On Monday night, the Upper Mount Bethel Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to send a letter to Plainfield Township, advising that they oppose the proposed Synagro biosolids plant and reserve the right to appear at meetings and hearings to be a party. On June 2, the Lower Mount Bethel Board of Supervisors sent a similar letter (below).
These letters join letters from Wind Gap and Pen Argyl, which all express similar concerns: stream and water quality, air quality, truck traffic, quality of life, property values, etc. Plainfield Township supervisors also oppose this project, but legally they can't express an opinion one way or the other. The most outspoken critic in the area has been John Reinhardt, who has written excellent letters to the newspaper explaining why turning the entire Slate Belt into a trash dump under the guise of Economic Development and "good jobs" (Synagro projects an underwhelming 16 jobs at this site) will destroy the quality of the lives of those living there.
Nobody in the Slate Belt wants this pile of shit business located there, except Waste Management, Green Knight Economic Development Corporation, and Synagro. Following the April Q&A, Green Knight President Carlton Snyder stated that one of the criteria GKEDC looked at was "contractual obligations between the parties" when Green Kight chose to support this project. What does this mean? Green Knight is a 501(c)(3) - but are they truly independent as required for non-profit status?
It appears that Waste Management wants this project desperately, to fit into their plains for the trash dump. Recently this blog broke the news that Waste Management submitted a permit modification request to DEP in 2016, for disposal of liquid waste - a very lucrative segment of the waste disposal market. Only months later, this Synagro project is announced on property adjacent to the land fill owned by Waste Management. How does this project fit into Waste Management's grand plan is the question...
The purpose of this blog is to document solid waste and water extraction projects that do not meet zoning requirements or are just very poorly conceived, in an effort to protect the rights and health, safety and welfare of neighboring landowners and residents. The initial project was Nestlé Waters in Kunkletown, Eldred Township. Later, the Synagro biosolids in Plainfield Township - the "Slate Belt Heat Recovery Center" was our focus. We all live downstream.
Tuesday, June 13, 2017
Plainfield Township Zoning Office denies Synagro biosolids plant permit for 2nd time and determines at least 8 zoning variances required
Note: this post primarily concerns the Zoning Office letter which was published the afternoon of June 12, not the Site Plan review by the Planning Commission that evening.
On June 12, 2017, the Plainfield Township Zoning Office issued a letter to Synagro, determining that at least eight (8) specific variances are required for its planned crap bakery as a permitted use in the Solid Waste Zoning District. Several other Zoning Ordinance requirements are questioned, and compliance is reserved to be determined at a later date. Just because it's permitted doesn't mean it can happen. This is a major setback for Synagro - variances are heard by the Zoning Hearing Board, whose decisions are appealed to the Court of Common Pleas, then the Commonwealth Court, etc. There are specific criteria that must be met to justify variances - often glossed over by Zoning Hearing Boards, but are the ultimate determining factor in whether a variance is justified. If your township's zoning hearing board is a Kangaroo Court, as was displayed in West Penn Township last evening (water extraction matter), its decisions can easily be overturned on appeal.
For good measure, a Zoning Permit for Synagro was denied for the second time - in the first Zoning Office's review letter in April the permit was also denied. This is SOP, due to the requirement to approve or deny a permit within a set time frame, and a Site Plan approval required that takes longer than that time frame. In the case of a Site Plan review, up until a permit is issued following a review and recommendation to the Zoning Officer, variances may be required; the determinations made June 12 do not exclude the possibility of additional variances being required later in the process.
Some top level questions in the township's letter that are identified are:
On June 12, 2017, the Plainfield Township Zoning Office issued a letter to Synagro, determining that at least eight (8) specific variances are required for its planned crap bakery as a permitted use in the Solid Waste Zoning District. Several other Zoning Ordinance requirements are questioned, and compliance is reserved to be determined at a later date. Just because it's permitted doesn't mean it can happen. This is a major setback for Synagro - variances are heard by the Zoning Hearing Board, whose decisions are appealed to the Court of Common Pleas, then the Commonwealth Court, etc. There are specific criteria that must be met to justify variances - often glossed over by Zoning Hearing Boards, but are the ultimate determining factor in whether a variance is justified. If your township's zoning hearing board is a Kangaroo Court, as was displayed in West Penn Township last evening (water extraction matter), its decisions can easily be overturned on appeal.
For good measure, a Zoning Permit for Synagro was denied for the second time - in the first Zoning Office's review letter in April the permit was also denied. This is SOP, due to the requirement to approve or deny a permit within a set time frame, and a Site Plan approval required that takes longer than that time frame. In the case of a Site Plan review, up until a permit is issued following a review and recommendation to the Zoning Officer, variances may be required; the determinations made June 12 do not exclude the possibility of additional variances being required later in the process.
Some top level questions in the township's letter that are identified are:
- "Can Syangro use Plainfield Township property (Recreational Trail) under the terms of an agreement that granted Grand Central (Waste Management) the right to use said property until the land fill closes?" The land fill is expected to close roughly between 2030 and 2035.
