Saturday, March 7, 2020

History of creation of Plainfield Township's Solid Waste Zoning District that Waste Management proposes to increase in size for Grand Central Sanitary Landfill expansion

Landfill is on land subdivided from a tract bought by three partners

In the 1980's, Grand Central was not yet owned by Waste Management.  The record shows that the landfill began as a dump in the 1950's, in response to pleas by the mayors of Pen Argyl and Wind Gap that landowner Robert Perin allow trash disposal on his property in Plainfield Township.  Mr. Perin had purchased a larger tract that included his land with two partners, Frank Fiorot and Ernest Albanese.  Albanese ironically came to rue the day that he partnered with Perin as he built his family homestead on the lands he obtained adjacent to what became a major nuisance on Perin's share of the land - the landfill (see the testimony of Mr. Albanese and his wife for how the landfill destroyed the enjoyment of their property on pp. 117-123 of the transcript below).  The landfill started under Robert, and his sons Gary, Ronald and Nolan took over from him.  DEP was known as DER in the 1980's, and the state of Pennsylvania was just coming up to speed on regulating landfills.  It may well be that some state legislation was put into place as a result of legal battles involving the landfill and its desire to expand greatly in 1986.

Landfill was relatively small when it requested a very large expansion

Testimony in the transcript below is that dumping in the landfill in the mid 1980's was permitted in a relatively small area in portions of quarries on lands in the Farm and Forest Zoning District - less than 10 acres - and that Grand Central applied for Special Exception approval to expand the area for the landfill on property it owned to three hundred and fifty three acres.  The Zoning Hearing Board approved a size of 80 acres.  A legal battle ensued over what size should be allowed.

Proposal for incinerator in addition to expansion of landfill rocks township

In the same time period, a garbage incinerator was proposed in Plainfield Township, the ash from which would be disposed of in the landfill.  Incinerators produce two kinds of ash - fly ash and bottom ash.  Fly ash is considered hazardous waste, bottom ash is not.  When they are mixed, the state of PA in the mid 1980's considered the mixture non-hazardous.  Got to love the state.  Naturally there was a lot of concern over emissions from an incinerator, and the disposal of ash.  The township placed a moratorium on new solid waste uses, while it researched whether all must be provided for.

Activist group of concerned citizens S.O.L.E. is born

Plainfield Township has had zoning since 1971.  Applicants can file a curative amendment if the ordinance can be argued to be exclusionary and as a result might be able to put a use wherever they want.  A legal consultant was hired by the township to advise on a course of action to respond the threats of solid waste uses proliferating and legal action by those promoting these kinds of uses.  An activist group named S.O.L.E. (Save Our Local Environment) was born, and it and the township were parties in the lawsuits over the landfill and the incinerator.  As a result of the moratorium, the incinerator proposal was moved into Bushkill Township, on land that borders Plainfield Township.

Plainfield Township crafts action plan in response to threat of solid waste uses expanding without bounds

Amid these battles, the township formed the Solid Waste Study Group in about December of 1986.  This group included members of S.O.L.E., township supervisors, citizens and Nolin Perin who represented the landfill.  Special council Robert Sugarman and professional planners Urban Research and Development advised and guided the process.  The objectives of this group were to research whether the township could legally exclude certain uses, and how the landfill should be provided for, yet in a controlled manner.  Their work product was hoped to be used to settle the legal disputes over the allowed size for the landfill, where landfills may be placed in the township (Farm and Forest is by far the largest zoning district by area) as well as whether an incinerator and other solid waste uses must be permitted.  The products of the Study Group were a Comprehensive Plan Supplement for Solid Waste, an ordinance amendment that would create a Solid Waste district for solid waste uses, and a Zoning Map change that defined the boundaries of the new district.  The Study Group worked for 18 months.

Adoption hearing and push back from landfill representatives

The amendment adoption hearing at which extensive testimony was taken from representatives of the landfill, citizens of the township, members of S.O.L.E., special counsel Sugarman and supervisors was held on June 30 of 1988.  The testimony reveals that legal experts had a challenge to explain to the citizenry their methodology - that they were threading a needle in order to be able to settle the legal matters, avoid additional litigation, and obtain a result with a satisfactory outcome for the township.  Representatives of the landfill threatened that the amendment could not stand legal scrutiny, and Nolan Perin was on the record stating that the township has wasted 18 months and had nothing to show for its effort and legal fees.  Naturally, the landfill wanted no local regulations to control it.

The testimony reveals that many citizens wanted the landfill to not expand at all.  Some participants testified that Plainfield Township does not need to be the dumping ground for the entire state of Pennsylvania, and trash was already arriving in significant amounts from out of state as well.  The ultimate size of the district was chosen to provide the landfill and other solid waste uses to be located in the township, and to prevent challenges that the district was not large enough.  This is known in zoning law as "Fair Share" - and is certain to be a concept of discussion in light of Waste Management's rezoning request.  Some testified that the township had already taken in its fair share of garbage and sludge - as of 1988.  The legal consultants found that a municipality does not in all cases need to provide for every possible use, and incinerators were made a non-permitted use in the township.  The fate of the incinerator proposed in Bushkill Township was that the property line of the the site in question turned out to be 175 feet east of where it was assumed to be, placing the proposed operation in Plainfield Township.  This was discovered prior to the adoption of the zoning amendment, which put the kabash on the incinerator since this use was listed as not permitted prior to the expiration of the derided solid waste moratorium the following day.

Afterward - Grand Central wields lawsuits as a weapon, 
costing Plainfield Township and average citizens $$$

A Morning Call newspaper article from 1992 itemized a raft of legal action that Grand Central and members of the Perin family took against multiple citizens as well as Plainfield Township during this timeframe.  One lawsuit was filed over a $50 DER fine.  The lawsuits against individuals and elected officials, alleging slander and libel, appear to have been dismissed.  In 1990 and 1991, the township expended over $150,000 and $100,000 respectively in legal fees.  Township supervisors may want to take this into consideration when choosing to expand solid waste uses and continue a relationship with the landfill beyond 2028, or to put an end to future potential litigation by refusing a request that they are not obligated to oblige.

1988 amended Zoning Map - new Solid Waste (SW) district in silver

The amendment turned out to be well crafted, despite the criticism of detractors and threats of legal challenges.  Here is the township's current zoning ordinance for the Solid Waste district created in 1988, in much the same form as when adopted with the exception that setbacks have been significantly reduced:

https://ecode360.com/31720486

Here is the Comprehensive Plan Supplement of 1988:


The hearing transcript: