director of Building and Planning Robert Duncan said it is projected that the township could collect about $4 million in traffic impact fees, money that will be used to help improve traffic at intersections. 

The township will charge new developers within the City Avenue Transportation Service Area a traffic impact fee of $1,544 per afternoon peak hour trip, Duncan said.  Lower Merion will have three years from the designated improvement date to use the fee, after which time the developer has the right to recoup the money if it has not been spent, Duncan said.

A separate “reach back” fee of $1,000 per afternoon peak hour trip will be charged to any developer who submitted a land development or subdivision application between April 1, 2010 and the adoption of the new ordinance on Wednesday night, Duncan said.

Duncan estimated that the township could collect $100,000 to $125,000 in “reach-back” fees. 

The Board of Commissioners approved the impact fee with just three days to spare, in terms of the reach-back fees.

After Sept. 17, the board would have lost the right to collect reach-back fees (but not regular traffic impact fees) because the reach-back period under the state municipalities planning code would have passed, Duncan said.

Only one person spoke last night during the board’s continued public hearing about the traffic impact fee: Gladwyne resident Bernie McNamee.

McNamee said he did not want to ignore “we have some challenges on City Avenue, but I don’t think it’s broken … My experience is, impact fees are a disincentive.”

McNamee said the township counted car trips to establish the impact fee but there are other methodologies for calculating impact fees that should be considered, such as counting the square footage of new development or counting parking spaces.

Duncan replied that how the township establishes a transportation impact fee must comply with the state planning code.

“It has to be based on (vehicle) trip generation as it relates to future development,” Duncan said.

When the Board of Commissioners approved the traffic impact fee after the public hearing, Commissioner Jenny Brown, who is running for Montgomery County Commissioner, cast the sole dissenting vote.  Four commissioners, Jane Dellheim, Lewis Gould, Cheryl Gelber and Philip Rosenzweig, were absent from the meeting.

Before voting, Brown said she had voted against the proposal before and she would vote against it again because “I think this is the first step in pushing through an enormous zoning change.”

Brown said she was concerned about the proposal to rezone City Avenue because “residents’ quality-of-life concerns have not been addressed sufficiently,” and she had concerns about the traffic study that was conducted for City Avenue.

Brown said she was not convinced by reassurances that approving a traffic impact fee is separate from the proposal to rezone City Avenue.

“Let’s not kid ourselves,” Brown said.  “The only reason why we’re looking at traffic impact fees is the looming changes in zoning.”

Other commissioners, who supported the ordinance, disagreed with Brown.

“This is about trying to help mitigate traffic,” said Commissioner Brian McGuire. “It’s completely separate from the City Avenue rezoning, and I think it deserves our support.”

Commissioner Scott Zelov said, to him, the evidence that the two proposals are unrelated is he supports the traffic impact fees (and voted in favor of it) but he does not support the City Avenue rezoning proposal.

Regarding the City Avenue traffic study, Commissioner Daniel Bernheim said, “To the extent that anyone wanted to challenge the criteria on which the traffic study was based, they had the chance.”

Later in the night, during the Board of Commissioner’s Building and Planning Committee meeting, Duncan provided an update on several amendments that township staff have made to the proposed City Avenue rezoning ordinance, in response to comments from the Montgomery County Planning Commission (MCPC) and the public, or a result of the township staff reviews of the ordinance.

One amendment which was added is a 400-foot separation requirement for indoor recreation and indoor entertainment uses, Duncan said.

“These uses must be at least 400 feet from any residential use in a residential zoning district,” Duncan said.

During the public comment that followed Duncan’s update, Richard Kaufman of Bala Cynwyd said the problem is not the separation of the entertainment complex.

“The problem that it exists, is the problem,” Kaufman said.

“A crumb of 400 or 500 feet will not mollify the residents,” said Kaufman, a Republican candidate for George Manos' Ward 9 board seat.

Kaufman, one of three residents who spoke in opposition to the rezoning, said residents are also opposed to the rezoning proposal as a whole.

“There’s an overwhelming anger and dissatisfaction with this project,” Kaufman said.

Another amendment made to the rezoning proposal is that bulk and spacing requirements have been reworded to be clearer and to increase the separation between taller buildings, Duncan said.

“The taller the building, the greater the separation, so you don’t create that canyon feeling that everyone’s concerned with,” Duncan said.

Township staff also added a new traffic impact standard which will require a new traffic study when a development exceeds the limits of the square footage, floor area or traffic trips which were established by the Land Use Assumptions Report.

“Once any of those trigger points is exceeded, they’re going to have to do a traffic study and show how they can maintain that Level D,” Duncan said.

Level D refers to the preferred level of service for intersections within the City Avenue Transportation Service Area district, which is a delay of 35 to 55 seconds. Level of service for intersections ranges from a grade of A, which is the best, with a delay of less than 10 seconds at intersections, to F, which is a congested area with a wait of more than 80 seconds at an intersection.

“This goes a long way to address traffic concerns of those that fear we’re going to reach that full (redevelopment) buildout,” Duncan said.  “We’re going to maintain that Level D.”