BoS Meeting Notes & Solar Ordinances Public Hearing - 3/18/2010

Public Hearing - Solar Ordinances 314 & 315 - 7:00 PM

Both Solar Ordinances were explained by Solicitor Kline.  He said that the impetus behind the preparation of them by the Planning Commission (PC) was the approved Crayola solar farm on 15 acres near its plant on Church Road.  The PC gathered language from solar ordinances of other municipalities and used that language to craft Forks' two new solar ordinances, 314 and 315. 

Ordinance 314 allows solar panels as a residential accessory use in any zoning district and applies to the Zoning Ordinance.  Ordinance 315 applies to the SALDO (Subdivision and Land Development Ordinance) and controls roof and ground arrays for lawful non-residential use in any zoning district.  Ordinance 315 also provides for the decommissioning of solar installations that are no longer in use (or at the end of their useful lives) - after a period of six months.  In fact, if the sites are not decommissioned, the Township can step in after written notices have been sent, do the work, and charge the land owner. 

The reason that one ordinance applies to Zoning and one to SALDO is because when a resident wishes to add solar panels as an accessory use, a land development plan is not generally submitted.  However, non-residential solar installations do require land development plan submissions and therefore must be in compliance with all SALDO amendments.

The MPC (Municipalities Planning Code) requires specific actions in order to adopt ordinances.  There must be a PC public hearing (there was), the ordinances must be submitted to the local regional planning commission (LVPC - they were and the comments returned were basically favorable), and there must be a Board of Supervisors public hearing (in process now). 

In discussion, Supervisor Howell asked how long after approving the ordinances before they are in effect?  Kline replied that ordinances are generally in effect five days after being enacted. 

Howell said that he has been contacted by an individual inquiring if the Township has any plans for a wind generation ordinance.  Kline said that the PC had considered it and as he recalled, the consensus was that Forks was not a primary area for wind turbines.  PC Chairman Dean Turner added that wind tower rules are already in the Zoning Ordinance.  Vito Tamborrino (PC Vice Chairman) added that zoning requires fall zones and setbacks that are outside the range of most Forks residential properties. 

Howell said that he was thinking of roof top windmills attached to chimneys.  Turner said that the PC thought that there would not be enough power generated by them to make a difference.

Kline offered that if the power generated is just to be sold back to a public utility, it is regulated by the Pennsylvania PUC.

Ron Roth, Career Institute of Technology Director (and Forks resident), commended the Township on the new solar regulations and for encouraging solar power.  He said that CIT is in the early stages of investigating the installation of solar panels at the school.  At the moment, they are gathering preliminary information and have a two month agreement with an energy management company for a study.  The CIT building is totally electric and the estimate is that solar will give them an electricity cost reduction of 17%.  He said that lowering the peak demand on the grid, will lower the the cost of the balance of their electric use.

Mr. Roth said that the school intends to erect a combination of ground and roof mounted systems.  They will be almost invisible from the street.  He will be back before the BoS in a few month for approvals.  Roth added that there will be a kiosk in the school describing what is happening.  Everyone is pretty excited about it. 

CIT has read the ordinances and will have no trouble complying with them. 

When asked about the Crayola solar farm size and the CIT installation size, Roth replied that they can see the Crayola installation from their property.  The land being used by CIT is not a huge piece and is triangular in shape.  It is being combined with a roof top array and Roth does not know the size.  He added that the roof top mounts will be held there by ballasts and holes in the roof top will be unnecessary.  They will withstand 90 MPH winds.

.................................

Regular Meeting - Agenda

At this meeting, Supervisors:

• Unanimously approved both new Solar Ordinances, one for the SALDO and one for the Zoning Ordinance.  Read Tony Nauroth, Express Times and see below for details.
• Agreed to send a letter to Senator Mensch in support of the bill (currently in the PA Senate) to allow accredited police departments to use radar guns. 
• Learned more about the progress of the Meco/Sullivan traffic light.  It might even be out for bids this summer.
• Agreed to wait two more meetings before deciding on the bid award for the CMX designed amphitheater plan while cheaper options are investigated.  Read Tony Nauroth, Express Times and see below for more details. 
• Appointed Supervisor Egolf to be the Township's Bushkill Creek Watershed representative.
• Approved the purchase of a $16,500 replacement scanner for the Zoning and Sewer Departments. 

Approval of Minutes

The vote to approve the minutes from the March 4th meeting was 4:0 (with Supervisor Egolf abstaining) but only after the minutes were corrected as follows:

• Supervisor Howell asked Supervisor Rogers if the wording regarding the Recreation Board discussion should state that the Recreation Ordinance was to be reviewed and rewritten by the Recreation Board and then to be forwarded directly to Solicitor Kline for review.  Rogers agreed that is what it should state. 
• Chuss corrected the part mentioning Mrs. Hanks' agreement that she had received what she requested in her open records document request.
• Solicitor Kline corrected the section of his Township report to read that the motion to dismiss was filed by all the defendants in the Strausser Federal law suit.

Public Comments (non-agenda)

• Melody Talpas - resident and FTYSO (Forks Township Youth Sports Association a.k.a. Forks Township Athletic Association) Secretary - gave a brief report to the Board of the activities of the FTYSO (Forks Township Youth Sports Organization a.k.a. the Forks Athletic Association).  To date 763 Forks children are signed up for spring sports - 378 for baseball, 242 for softball, 61 for lacrosse, and 82 for cheerleading.  She said that the group is working with Mark Roberts and the grounds crews to be sure the fields are ready for spring sports.  Also, the FTYSO is coordinating a "walk" of the five acre parcel (between the Community Center and College Park Estates to the west) with Supervisor Billings, Township Manager Schnaedter and nearby resident Eric Konecke (who has voiced concerns over the possible uses for the land.)
• Dean Turner - resident (and Chairman of the Planning Commission) - spoke to the Board regarding the traffic on Richmond Road.  He said that he moved to the Township 17 years ago and back then, he could tell when the shifts changed in the industrial park because that's when there was traffic on the road - at 7, 3, and 11.  Today he fears for the kids crossing the street to get to the playground.  He recently saw a car pass a school bus at a high rate of speed - while kids were getting ready to cross the road in order to board the bus.  Speeding is a problem.  The traffic light at Elizabeth and Sullivan is the only light where drivers can get from the eastern side of the Township to the western side.  Turner offered that the Township should focus on "opening other paths along Sullivan Trail so that people on the eastern end of the Township can get to the western end of the Township." 

