It is looking more like Wawa will win the battle for the old PRR rail yard in Pemberton Township, Burlington County, NJ. With all of their money and the unwillingness of the township council to stop them because rateables rule, it is all but done. All they had to do was to turn down their application for a zoning variance. A year or so ago, our treasurer put out a call for help on another site and it generated hundreds of e-mails to the council, but they were not allowed into the zoning meeting.

And the owner of the ground will not confirm or deny if Wawa's option is still valid or not or entertain any other offers. It is rumored that Wawa gets what it wants by "intimidation through litigation." And one of the council members who is running for mayor has sent out a letter of fear saying the current and past adminstrations have wasted taxpayers money. One example is the 20 million spent on the train station. If we had the 20 million, our entire dream list would be done including having two operating steam locomotives and an operating yard with turntable! And we would have lots of change! Makes you wonder about the other claims in his letter. Now the council won't take up the matter on the grant money we have waiting to buy the ground. See, if they do nothing the grant goes back and they can say it wasn't their fault. I hate people of power that use that power for their own ends under the guise of working for the people. And the county and state can not help, or will not help. It smacks of conflict of interest but we cannot get the State Attorney General interested. Not that he would do anything. Those of you in NJ know what happened with the George Norcross investigation that was run by the AG. Evidence was lost and the Feds say they cannot do anything. It is just so frustrating but there isn't anything we can do without the support of the council. Don't get me wrong, there are one or two on the council that know that if we had the ground, it would generate tourism and both the township and Wawa would benefit. If only.

Later!
Mr. Ed

What was the area zoned as and what was the variance request for? Also. what is the surround area zoned for and how would you characterize its development?

Tom Cornillie

The ground was zoned commercial. Zoning laws in the township state that there cannot be two gas stations within 1500 feet of each other. The ground that Wawa is currently on has a gas station at the point of the corner, next to their existing store. Now our engineer finally got a copy of their plot plan the day of the final zoning hearing too late for him to prepare a rebuttal. He did so later showing that same plan on the ground they are on and they would have more ground, better access and both streets that border the property have center turn lanes, something they will not have on the one street that the new store will be on. The owner of the existing gas station had contacted Wawa to offer his station for sale and they never got back to him.

We are on one side of the property and the back is farm land with the other side residential. The owners of those homes didn't want Wawa for a neighbor knowing what all of the station lighting would do to their sleeping abilities. Their complaints went unheard at the zoning hearings.

There was also studies done by traffic engineers for them that showed the traffic would have more trouble getting in and out of the station than if they stayed where they are. Our engineers said there will be major traffic back ups if the station is allowed to go in because the road is too narrow to put a center turn lane in or widen the shoulders for passing cars attemting to turn. Makes you wonder if there is some underlying motives at work here.

Later!
Mr. Ed

Your group should also contact the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Historic Preservation Office to discuss the possibility of doing an archaeological survey of this site. There are likely to be artifacts and foundations that could shed light on this site's prior use that could be recovered before construction begins. Such a survey would provide unique and important information resources for your museum and may open up potential partnerships with area historical societies and educational institutions.

http://www.state.nj.us/dep/hpo/1identify/survarkeo.htm

Tom Cornillie

We have done the survey years ago and have found all of the original foundations for the general store/soda shop, hay press building, lumber yard, engine house, freight house, turntable pit, etc. The ties are still in the ground because when the PRR scrapped the yard in the '50s, they just removed the rails and graded over the ties. Our plan was to restore the site just as it was originally built in the late 1800s. While our station is on the historic registry, the yard is not.

Later!
Mr. Ed

With this survey, I think that you have a good arguement to compel a full archaeological investigation before construction begins. I am not familer with local or New Jersey law on this but the NJ DEP could probably point you in the right direction.

Tom Cornillie

Hypothetically speaking,

From the information that you provided, it seems that there are several facts for enforcing the zoning regulation as stated. The addition of a second gas station, so close to an existing facility, would cause a substantial increase traffic in the area which would have a detrimental effect to the residents of the surrounding area. Likewise, if your group was not able to gain access to the evidence in this case in a timely fashion then you may have been denied due process.

It is likely that your group would have standing to file suit against the municipality to challenge the validity of this variance, as the new development would adversely impact the station that your group has preserved. The area residents would also have standing to challenge this case, and I would suggest contacting them.

Again, all this information is provided to suggest hypothetical possibilities - and not to recommend a specific course of action.

Tom Cornillie

We have been in contact with the DEP and they are with us but their hands are tied. We know what will be lost as Wawa bulldozes the ground in preparation of erecting a store and gas station. Many historic societies are aware of this but again there is nothing they can do either.

When we first heard of Wawa's attempt to buy the land, our tact was to challenge their variance on the merits of the increased traffic and their study confirmed our study confirming that there would indeed be a terrible bottleneck caused by their new location. The residents complained as well to no avail. The street is also the only major connector for five miles in either direction between two towns and is the only route for emergency vehicles between those towns. There is no one invloved that doesn't admit that there will most likely be fatalities that will be directly contributed to the traffic bottleneck this new facility will cause.

It is all politics plain and simple. We have written and printed proof of severe conflict of interest but who can we take it too? The State Attorney General's Office is on the same side as the township council so they are not in any position to show any kind of impartiality.

