Brookhaven hearing on 7 Brews drive‑through at 4101 Edgemont draws traffic and school‑safety concerns

Brookhaven Borough paused its regular council meeting on May 4 to hold a conditional‑use hearing on a proposed 7 Brews drive‑through at 4101 Edgemont Avenue, where applicant witnesses described a small prefabricated beverage‑only shop and traffic controls while neighbors warned the site could worsen already heavy congestion and create pedestrian and school‑bus hazards.

Attorney Bob Karolos introduced witnesses for the applicant and said the conditional‑use process requires the applicant to show the use meets the ordinance’s objective standards. Franchisee Zach Roskam testified that the outlet would be a prefabricated 510‑square‑foot building with a 260‑square‑foot storage/refrigeration container, that the operation has no on‑site cooking (the only food is a prepackaged muffin), and that typical hours would be 5:30 a.m. to 10 p.m. on weekdays and 11 p.m. on Fridays and Saturdays. Roskam said total on‑site time averages about three to three‑and‑a‑half minutes and that staffing would be three to four employees off‑peak and six to seven at peak times.

“We will be here. We’re excited to be part of the community,” Roskam said, and he told council the company conducts community outreach and charity events before opening sites.

Engineer Nick Lewis (Boller Engineering) said the application consolidates five parcels, would demolish existing structures, keep the two existing access points on Barlow and Edgemont, provide two queuing lanes that wrap the site, nine parking spaces (one ADA), pedestrian access and a landscape buffer; he said the project will require variances for impervious coverage (about 75% proposed vs. a 70% allowance), a rear‑yard setback for the canopy, and landscape buffering, and that full stormwater detention details will be provided during land‑development review.

Traffic planner Pete Spiesak testified the project team submitted a traffic study to PennDOT, proposed measures to prevent left‑out movements from the Edgemont driveway (a physical island and signage) and a traffic‑management plan that would close site entrances if onsite queues reached capacity. “PennDOT…said keep the left in, but you have to restrict the left out,” Spiesak testified, and he said PennDOT will require a highway‑occupancy permit during land‑development review and may request a post‑occupancy study.

Applicant witnesses said they designed the site for a 29‑vehicle queue and that employees would be trained to stop vehicles from queuing into Edgemont or Barlow; they also offered to implement an enforceable traffic‑management plan as a condition of approval.

Neighbors who were granted party status and other residents urged the borough to attach strict conditions or deny the use. Concerns focused on queuing and backups at the busy Edgemont/Brookhaven intersection, the proximity of a SEPTA bus stop that sometimes stalls traffic, the ability for emergency vehicles to negotiate the corner, and student safety at a nearby school‑bus stop on Barlow Avenue.

“Safety is the key here, people,” said Charles Leslie, who identified himself as the borough’s fire marshal, during public comment. Multiple residents described daily backups at the intersection and asked the borough to require physical traffic controls, post‑occupancy monitoring and targeted pedestrian‑safety measures before any final approval.

Council and applicant counsel noted the hearing record would close for evidence and that the application will proceed through a multi‑step review: zoning hearing board variances (scheduled for June 9), planning and land‑development review, required engineering and fire/police review letters and PennDOT approval. Council closed the hearing and said it will render a public decision on the conditional‑use application at its June 1 regular meeting.

If council grants use approval, the developer said it will still need land‑development approvals and PennDOT’s highway‑occupancy permit before construction can start. If council denies the application, parties may appeal to the court of common pleas, per the solicitor’s explanation of the process.