Supervisors Comments 

• Supervisor Chuss - in response to Turner's comment (above), asked Chief Dorney about "slow down" signs.  Dorney said there were two stop sign violations issued today at Elizabeth Avenue.  Traffic enforcement will increase now that the weather has improved.  Turner wondered if the Township could purchase a portion of the Jackson farm in order to allow Ramblewood to be continued through to Town Center.  He suggested that the residents who live there would know about the extended road and would use it. 

Dorney said that there is proposed legislation to expand the use of radar guns to allow accredited police departments to use them.  Currently PA is the only state in the country where municipal law enforcement is not allowed to use radar.  Dorney said the bill passed the House and is sitting in the Senate.  Supervisor Billings asked if it would help if the Board sent a resolution of support to Senator Mensch?  Supervisor Howell thought that a bigger voice would be created if all accredited police departments take a position in favor of the bill.  Dorney said that that is being done through the PA Chiefs Association.  Solicitor Kline noted that if PSATS (Pennsylvania State Association of Township Supervisors) took a position in favor, it would carry some weight with the Legislature.

Billings made a motion to have Township Manager Schnaedter write a letter in support of the Senate bill for the use of radar guns in the Commonwealth of PA.  Supervisor Egolf seconded.  In discussion Howell said that the letter should stress public welfare and safety and should be personalized with Forks' density.  Egolf noted that Forks has had a rapid increase in population and the roads are not designed to handle it. 

The vote was 5:0.

Egolf added that Forks should not lose sight of the stipulations in the newly revised and rewritten Comprehensive Plan that strongly address the Township's problems with east/west and small roadways.  It is "pretty much a mandate for us to start working on this."

Treasurer's Report - Egolf detailed the debits (cash paid out) since the last Supervisors' meeting.  The debits and transfers were approved with a 5:0 vote.  The Township's current outstanding debt is $7,722,913.

Chuss noted that the Board should do what it can to encourage Township residents to respond to the 2010 census.  It is very important when it comes to the allocation of monies from State and Federal governments.  He asked that something be put on the Township website to remind people to fill out their census forms.  Rogers said that the "census bureau" will be available at the Community Center from 5-8 PM M-F (March 19 through April 18) to answer census questions.

Standing Committee Reports:

• Public Safety - Supervisor Egolf - said that the next meeting will be on Wednesday, April 14th at 7:15 PM.  He took a few moments to acknowledge, on behalf of the Board, the "absolutely superb work" by the fire, police, and public works departments in preparation for possible flooding.  He also commended the fire and police departments for their handling of the "Giant episode" and said that it is nice to know that Forks' "public service forces are prepared, well trained, stay calm, keep our friends and neighbors and citizens safe..." (Applause)

Police Chief Dorney reported on the committee's meeting.  He said that it was lengthy and items discussed included current grant funding and preliminary applications for items "coming down the road."  Also, discussed were a possible resolution that may come before the Board ("a matter of routine practice") as well as recent vandalism in the park and community policing initiatives to prevent it - including bicycle deployment. 

Fire Chief Chapman said that the fire department is working on revisions to their standard operating procedures to present to the Board in the spring or summer.  The new fire engine blueprints have been approved by the fire department and delivery is expected in late July.

• Public Works - Supervisor Howell - reported that the committee had a short meeting a week ago and reviewed the Township snow plowing policy for both dedicated and non-dedicated roads as well as the naturalizing condition of the recreation paths in the winter; they are left unplowed.  He said that the Braden lavatory is almost operational.  Its sewer and water hookup will be tested when weather permits.  Also discussed were "some of the needs" for the five acre parcel (between the Community Center and College Park Estates).  DPW Director Roberts plans to grade it when the weather permits.  It is expected that it will be seeded and re-seeded and ready for the fall.
• Parks & Recreation - Supervisor Rogers - said that there had been no meeting since the last BoS meeting.  The next meeting is set for April 7th at 6 PM.
• Community Relations - Supervisor Chuss - said that the committee met on March 8th.  The next committee meeting is Monday, April 12th at 4:30 PM.  Chuss said that the newsletter proof was received with errors and was resubmitted back to the editor for "update."  He hopes that residents will have it at the end of the month.  Chuss asked that anyone who sees website content changes that should be addressed notify the committee.  They are planning to meet with the website provider this spring to discuss website updates.  Chuss said that there is no update yet on the new Community Days coordinator.  He said that there has been concern expressed that the normally scheduled weekend, the second one after Labor Day, falls on a religious holiday.  Chuss noted that the inaugural meeting of his arts society was held on March 16 and was attended by 15 enthusiastic people of diverse backgrounds.  The next meeting will be on April 14th at 7 PM in the Community Center - going forward they will meet on the second Wednesday of the month at 7 PM in the Community Center.  Some of the group is looking at sample bylaws and investigating the requirements for 501 (3)(c) status.  He asks that anyone with questions contact him. 
• Finance & Administration - Supervisor Billings - said that the next meeting will be on Wednesday, April 14th at 6 PM.

Township Manager's Report - Schnaedter said that the Lehigh Valley Insurance Cooperative has refunded $186,857 to Forks.  He attributes the refund to the follow up of claims and preventative measures taken.  Schnaedter said that this is the fourth year in a row that the refund is over $100,000.  Howell asked if the money goes back to the general revenue account?  Schnaedter said that the money is kept in a reserve account.  So far 60% has been received and there are no pending cases. 

Engineer's Report - Muller reported that the Meco/Sullivan traffic light continues to move forward.  PennDOT has come back with revisions based on the meeting with Verizon and MetEd.  The site's utility poles are an issue - what has to be relocated and what does not have been noted.  Benchmark is working on the plan revisions.  The horizontal geometry of the site has to be approved.  The approval for the signal was received Jan. 31st (or Feb. 1st).  It is an ongoing issue with PennDOT.   Muller said that he continues "to push it to make sure it gets done."  He said, "We're almost there." 