What it boils down to is the township has the final say and there is nothing the county or state can do. Bringing a law suit will delay the inevitable and cost us more money in legal fees. But they are in no hurry to proceed with the new facility. They were given the variance in June and have done nothing since. And there is nothing we or the township can do to speed them along. They are in no hurry since they have an operating store across the street. Now it is just a matter of throwing salt in the wounds.

Later!
Mr. Ed

We had a major fight a few years back fighting to keep our railroad from being cut in half. We finally won(more or less). We had to do what it sounds like you don't want to do, higher Lawyers. In today's day and age there rally is no way around it.
The key to our beating the locals, who were quite a few with friends and FAMILY in plotical places was our legal counsel. We went out of the county for our lawyers and went right to federal court with the lawsuit, we also went right to the governor and hired a lobbyist.
Yes this was somewhat costly to the point of postponing projects but it kept the railline from being permently cut in half. It also opened up funding sources we did not have before. This and the area in question will be rebuilt better than we could have on our funds.
We also learned that having a good high powered law firm has been of benifit on an almost monthly basis since that point. Owning a rail line that has been out of service since 1969 has brought all of the strange people out of the woodwork.
Currently we have someone trying to take a piece of our property by perscripition. This has been a never ending problem and if it wasn't for lawyers ever crackpot in the county wouold have his way.
I think most people try and bulldoze groups counting on there not wanting to fight to bully us (and you) into submission.

Sorry for spelling and grammatical errors. It submited before I could proof read it, fumble fingers at work.

Yet another sad story from within the realm of New Jersey. From up on the North end, I can sympathize with you Mr. Ed. Similar stories echo from Phillipsburg, and across the river to Bethlehem, where some of our most notorious politicians, and ex politicians keep lining their pockets at the expense of "development".

Sickening.

Funny how the solution to combat these unscrupulous politicians is to hire lawyers and bring law suits. Sadly in many cases these politicians are also lawyers. Sounds like they are trying to perpetuate their profession.

We used most of our funds with our attorney during the many rounds of the rezoning hearings. See what they would do is ask for continuance after continuance which cost us money. Even though our attorney was working at a very reduced rate, there were still charges amassed.

It really irks me especially since I started paying attention to what our politicians have been doing to the taxpayers. Sad that most taxpayers do not remember how bad the politicians have been. They keep putting the same ones back in office even after they have demonstarted their unwillingness and total disregard to work for us.

I have taken the battle directly to Wawa by sending tham an e-mail through the customer service portion of their web site. I asked for the message to be directed to the president explaining what is going on and that they are spending and will continue to spend more money buying, clearing and devloping the new site rather than staying where they are. I received a response that the message was being directed to their real estate department. These are the same people that are spending all of the money. But being the eternal optomist I still hope we can convince them to leave the site alone.

Later!
Mr. Ed

Hi Mr. Ed,
Emails will only go so far and as you said it went directly to those causing your trouble.
What might help is take everything you got in print and copy it, walk into their home office and ask for an appointment with their President to discuss the matter with him. Dont ( and I mean DONT) take no for an answer and dont give the information to anyone not even his secratary. Make sure he gets it and let him know what it is about and how his company can save money by staying where they are and how many problems they will encounter by moving. If you can convince him it is in his best interests and the companies you may get what you are wanting.
Sometimes going to the top in person is the only way to get things done.
Andrew

Mr. Ed,

I too am from the great State of NJ and work as a Civil / Traffic Engineer for a northern NJ County. I review development applications all the time.

First off, I assume Wawa is attempting to obtain site plan approval and once done they will purchase the property? You can confirm who the current owner is in the local Municipal or County tax office.

Generally with traffic, the arguement about increase in emergency response time or increase in traffic volumes or delays does not pan out. People using the Wawa are the same ones using the existing facility. The pool of people in the surrounding area using the gas station and store will not increase, so traffic volumes will not increase just because the Wawa relocates / expands.

To me, your BEST bet is to discuss the issue with your County Freeholder Board or County Executive's office. Pick the person on that board that is historically minded and ask them for a help / meeting. Keep focused on the history of the site, what your plans have been, etc. If there are no other facilities like it in the County, that may help too. Is it continguous to other preserved property? If you have funding available, or can offer funding sources for the purchase of the property the County may be receptive to helping you in your fight. But if the locals have already signed off, an no money is available for purchase, the County politicos may just fall in line behind the municipality or close their eyes.

I personally don't think fighting the Wawa Corp. is going to matter, because even if they go away, the current owner will renew the search to find another developer. From the sounds of it, Wawa has invested a lot of money on the proposed site, so I seriously doubt they are going to pass on it.

A local property near my home was sold to a developer for $300,000 he then got his approvals for a strip mall. Politics in town changed and the new mayor no longer wanted the mall. It cost the Town / County / State $2.5 million to buy it from the developer, because that is what the property was worth with the approvals he had.

I wish you luck in your fight

Hi Ed,

If it is private property, the only way it can be kept from being developed - apartments or homes, if not fast food or a drug store - is to buy it.

Since you have little, or no, money, that isn't going to happen.

What is the property selling for?

Good luck, Roger