- Can the subdivision that created the Green Knight Energy Center parcel be "undone"?
At the June 12 Planning Commission review of Synagro's Site Plan, Solicitor Backenstoe addressed concerns about the Recreational Trail use agreement with Grand Central, and indicated he would review it more closely in order to give guidance on it prior to the continuation of the Planning Commission review.
It is expected that prior to the next Planning Commission meeting, Synagro will submit variance applications for the variances identified, since the Planning Commission reviews variances prior to the Zoning Hearing Board voting to approve/disapprove them. Basically, Synagro is up Shits Creek - screwed. They can't possibly meet the criteria specified in the Municipalities Planning Code.to be granted variances on the proposed site. Here are the variances determined to be required. Each line item is a reference to an Article in the Ordinance:
- (Use) 315(B)(35)(b) Entrance/Exit drives shall be separated and accessed from an arterial or collector road
- (Dim) 505 areas within 50' of a pond shall be open space
- (Dim) 318(I) Front yard setback of 50'
- (Dim) 704(B)(3) Maneuvering room shall be outside required buffer and yard areas
- (Use) 402(A) Street frontage
- (Use) 201(B) Front yard definition
- (Dim) 703(G)(1) Parking space and access drives shall be at least 10' from side/rear lot lines
- (Dim) 703(G)(2) Areas that are not parking spaces, access drives, walkways shall be landscaped
"Use" is a use variance, "Dim" is a dimensional variance - as determined by this blogger. Use variances are rarely granted. The pond setback variance was identified as "use" because Synagro proposes not only building too close to it, but in the pond. Amphi-truck, anyone?
Here is the biggest problem with Synagro's Site Plan - they have far less space (less than 50%) than they need, so they made up their own definition of front yard to fit their building in, and in the process triggered two of the variances above. In the process, they chose an arbitrary point (red circle in diagram) to transition from the front yard to a make believe side yard. The SALDO specifically provides for lots along curved roads, in which the entire frontage is the front yard, there are two side yards that meet at the rear, and there is no rear yard. Synagro came up with a fantasy yard layout, in order to deal with only a 25' setback along the recreational trail - which in their imaginary world they call a side yard, adjacent to township property not even identified on the site plan that Synagro plans to use for the life of its proposed plant. The green line in the diagram depicts yards that actually comply with the SALDO and Ordinance. What Synagro did is bull shit - let's start the side yard at this random point Joe chose to make everything fit. Hey, great idea!
Here is the biggest problem with Synagro's Site Plan - they have far less space (less than 50%) than they need, so they made up their own definition of front yard to fit their building in, and in the process triggered two of the variances above. In the process, they chose an arbitrary point (red circle in diagram) to transition from the front yard to a make believe side yard. The SALDO specifically provides for lots along curved roads, in which the entire frontage is the front yard, there are two side yards that meet at the rear, and there is no rear yard. Synagro came up with a fantasy yard layout, in order to deal with only a 25' setback along the recreational trail - which in their imaginary world they call a side yard, adjacent to township property not even identified on the site plan that Synagro plans to use for the life of its proposed plant. The green line in the diagram depicts yards that actually comply with the SALDO and Ordinance. What Synagro did is bull shit - let's start the side yard at this random point Joe chose to make everything fit. Hey, great idea!
Synagro's fantasy yard layout (black), compared with the yards as defined in the SALDO and Zoning Ordinance (green)
Employees will need one of these to park in the pond. A larger version is needed for sludge transport near through the parking area
Here is the Zoning Office's June 12 letter:
Monday, June 12, 2017
Two important Poop and Water Extraction blog municipal meetings tonight, in the midst of intimidation
Tonight, in West Penn Township, there is a Zoning Hearing Board hearing to hear an appeal by citizens rightfully upset that a water extraction operation was welcomed quietly into town - in a process that bypasses the one dictated by the Municipalities Planning Code as well as the township zoning ordinance. In court testimony last week, in which water pimp Jay Land failed in his attempt to have a bond required, there was testimony that concerned citizens had been intimidated by the landowners and Mr. Land in response to them pursuing their right to challenge Land's permit and its regulatory enforcement. It rumored there have been one or more additional incidents, which may be discussed at tonight's hearing.
In Plainfield Township, poop processor Synagro pursues review of its Site Plan in support of its application to locate a crap bakery in the township. What was designed to be a back door (yuck yuck) approach in which the community was blindsided and would not know what happened until the project was approved has evolved into a major battle. Three townships have explicitly objected to the proposed project, and it is rumored a fourth is or has sent its objection as well. Plainfield Township can not legally object to the project, but has hired consultants to "make sure the ordinance is upheld." (aka it objects) Now comes evidence that agents of Synagro are engaged in what appears to this blogger to be intimidation. I have never seen such a letter accompanying materials for planning commission review, in which members are reminded of their "legal obligation" before an application is even reviewed. This application was submitted March 31, 2017 and has not yet had a first review due to multiple delays requested by Synagro.