Muller said that he and DPW Director Roberts discussed the sanitary sewer lines that are to be replaced this spring on Sullivan Trail.  He is working to get that done before the road realignment for the signal installation at Meco/Sullivan. 

Chuss asked if the PennDOT requests are reasonable?   Muller said that they are, however, some of the issues are because the initial engineering survey missed things - including some poles (not the utility companies' fault).  He would like to get the project out to bid sometime this spring so that it can get done this summer.

Muller said that he met with Roberts, the old Township engineer, and the GIS representative from his firm, Gilmore & Associates, regarding the GIS system in the Township.  He said that great strides have been made in the first couple of months in getting things up-to-date.

Muller has also met with Roberts regarding storm drainage issues on another intersection and will review the survey and make recommendations so that Roberts can move forward and get it re-topped. 

And, lastly, Muller said that there are a couple of small subdivision plans and land developments in the works.

Solicitor's Report - Kline - agenda items only.

UNFINISHED BUSINESS

None  

NEW BUSINESS

Ordinance 314 - Solar Amendment to Zoning Ordinance Approval
Ordinance 315 – Solar Amendment to Subdivision and Land Development Ordinance (SALDO) (Karl Kline, Solicitor) - Kline explained that basically if one has a house in any zoning district a solar energy accessory use is allowed.  If one wants to generate solar power for one's own non-residential property it, too, is allowed in any zoning district.  There are provisions in the ordinances for ground and roof top arrays.  The ordinances were drafted by the Planning Commission (PC) which held a January 26 public hearing.  They were reviewed by the LVPC (Lehigh Valley Planning Commission) who commented favorably.  The Board of Supervisors' public hearing was earlier tonight at 7:00 PM. 

Billings motioned to accept ordinance 314.  Howell seconded and the vote was 5:0.

Howell motioned to accept ordinance 315.  Egolf seconded and the vote was 5:0.

Inter-municipal Sale of Police vehicle (Rick Schnaedter, Township Manager) - Schnaedter said that a Board member from the Borough of Roseto approached him regarding the purchase of one of Forks' two old police vehicles.  They are used only in emergencies.  Schnaedter said that the Borough representative liked the 2003 Crown Victoria with attached light bar and 105,366 miles on its odometer.  He spoke with Dorney and with Roberts and they said that the Township should be able to accommodate Roseto (including the light bar).  The price developed from past sales history of old vehicles was $1200.

Egolf made a motion to sell the vehicle "as explained and described" to Roseto.  Kline said that in an inter-municipal sale, the advertising and bid process are not necessary.  The vote was 5:0.

Awarding of the Amphitheater Contract (Rick Schnaedter, Township Manager) - Schnaedter said that CMX reviewed the amphitheater bids and that Bracy Contracting submitted the low bid of $360,000.  All bids were also reviewed by Kline to verify that they were proper and contained all the necessary documents. 

Billings asked if the $360,000 bid is the amount for everything and Schnaedter said that the paving will be done by the public works department.  An alternative bid was requested should the paving work be contracted.  Bracy's was low bid at $17,600 (or $11/square foot) for the paving.

Chuss said that he is concerned about the overall cost including the $46,000 already paid for the architectural work.  He said in looking at the site as a whole, the project is pushing into the $500,000 cost range.  He said that although he is supportive of an amphitheater, the Board should look at other alternatives.  He personally feels that this simple amphitheater has been "over-engineered."  Chuss added that the five year recreation plan is due next month and this project will eat up a lot of the $1.8 million in the recreation fund (before knowing what other projects will need money.)  He said that one can get quite a house for that amount of money and this does not seen like a good value to him.  Chuss asked that the Board look at alternatives.

Howell said that two years ago the Parks & Recreation Standing Committee viewed a lot of proposals and some were quite nice.  He said that he wouldn't approve this plan without also approving a restroom and asked Schnaedter how much the Braden rest room cost.  Schnaedter said it was about $40,000.

There was additional discussion and Schnaedter reminded the Board that although (when they last looked) the prefab structures cost $150,000 to $180,000, they require costs for delivery and construction which can bring prices close to $300,000.  Several firms could not provide the committee with an idea of those costs.

Egolf said that he has reservations about the general design of the CMX structure.  He said that he sat in on one of the planning sessions with engineers, architects and area vendors.  There were many questions raised about how to put it together and how the panels would be hung.  He saw dollar signs mounting.  He is worried about change costs and structural problems.  He said that it seemed to him that things weren't clicking and he got a strange feeling that this was not the right path.  Egolf said that he does want an amphitheater.

Billings said that he is worried that the cost number is not something that the community is comfortable with - yet he does not want "nothing" to happen.  He feels that if it is to be tabled, it should be time bound.  He asked Schnaedter if the Township is still trying to get programs for the facility. Schnaedter said that he approached the Business and Commerce Association of Forks (BCAF) about two years ago and they were very supportive of being involved in cultural programs for the community.

Schnaedter said that he will provide the Board with details of one of the earlier structures the committee looked at along with a sketch from a pamphlet and estimates for construction.  Howell said that he and Muller can look at them with Schnaedter.  Muller said that he will look but construction costs are not his (nor his company's) area of expertise.  He suggested that Bracy be asked to look at them.  Schnaedter said that a municipality that constructed one of these (less than three years ago) has been identified.  He will get their cost (and caveat) information.

After confirming that the bid package indicates the bids are firm for 90 days, Howell made a motion to suspend consideration of awarding the contract for two meeting dates to the second meeting in April.  Billings seconded and the vote was 5:0.

Chuss asked Rogers if the Board will have the five year recreation plan next month.  She said yes.

Construction and maintenance agreement – CMX (Rick Schnaedter, Township Manager) - Schnaedter noted that in light of the situation with CMS and after prior consultation with DPW Director Mark Roberts and Township Engineer Muller, it was felt that having a backup hourly rate agreement in place should concerns or questions arise during construction was a good idea.  CMX declined and instead gave a single line item bid.  Schnaedter recommended rejecting the proposal.  Kline said CMX submitted the proposal and no action is necessary by the Board.

