"Stop Traffic" is the second component of the slogan, "ADD PARKLAND / Stop Traffic".  The following text explains why.

Road alterations proposed by a real estate developer threaten family yards and neighborhoods in Wallace Township.  Eminent domain abuse also threatens family yards and neighborhoods.

The road alterations are linked to a commercial/residential development.  The development includes hundreds of exclusive overnight accomodations, hundreds of exclusive restaurant seats, and a 2500 member country club.  Also included are about 280 exclusive dwellings.  The dwellings will be priced at twice the price of the typical Wallace Township family home, according to the developer.

The development will adversely affect roads in Wallace, Upper Uwchlan, East Brandywine and West Nantmeal townships, and perhaps elswhere too.  Traffic will increase significantly, and family homes line every road to the proposed development.  Making matters worse, the developer has proposed road alterations that will degrade neighborhoods and take land from family yards near the alterations.

To obtain right-of-ways for road alterations, the real estate developer has requested Wallace Township's assistance (see footnote 7 on page 8 of 15 June 2009 correspondence from the Wallace Township Planning Commission to the Wallace Township Board of Supervisors).  Wallace Township has put in writing its willingness to use eminent domain to obtain right-of-ways (see Valhalla Brandywine conditional use order, pp. 75 & 76 paragraph “v”).  This is a NONtraditional, radical use of eminent domain.

For the sake of emphasis, it is worth reiterating what has transpired.  A real estate developer requested township government assistance obtaining right-of-ways benefiting the developer and harming family yards.  The township agreed to use eminent domain.  This is a NONtraditional, radical use of eminent domain.

Similarly radical use of eminent domain has caused severe harm.  New London, CT seized and demolished a neighborhood so a developer could replace family homes with hotel rooms, commercial space and luxury dwellings.  The developer abandoned the project.  The former family neighborhood is a now a collection of vacant lots strewn with debris.  New London is stuck with the $70+ million bill incurred taking and demolishing properties.   And the taking & demolition reduced the number of properties to tax in order to pay off the $70+ million bill.

Closer to home, Coatesville tried to seize and develop the Saha family's farm.  The effort deepened Coatesville's financial problems, and distressed the Sahas for years.

Residents of Wallace Township worry about similar troubles.  Failure has been the outcome of prior attempts in the area to sell dwellings in the price range targeted by the developer.  Country clubs are struggling and being converted to commercial, residential and other uses.  How a resort in Wallace Township can compete with alternatives in the mountains and at the shore puzzles township residents, many of whom are successful business people.

The real estate developer does NOT need the right-of-ways it seeks.  The developer already controls more than enough road frontage for entry into and exit from its planned facilities.

The right-of-ways are for road alterations opposed by many residents of the township and surrounding area.

One road alteration threatens a pleasant family neighborhood.  The neighborhood consists now of eight or ten homes surrounding a cul-de-sac.  At present, children can safely walk across, ride their bikes on, and play in the cul-de-sac.

Threatening the neighborhood is a proposal to route through the neighborhood traffic to and from a 2500 member country clubhouse, a restaurant and numerous dwellings.  Country club membership alone is about 300 times the number of homes now surrounding the cul-de-sac.  Imagine the increase in traffic and the risks posed to children living on what may become a busy street.  Making matters worse, homeowners will NOT be compensated for the harm increased traffic causes.

Other family yards are at risk of being taken by eminent domain for use in a road alteration resembling a traffic circle.  The real estate developer is the major advocate of the road alteration.  Much and perhaps most of the community vigorously opposes the traffic circle.  Safety is a major concern of the opponents.

Other yards could be taken for turn lanes and other alterations at another intersection.

The family yards threatened in Wallace Township are typical of Chester County.  The yards and homes are well cared for.  They are occupied by working people or people who worked until they retired.  These properties are NOT blighted (an excuse used by New London to condemn an entire neighborhood).  Instead, a commercial/residential development threatens to degrade family yards & neighborhoods.

Like the Sahas and residents of the demolished New London neighborhood, many (perhaps all) Wallace Township residents now threatened by eminent domain plan or planned to live indefinitely in their homes and to enjoy their yards as is or with minor changes.  Eminent domain will force them to sell.

Enlarging Marsh Creek Park can remedy these threats to residents of Wallace, Upper Uwchlan, East Brandywine, West Nantmeal and other townships.  The proposed addition to the park will protect as parkland fields and woods that will otherwise be covered with parking lots, other paved surfaces, a hotel, restaurants, a spa and most of the proposed 280 dwellings.  Eliminating these sources of traffic will cut the number of vehicles using area roads.  Protecting the fields and woods as parkland will also eliminate pressure for road alterations threatening family yards and neighborhoods.

This explanation concludes with two comments directed to property rights advocates.  First, property rights advocates should be irate a real estate developer and township government are colluding to take land from property owners opposed to giving up their land for the proposed road alterations.  In contrast, and second, the park  will be dealing with WILLING SELLERS when making the proposed addition.  Here is proof.  The owner of one parcel the park should buy has AGREED TO SELL to the developer.  The developer is preparing to sell 280 dwellings plus resort services on an adjacent parcel.   Because the developer and the other parcel's owner are WILLING SELLERS, the park only has to preempt other buyers.  The park does NOT HAVE TO FORCE the sale of either parcel.