The result of the Zoning Office's review is (just received this afternoon - see below) is that Synagro must appear before the Zoning Hearing Board in a quasi-judicial proceeding to meet it's legal obligation in an attempt to prove hardship for variances. Judge for yourself the letter from Synagro's legal counsel:
In Plainfield Township, poop processor Synagro pursues review of its Site Plan in support of its application to locate a crap bakery in the township. What was designed to be a back door (yuck yuck) approach in which the community was blindsided and would not know what happened until the project was approved has evolved into a major battle. Three townships have explicitly objected to the proposed project, and it is rumored a fourth is or has sent its objection as well. Plainfield Township can not legally object to the project, but has hired consultants to "make sure the ordinance is upheld." (aka it objects) Now comes evidence that agents of Synagro are engaged in what appears to this blogger to be intimidation. I have never seen such a letter accompanying materials for planning commission review, in which members are reminded of their "legal obligation" before an application is even reviewed. This application was submitted March 31, 2017 and has not yet had a first review due to multiple delays requested by Synagro.
The result of the Zoning Office's review is (just received this afternoon - see below) is that Synagro must appear before the Zoning Hearing Board in a quasi-judicial proceeding to meet it's legal obligation in an attempt to prove hardship for variances. Judge for yourself the letter from Synagro's legal counsel:
Sunday, June 11, 2017
Synagro May 30 revised site plan for proposed Plainfield Township biosolids site retains several zoning ordinance violations
Synagro submitted a revised site plan on May 30 for its proposed biosolids crap bakery to be located in Plainfield Township on lands of Waste Management, near the boundaries of Wind Gap and Pen Argyl. The boroughs of Wind Gap and Pen Argyl have submitted letters of objection to the proposed plan, as well as Lower Mount Bethel Township. It is rumored that Upper Mount Bethel Township is considering objecting as well.
To Synagro's credit, the revision eliminates the preposterous proposal to essentially overlap Synagro's operation with that of the existing Green Knight Energy Center, and eliminates several variances that would have been needed to implement that non-plan.
However, several variances that appear to be required in the original version of this site plan remain (click here for a detailed description of the deficiency in the review of the original site plan):
To Synagro's credit, the revision eliminates the preposterous proposal to essentially overlap Synagro's operation with that of the existing Green Knight Energy Center, and eliminates several variances that would have been needed to implement that non-plan.
However, several variances that appear to be required in the original version of this site plan remain (click here for a detailed description of the deficiency in the review of the original site plan):
- Sec 503.J.1.c & 503.J.1.d Steep Slopes
- 318.I & SALDO 10.7.D Yard definitions - lots with no rear yard and two side yards
- 704.B.6 Off street loading traffic pattern
- 315.B.35.a Additional Requirements lot size
- 315.B.35.b Additional Requirements separate entrances and exits
- Sec 505 50' setback from a pond for driveways, parking areas, and buildings
In addition, the following variances appear to be needed:
- 201.B No part of a yard from the surface upward may be occupied unless provided for in ordinance
- 704.B.3 Maneuvering room must be outside required yards
Significantly, Synagro continues to attempt to squeeze a project the ordinance requires 5 acres for into about 1-2/3 acres of usable area - a fact that results in all of the variances needed listed above (see Site Plan below).
Synagro claims in its response that the Steep Slopes portion of Plainfield Township's ordinance do not apply since the pond is man-made, and thus it not developing on Class A or Class B slopes.
Another key item in the response is that Waste Management believes it has the right to use Plainfield Township's Recreational Trail pretty much forever - not when the land fill closes as intended A legal opinion should be obtained because the agreement says nothing about Waste Management granting rights to lessors to set up additional operations. It should be noted that Plainfield Township's Recreation Board has also submitted a letter in opposition to Synagro's plan.
Another key item in the response is that Waste Management believes it has the right to use Plainfield Township's Recreational Trail pretty much forever - not when the land fill closes as intended A legal opinion should be obtained because the agreement says nothing about Waste Management granting rights to lessors to set up additional operations. It should be noted that Plainfield Township's Recreation Board has also submitted a letter in opposition to Synagro's plan.
Here is the new traffic pattern that avoids using the neighboring property. However, note that either a 25' or 50' setback (depending on if the area is the side or rear yard) is violated by both the driveways as well as the proposed berm.
Loading/unloading patterns are in side yard and in opposing directions on one-lane drive (dangerous)
No further review will be done here at this time. As of Thursday at 3:15pm, Plainfield Township had not received a review of these updated materials from the township engineer. EDIT: Engineer's review was received by the township and is at the bottom of this post. Following receipt of the review, it is expected that the Zoning Office will issue a review letter as well, indicating if any variances are required. To date, none have been officially identified. Since the Planning Commission reviews variances also, it is expected that during the Commission's review, variances will have to be discussed. Time is very short - the review begins tomorrow evening.
2017 May 30 Synagro Project Narrative on Scribd
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)