Purchase of Zoning Scanner (Jim Farley - Finance Manager) - Farley said that a replacement scanner for the zoning and sewer departments was included in last fall's budget.  At the time, the money was to come 50% from the zoning capital account and 50% from the sewer capital account.  The price is contracted by PA.  The unit selected is from OCE North America and costs $16,519.  It is compatible with all the other department equipment.  The old machine is from the 1970s and the inputs on it do not match the computers.  Special adapters must be purchased.  And, it is time to renew the maintenance agreement as well as buy supplies. 

Egolf made the motion to purchase and Billings seconded.  In discussion, Howell asked if the new scanner can do 8-1/2" X 11".  Weis said that it can.  He said that it is a color scanner.  The old one is black and white and should it break, there may not be parts available. 

Howell said that the administration side of the office does not have a (regular format) scanner.  Farley offered that with the purchase of software, the office copier can do scanning.  He will get prices on the software.

The vote to purchase the new large format scanner was 5:0.

Bushkill Creek Watershed – Designation of a Representative (Rick Schnaedter, Township Manager) - Schnaedter said that he received a letter from Northampton County asking that the Township appoint a representative to the Act 167 Watershed Advisory Committee.  He will be responsible for attending at least four meetings, for reviewing and commenting on the plan, and for reporting back to the municipality on the plan process.  Howell nominated Egolf.  Rogers seconded.

Egolf said that he has spoken with Geoff Reese (sic) of the Lehigh Valley Planning Commission (LVPC).  He is in charge of this program.  He (Egolf) is also on the Bushkill Stream Conservancy and he wanted to be certain that there would be no conflict of interest.  Egolf was told that there is no conflict of interest posed by serving both groups and he said that he is interested in doing it. 

Egolf said that he also learned that it is important for the Township Solicitor, Township Engineer, and Chairman of the PC to be aware that the end result will be a municipal ordinance.  Reese suggested that they should all be on the Bushkill Creek Watershed mailing list for announcements, minutes, and updates to keep them apprised of what is going on with the committee.

The vote was 5:0.  Schnaedter will write a letter to advise the Bushkill Creek Watershed group that Egolf was chosen to be Forks' representative.

Executive Session - There was no Executive Session and the meeting was adjourned. 

Our objective is to relate what is experienced at Forks Township meetings for those who cannot attend. We are attempting to be as factual as we can. If we make a mistake, tell us via email or COMMENT here in the blog, and we will do our best to correct it. We are not perfect. We want to get it right.

Commonwealth Court says "no" to KMRD's procedural challenge

From the FAC website:  On December 21, 2009, the PA Commonwealth Court validated Forks Zoning Hearing Board's decision in favor the of the Township and against KMRD in its procedural challenge of Forks zoning ordinances.  

It remains to be seen if KMRD will pursue the challenge to the next level, the State Supreme Court, and if it does, whether or not the Supreme Court will agree to hear the case.

Read the decision here - large file.  For more details read these articles:   Tony Nauroth - December 23rd Express Times and Riley Yates - December 24th - Morning Call.

KMRD - Oral arguments - Procedural Challenge - Coming Feb. 3rd

The Northampton County Court of Common Pleas has scheduled the oral arguments in the KMRD Procedural Challenge (large file) for 9:00 AM, February 3rd.

This is the challenge that the Forks Zoning Hearing Board rejected on March 24, 2008. KMRD alleged that Forks Zoning Ordinances back to 1983 were enacted with flawed procedures and should therefore be declared invalid. It is no secret that KMRD would prefer to develop the land they own and/or have under contract using 1983 rules.

If you have time on Tuesday, February 3rd, you may want to watch the proceedings in the Northampton County Court of Common Pleas for yourself.

Forks 5 - KMRD 0

Yes!  Forks' Zoning Hearing Board (ZHB) voted 5:0 against the KMRD/Kings Mill challenge to Forks zoning ordinance -  because the "applicant" failed to meet the burden of proof.  The meeting went on for three hours. 

The testimonies of three Forks residents are now part of the court record.  Please read the considered and thoughtful words of James Wideman and David Billings.  Mark Mulrine spoke, too.  Unfortunately, we do not have a copy of his testimony.  He spoke to his disregard for developers who come to our township, build, devastate, and leave.  

These Forks residents, your neighbors, spoke for you and for our Township. Yes, there was indeed applause!

Attorney VanLuvanee (representing KMRD - and also a KMRD principal) gave a summation lasting approximately 1-1/2 hours.  He contended that the 2006 zoning ordnance had nothing to do with farmland preservation and was meant instead to halt development.  According to VanLuvanee, the Constitution says you cannot tailor an ordinance to exclude classes of people which, in essence, (he alleged) that Forks did by not allowing apartments, townhouses, and mobile homes in the Farmland Protection (FP) district.  He also stated that the LVPC (Lehigh Valley Planning Commission) criticized the 2000 Forks Zoning Ordinance because it was not changed to allow these types of houses.  VanLuvanee referenced numerous court cases, many in which he was involved.

VanLuvanee claimed that one of the goals of the 2006 zoning change from the 2000 zoning ordinance was a 10% reduction in development throughout the township. He claimed that sewer is a State regulation and not a justification for one acre lots. He also claimed that Forks shirked its responsibility when dealing with exploding growth - rather Forks ran the other way and did not deal with the issue.

The Township's attorney, Steve Goudsouzian, pointed out that Nic Zawarski & Sons (another member of the KMRD partnership) did not build apartments when building in Forks but instead built high value homes - because of the profit factor.  The opportunity to build the other types of housing was there but was rejected by developers in Forks.  Also, Goudsouzian noted that KMRD never provided a map of the proposed development (Kings Mill) choosing instead to use old graphs to substantiate its case - some of which were proven inaccurate by the Forks' expert witness, Mr. Charles Schmehl, of Urban Research & Development (URDC).

Goudsouzian noted that the FP is in the northeast section of the Township - an area, he said, that is not in the path of growth primarily because of the lack of sewers.  And, contrary to what VanLuvanee indicated, low income housing is not a law in PA.

Goudsouzian said that not only was the opportunity there for developers to build apartments, they actually had approved plans for building apartments, and Forks accommodated the developers on their plan changes to more profitable types of housing.  KMRD bought land from farmers at a reduced rate, and now wants to change the rules to increase their profits.

Goudsouzian said of the KMRD expert witnesses:

• Glackin knew about the Heritage case, but chose to ignore it in his testimony. 
• Bernard ignored PA law and instead said this is what we should have.
• Unangst ignored practical issues with building on smaller lots and instead presented development in a perfect scenario.

KMRD had two principal claims - that Forks does not preserve agriculture and that it does not provide a variety of housing types.  Goudsouzian also pointed out that you don't have to look at the entirety of Forks Township to determine if it is in the path of growth.  You can look at the FP district and determine if that alone is/is not in the path of growth.

The Zoning Hearing Board members expressed their opinions before the vote:

• Mr. Kimmel - said that he reviewed many transcripts and thought there was overkill on what was actually needed. He stated that Forks is highly developed and that both sides agreed that over the last five years Forks has taken on a larger burden than most with growth.  Why should we be forced to continue to take on more?  He said that the changes from the 2000 ordinance to the 2006 ordinance dealt with open space requirements throughout the Township, and not just in the FP.  Kimmel said that he is comfortable with what zoning has done and that there are no serious problems.
• Mr. Asteak - asked if the land is in the logical path of growth?  "No."  He offered that there are inadequate water, roads, etc. and therefore it is not in a logical path of growth.
• Mr. Moyer - said that developers have had the opportunity to build enough multiple family units and the economic margins and/or markets have made their determinations, not Forks Township.  KMRD ignores its own history.  He felt that the school impact was glossed over and that there would be a negative impact to Easton. The statement that traffic cannot be a reason for denial is spoken by those who won't be driving here.  Moyer  further pointed out that 25 acres of housing will protect 25 acres of farming - dispelling the KMRD assertion that three acre housing does not protect farmland. He also agreed that Forks' is highly developed and that the FP is not in the path of growth.  He said that Forks provided developers the opportunity for all housing types.
• Mr. Rossi - said that the Township did not pull zoning out of the air.  Forks has always hired legal experts, made field trips, had hearings, formed committees, and spoken with many professionals - before any zoning or ordinance changes.  Further, Rossi added, the township went out of its way to accommodate developers. He said that Forks gives developers options for what they can build.  Forks cannot tell developers what they can build.
• Mr. Pappas - concurred with the other ZHB members.

Please read Christopher Baxter (Morning Call) and Tony Nauroth (Express Times) for more of this most gratifying final session of the KMRD/King's Mill challenge to Forks' 2006 zoning ordinance.  And, yes, it will be appealed in the Northampton Court of Common Pleas - VanLuvanee said so.

FAC wishes to thank all those who attended this and other rounds of the KMRD zoning challenge hearing and who contributed their time and insight to the reporting of it.

Our objective is to relate what is experienced at Forks Township meetings for those who cannot attend. We are attempting to be as factual as we can. If we make a mistake, tell us via email or COMMENT here in the blog, and we will do our best to correct it. We are not perfect. We want to get it right.

KMRD's Kings Mill zoning hearing - Down to the last round!

In case you missed the newspaper coverage of the 24th round of the ongoing KMRD/Kings Mill zoning challenge hearing (on September 8)... kidding... you had to miss it.  There were no reporters there. 

You may not have heard yet, but the next meeting will be the last.  It was announced.  It is certain.  It is carved in stone.

The big news is that YOU, the public, will be given a chance to speak.  Your words will become part of the official record of the hearing. 

To read a summary of round 24 (and more) please visit the FAC Kings Mill web page and for another view, check out David Billings' Everything Forks blog post. 

Remember:  Monday, October 20th is YOUR night!  Don't miss your only opportunity to affect the outcome.  The hearing begins at 7:30 PM. 

Kings Mill Zoning Hearing - Round 23 - August 4 at 7:30 PM – Will it be the last?

August 2006 is when the KMRD challenge hearing began - and what a long hearing it has been.  With the August 4th session, the end will be in sight.  In fact, it may even be "the end."  It is only fitting that the hearing ends in August - 24 months later! 

The KMRD challenge alleges that the Farmland Protection (FP) zoning regulations are "arbitrary, unreasonable and unconstitutional" and that the Township fails to allow enough space for mobile home parks and multi-family dwellings.  The pressure on our town has been constant - for two full years.  And, as promised in 2006, Forks has not caved.

What to expect at Monday's session:

• Additional cross-examination of the Township's final witness by the appellant attorney.
• Testimony from an as yet unidentified rebuttal witness.
• Cross-examination of that unidentified witness by the Township's attorney.

What may also occur:

• Summary arguments by both sides.
• A vote by the Zoning Hearing Board.

Unknown: 

• If another session will be needed before the Zoning Hearing Board renders its decision.
• If your opinions will be heard.

If you want to watch the hearing wrap up, plan to attend Round 23 this Monday, August 4th - 7:30 PM - in the Municipal Building meeting room.  You may not get another chance!

BoS Meeting 5/15/08

Regular Meeting (agenda)

The small agenda did not insure a short BoS meeting as a good deal of time was spent discussing the Comprehensive Plan process.  For more, see Madeleine Mathias' article from the May 16, 2008 edition of the Morning Call.

Public Comments (non-agenda) - There were no comments from the public re. non-agenda items.  (Note:  This section has been moved to the beginning of the meeting - after the approval of the previous meeting's minutes.)

Supervisor Remarks

Supervisor Chuss raised two questions/issues: 

1. He asked what the disposition of the new policy re. contact with the solicitor and engineer was.  He was reminded by Nicholas that the policy passed at a previous meeting.  (See BoS meeting notes from 4/3/08.)
2. He asked that meeting agendas (if available) and confirmations/cancellations of committee meetings be sent via email to all Board members a few days before meetings.  Supervisor Egolf said that he already sends them to those attending and will copy the Board.  Chairman Howell said of the Parks & Recreation Committee agenda that it is a "comprehensive" one that includes all the items that the committee is considering.  At meetings different items are emphasized.  He will forward the agenda to the Board when he sends the meeting minutes. 

Treasurer's Report - Egolf detailed the debits (cash paid out) since the last Supervisors' meeting. The debits and transfers were approved with a 5:0 vote.  The current outstanding debt is $7,875,858.

(Resident) Sandy Hanks asked what the transfer of funds to the Recreation Land Acquisition Fund is?  Finance Manager Farley explained that it is monies for the cost of materials and supplies for the Gollub Park project.  Howell wondered why the $1 million from the Real Estate Fund wasn't questioned by anyone.  Farley explained that it was simply a check cut from the real estate tax receipts fund for deposit to the General Fund.  The monies were collected in April and a transfer is not done, a check is actually written.

Standing Committee Reports (meetings are open to the public - see the official Township calendar for dates and times)

• Public Safety - Supervisor Chuss - noted that the May meeting was canceled and that the next will be on June 3rd.  He reported that the police department is getting the furniture plans together and that the discussion about the fire training facility foundation is underway.
• Public Works - Supervisor Miller - said that there has been no meeting so there is no report.  
• Parks & Recreation - Supervisor Howell - reported that the committee met last Thursday and is continuing to explore park equipment - whether to restore or buy new.  The committee is preparing to report to the Board on a mini/neighborhood park concept where smaller recreation equipment would be located in some Township neighborhoods.  It would take some pressure off of the central park.  The committee will send a request for recommendations to the Recreation Board.  This committee meets twice a month.
• Community Relations - Supervisor Nicholas - said that the next meeting is scheduled for June 9th at 6 PM.  She reported that the rough draft of the next Forks Quarterly is ready.  Township Manager Schnaedter said that he expects a proof in a few days and will distribute it to the Board. 
• Finance and Administration - Supervisor Egolf - reported that the committee met on May 14th and that the new server is being installed.  The installation will take approximately two weeks and when up and running, should help greatly with email and with the document management system.  The committee is looking at the best ways to manage documents that are received daily.  Egolf said that they attended a document management conference on Tuesday and that Farley will attend a one day workshop (on the document management system).  The committee meets twice a month and the next meeting is set for May 28th.

Township Manager's Report - Schnaedter - said that he received a letter from the Bushkill Stream Conservancy requesting permission to put in a wildflower meadow at Lion's Park.  Howell said that when he read the letter from Mrs. Merwarth, President of the Bushkill Stream Conservancy, he asked Miller and DPW Director Mark Roberts to check out the area being considered.  Miller said that both he and Roberts have done that.  The area is already staked out and is not an area that cars use.  He said the wildflower meadow will look nice and is a good addition to what's along the creek.  Roberts added that Ed (Kleppinger - Parks Crew Chief) looked the area over as well and foresees no maintenance issues with it.  Howell asked if this will affect the Eagle Scouts' project.  Roberts said he will meet with the aspiring Eagle Scouts tomorrow (Friday, 5/16). 

Nicholas asked about access to the creek for fisherman (and others) and was told that it won't be impeded.

Egolf made a motion (seconded by Chuss) to approve the meadow in Lion's Park and to authorize the preparation of the area (and to include the Boy Scouts.)  The vote was unanimous.

Schnaedter also reported that the minutes of the meeting with PennDOT and various municipal officials about the Stockertown bridge are included in the Supervisors' packets.  Howell asked what Stockertown's point of view is regarding the bridge.  Schnaedter said that Stockertown Borough Council voted against replacing the vehicle bridge but would like a pedestrian bridge that is coordinated with the area recreation trails.  Howell asked the Board if it was interested in pursuing Chuss' request from the last meeting about a letter to Stockertown.

Chuss said that Schnaedter spoke with Mr. Fatzinger (Stockertown Council member) and Fatzinger was adamant about "no bridge."  Chuss said that he thought that comments by Forks' Supervisors should be passed on as the bridge would help to alleviate traffic on Sullivan & Uhler, Bushkill & Uhler, and Church Lane & Sullivan Trail. 

Chuss made a motion to send a letter to the Borough of Stockertown expressing Forks' support of the bridge.  Miller seconded the motion.  In discussion, Nicholas said that although she would like to see the bridge, she felt that it was not the Board's place to tell Stockertown what to do.  She said it would be akin to Stockertown telling Forks not to allow a business in its industrial park because it would create more traffic in Stockertown. 

Howell said that the minutes were of meeting with PennDOT and in considering etiquette, he thought that perhaps the letter should be sent to PennDOT since they were the ones interested in input and Forks was not invited. Howell said that he understood Nicholas' comments and that telling Stockertown that "we want the bridge for our selfish reasons and they don't want the bridge for theirs" can have unintended consequences.

Chuss amended his motion to send the letter to PennDOT.  It passed 4:1 with Howell casting the nay vote.

Schnaedter also reported that he met with Solicitor Kline and is gathering sample ordinances and policies from area municipalities regarding obstructions in right-of-ways.  He will report further at the next meeting. 

Engineer's Report - reported that the specifications for the Community Center HVAC were complete and he asked permission to go out for bid.  The system is for both buildings.  Nicholas asked that the specs be emailed to her.  Miller made the motion and Egolf seconded.  The procedure is that the specs will be advertised and then there will be a pre-bid meeting, then a bid opening, and the bids will be checked by staff for bonding, compliance, etc.  The contract will likely be awarded at the the second BoS meeting in June.  Nicholas also asked that copies of the contract be provided to the Board.  The vote was unanimous.  (The Community Center air conditioning will be working this summer.)

Solicitor's Report - Kline - reported the following:

1. He reviewed Forks' ordinances for one dealing with on-sidewalk basketball hoops.  Schnaedter is reviewing the issue with other municipalities.  If there are continuing problems, residents should call the police department and they will handle the complaints as appropriate.
2. The KMRD Procedural Challenge 24 page Zoning Hearing Board (ZHB) decision (large file) has been received.  The ZHB rejected the challenge by KMRD and upheld the procedural validity of the Township Zoning Ordinance.  KMRD had hoped to invalidate all zoning ordinances back to 1983 so that they could proceed with their land plans for the FP (Farmland Protection district) under the old rules.  KMRD has 30 days from receipt of the written decision to file an appeal with the Northampton County Court of Common Pleas. 
3. The KMRD Substantive Challenge hearings are continuing.  The Township's testimony has been concluded (on 5/14/08).  The last witness, Charles Schmehl of Urban Research and Development (URDC), the Township's expert, will be cross-examined at the next hearing on June 16th.  Kline said that KMRD will probably have a rebuttal witness as well.  There should only be two or three more hearings.
4. The Kings Farm land development plan (the by-right plan, filed under the 2001 zoning ordinance - with 2 acre lots - that was rejected by the BoS because the developer did not perform the soil and perc tests - the developer's failure to proceed) appeal was rejected by the Northampton County Court of Common Pleas.  The time to appeal that decision has passed and the developer did not appeal.  This one is over.
5. Playground equipment purchased under COSTARS, the State negotiated price program, can be negotiated down in price.  The COSTARS numbers are the capped (top) price.  In that spirit, Kline negotiated $1000 out of the installation price.  The total price for the equipment plus installation is now $55,688.  Kline recommended that the Board sign the contract at the reduced price.  A new motion was made at the revised price.  It passed unanimously.

UNFINISHED BUSINESS

Sullivan Trail Business Park (Karl Kline, Solicitor) - Kline explained that this has been on the books for years and that there has been a great deal of difficulty getting the developer (Goffredo) to complete the improvements.  The plan was approved in August 2001 and the subdivision improvement agreement was executed in August 2002.  Five years later, with most of the lots sold (exceptions are the Weis site and lots 5A & 5B), many of the required improvements are not complete.

Goffredo was to have completed all of the improvements within two years of the issuance of the first building permit.   The first was issued in October 2005 and all the municipal improvements were to be completed no later than last October.  Kline said that he has written to the developer and he and Hay have met with him and with his legal council and there is still no indication that the work will be completed.

The regional detention pond on the Merchants Bank property is not fixed.  The bank is extremely displeased and upset with the developer.  Because there is no low-flow drain in it, it has become a marsh - complete with cattails.

Kline recommended that the BoS draw on the line of credit.  This action will notify the bank that the developer is in default and that they are to immediately give Forks the $179,886.74 balance.  This means that the Township will undertake the improvements and the amount becomes a debt of the developer.  The letter of credit expires May 24th.

Nicholas asked if this was work that the Township DPW can do or if it will have to go out for bids.  Hay replied that bids will be needed. 

(Resident) Sandy Hanks asked who is responsible if the work costs more than the letter of credit balance?  Kline replied that it is the developer's responsibility and that under the MPC (Municipal Planning Code), the Township is responsible to see that the work gets done.  Kline offered that the Township can sue the developer for the difference or there may be opportunities to work out arrangements with some of the other builders coming in to the business park.  Kline thought it premature to decide to sue the developer.

The work to be done includes the wearing course on the business park roads, a job that will be not be done until after the Weis site (and other) construction is completed. 

Nicholas made a motion, seconded by Miller, to draw on the letter of credit.  In discussion, Egolf said that he saw that trees were being planted along the perimeter of the site.  Hay said that developers commonly do the easy things and that he saw that couple of light poles were in also.  The vote was 5:0.

NEW BUSINESS

Fort James III Subdivision (Karl Kline, Solicitor) - Kline reported that the developers agreements are in place and that a letter of credit for the entire site has been received - in the amount of $3,258,299.15.  Two major land developments are in process, Weyerhaeuser Industries and Henningsen Cold Storage.  The subdivision was approved in a 5:0 vote. 

Comprehensive Plan Update (Karl Kline, Solicitor) - Kline briefed the Supervisors about the decision by the Planning Commission (PC) last week to pass the draft Comprehensive Plan (in its current state) to them.  He said that the PC was hard at work for many months on the Comprehensive Plan and that many volunteers worked on it also.  Reports were submitted to the PC.  The Comprehensive Plan was put together in draft form by the PC and Charlie Schmehl (of URDC). 

Kline added that he believed Schmehl was planning to add the charts and maps before sending it to the Board.  It will be emailed to the Township.  And, Kline thought that the Board should discuss and write out what the process for going forward with the Comprehensive Plan will be.  Although, he offered that without anything in front of them, it may be difficult to make a decision tonight.

Howell asked Zoning Officer Tim Weis to provide a hard copy for each of the Supervisors.  Weis said that he will advise the Board when he's received it so that they can make a decision about putting it on the agenda.

Kline enumerated the steps that must happen before the plan's adoption:

1. The Board must be satisfied with the condition of the document.
2. The plan must be sent to the Lehigh Valley Planning Commission (LVPC), the EASD, and neighboring municipalities for comment.
3. There must be a public hearing before the Board of Supervisors.

Kline said that Board must decide what the procedure will be for editorial or substantive changes - should the Board wish to make any. 

Howell said that he would like the Board to make some sort of timetable for the review at the next meeting. 

Chuss said that the MPC has guidelines and that the Board should make a decision at its next meeting to send the plan on the LVPC and to the surrounding municipalities.  He said that the PC target date was March and that a complete review of the plan will result in unnecessary delay.  Chuss said that PC has gone to great lengths to solicit public input and BoS comments.  Further delay may mean looking at issues again.

Egolf said that he understands Chuss' concerns.  It has been a long process and reflects a lot of hard work from many people. 

Howell agreed that there were lots of opportunities for comment throughout the process.  There were comments made by the Supervisors and by the public but he said that he is not sure how they were compiled or listed since the minutes he's reviewed do not reference them.  Howell said that he's attended 80% of the workshop meetings and that comments were taken but he's not sure what happened to them.

Egolf said that this is exactly how he feels but that he is optimistic and "will take the whole thing on good faith."  He said that significant revisions were asked for and if they are included, he thinks it will be a "green light."  But, he said, he must see the draft before he will agree to pass it on to neighboring municipalities, the LVPC, etc.

Nicholas addressed Kline and said that she was at the workshop meeting when the motion to establish an ad hoc committee to review comments was passed.  Then she got the email from Dean (Turner - PC Chairman) stating that the PC was sending the plan to the Board as is.  She thought that this would be like her saying that she wants to do a vote over on something from last year.  Nicholas asked Kline if it was proper and Kline said that the PC has a right to do it. He added that "there are numerous instances where a governing body chooses to reconsider an action that it took before." 

Nicholas said that her understanding then is that the comments made at that workshop will (now) not be included.  Kline said that at that meeting there were editorial comments made by the public as well as comments of a substantive nature.  He added, "The PC was not interested in proceeding with the substantive changes and that only editorial changes needed to be made."  And, he suggested that if the Board wants those comments included it will have to decide on the process to include them. 

Chuss said that that was not his understanding and that any changes the PC agreed to would be incorporated by Schmehl into the document that would be sent to the Board. 

Kline said that the PC voted to pass it on in whatever condition it is.  However in an email from Schmehl to Kline and the Board, Schmehl said that he wanted to "issue a new draft to incorporate editorial improvements, updated mapping, photos, and some items raised at the last meeting and to incorporate the changes memo that was distributed at the April Planning Commission workshop."  Kline said that some of the comments may be in the draft that Schmehl sends - but until the Board gets it, it won't know.

Chuss said that he requested that Schmehl place bookmarks at all the changes so that a full review will be unnecessary.  He offered that if there are any significant issues they can be discussed - although he can't imagine what those significant issues could be that have not already been discussed.  He said again that the Board "should be prepared at the next meeting to forward it on to the LVPC and other communities so that we (the Board) can be sure that the Comprehensive Plan meets the needs of the Township."  Chuss added that the LVPC review can take up to 45 days which would put the public hearing sometime in August and that this (moving it forward) is one of the ways to "expedite the process."

Egolf said that the bottom line is that until the Board sees the draft it won't know what has been done.  He offered again that he will remain optimistic that it's all included.

Chuss agreed that he, too, is optimistic and said that he trusts Mr. Schmehl a lot.  He praised how receptive Schmehl has been to any comments and that he was always accommodating.

Weis said that he is sure they will have it before the next meeting so it should be placed on the agenda for discussion "one way or the other."

Nicholas said that she thinks that it is a very important document - considering the lawsuits against the Township.  She added that the Board really needs to be cautious and certain that this (document) is what the Board wants.

Howell said, "There were substantive comments made throughout the entire process... at meetings that Charles (Schmehl) was not present."   Howell said that he doesn't know what the process was to collect the comments.  He said that he is not concerned about the timing because "the process is the process."  He reiterated Nicholas' sentiment, that the Comprehensive Plan is a guide for the Board.  And, he added, that it is a guide that will be supported by changes in the Zoning Ordinance.

Howell said that he will be looking at how the Zoning Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan agree on what the Township sees for the FP.  He will also look at comments he's made regarding "vision" and about the refining of the Plan. 

Howell said that the URDC/Schmehl proposal is a rather substantial document and is about 50 pages long.  Yet the Planners' comments are that they are just "fine tuning and tweaking" (the 1997 Comprehensive Plan.)  Howell added that in the first few sentences of the document (the draft Comprehensive Plan) it says the duration of the Plan is 15 years.  He would agree that tweaking and fine tuning would be fine if nothing had happened in the Township since 1997.  However, since a lot has happened in the Township since 1997, Schmehl's proposal was right on target.  Howell added that Schmehl has done a credible job and the document complies with the statute and the design desired by the LVPC.  He just wants to be certain that the content is what the Board wants.

Howell related that in the mid-nineties, Supervisor Hoff complained that the Township was not getting its share of commercial and residential development.  To remedy that the Board lowered impact fees... and got growth.  Howell said, speaking for himself, he wants to be sure the Comprehensive Plan prepares the Township for the next 15 years.  And, he added, that if the Board, after review, has any substantive changes, that the changes are considered and not just forgotten.  Howell said that he will have substantive changes.

Chuss said that throughout the process there has been opportunity to provide input from both the Supervisors and the public.  Chuss said that he finds it "a little bit troubling to stop now and begin changing what has already been developed through meeting after meeting."  The opportunities, he said, for public input were more than ample.  He said these changes are coming in not at the 11th hour, not at 11:59, but at 12:15.  Chuss added that this delay is unnecessary and that "the Plan will never be perfect because as long as it's being worked on, the Township - the State - the world is changing."

Howell said that 15 years is written in the Plan and when he asked a few planners if they knew that, they did not.  He said that he brought up early on about vision sessions and never heard a conversation about one in public.  Howell said that he took Vito (Planner Tamborrino) at his word at the last (PC) meeting, when he said, "We are going to send it to the Board as is because we know we're going to get it back."  Howell said that no one is talking about a re-write and that suggestion of one is a "conjured up idea." 

Nicholas said that she doesn't think the plan should be for 15 years and that that should be taken out.  She remarked that a lot has happened since 1997 and that there's no way to know what will happen in the next five years.

Sandra Hanks asked if the Board can make changes or if it's only a PC function?  The answer was "yes" that the Board can make comments/suggestions. 

Chuss said that there were joint PC/BoS meetings in January, February and March specifically to address issues.  He added that the 15 years in the Plan is the maximum length and there is nothing preventing it from being changed next year.  Chuss reiterated that it's simply a guide and that ordinances are based on it.  He added that there is "an underlying vision in the plan and it is the vision of the residents who participated."

Howell offered that they must understand that "the process is what it is... it takes as long as it takes."  He asked Weis to post the new draft Comprehensive Plan on the Township website so that the public can see it.  The process is transparent.

Executive Session - The session was held to discuss several personnel matters.  No action was taken during the session but afterwards, in a 5:0 vote, the Board promoted Robin Featherman to the new position of Senior Crew Chief at a rate of $22.00/hr.  The rate for a Crew Chief is $20.96/hr.  Featherman will be second under DPW Director Mark Roberts.

Our objective is to relate what is experienced at Forks Township meetings for those who cannot attend. We are attempting to be as factual as we can. If we make a mistake, tell us via email or COMMENT here in the blog, and we will do our best to correct it. We are not perfect. We want to get it right.

Round 21 - Kings Mill/KMRD - A Technicality Forces Do-Over!

Yes, that is correct.  A technicality forced the postponement of Round 21 of the King's Mill/KMRD zoning challenge hearing.  The court recorder, an essential participant, was a no-show.  Hearings cannot be held if there is no court recorder. 

The Zoning Hearing Board (ZHB) and its solicitor, Michael Shay were there.  The Township attorneys, Stephen Goudsouzian and Karl Kline were there.  The witness, Charlie Schmehl of URDC was there.  The appellant's council, Kellie McGowan was there.  Even a few residents were there. 

Calls were made to the court recorder - voice mail answered - and, as a result, after one half hour of waiting, the meeting was convened (so it could be canceled), and a postponement was declared. 

The do-over of Round 21 (now Round 21.5) is planned for Wednesday, May 14th at 7:30 PM.