At the beginning of the meeting Township Solicitor Backenstoe explained to the Board and the audience - which was about 50 people well spread out in the fire company's pavilion - that in his opinion the Board had a legislative matter before it. If the Board rejected the request, in his opinion this decision is not subject to judicial review. Then he explained that if the Board instead chose to pursue further examination, ultimately a hearing would be scheduled for a Zoning Amendment, and at least 30 days prior the draft would be submitted to the township planning commission. Once the planning commission reviewed it, it would be submitted to the Lehigh Valley Planning Commission.
Supervisor Mellert then addressed the audience and Board, and explained that when the Ordinance was amended in 1988 to create the Solid Waste district, many residents were upset with the amount of land that was allotted for Solid Waste. They felt it was far too much. But, as Mrs. Mellert explained and the 1988 zoning amendment and map adoption hearing's stenographic record reflects, the final amount of space and boundaries were chosen to allow Fair Use and expansion by the landfill in the future. And once that was consumed, that would be the end of Solid Waste disposal in the township. Mrs. Mellert then added that the proposed addition of a second solid waste district/landfill, which is essentially what the proposal calls for since a state road would separate them, is far beyond what was envisioned when the land use planning was done, and would exceed what is called for by the Fair Use doctrine. "Fair Share" came into being in zoning law in order to evaluate whether a municipality provides for a suitable range of housing needs, but it applies to all kinds of uses. For a primer on Fair Share in Pennsylvania Zoning, click this link.
1988 Hearing to adopt amendment creating Plainfield Township's Solid Waste Zoning District on Scribd
Mrs. Mellert made a motion to not entertain Waste Management's proposal. Supervisor Borger seconded the motion, which opened the floor for comments from the audience.
Numerous citizens made comments at courtesy of the floor, all in opposition to the expansion of the Solid Waste district. Pen Argyl resident Andy Medellin who lives on Pen Argyl Street across from the Green and White ball fields stated that the odor from the landfill is horrendous, the air quality poor and often there is a lot of trash in the trees that remains there for days. He said they often can not use their property outside the home. He added that he has been unable to get any relief by contacting regulatory agencies. Luther Bond reminded the Board that 100 citizens or more have an active lawsuit against the landfill for odors. John Reinhart requested that the Board and other municipalities consider engaging with one or two agencies to do a health study across the Slate Belt to analyze the effects of all the reclamation activities that have taken place in the last 20 years - such as the landfill, tire recycling, filling of quarries, etc.
Once citizens completed their comments, Supervisor Heard stated that since the township's citizens in 2007 voted to impose an earned income tax on themselves, in order to support open space and farmland preservation, it would be a slap in their face to approve this proposal to convert farmland to a landfill. So he would be voting against consideration of the expansion. Mr. Heard and Mrs. Mellert voted yes, Mrs. Lambert said she was not prepared to vote yes or no because she felt she needed more information, Mr. Hurni abstained due to his connection with Green Knight, and Mr. Borger voted yes. The vote was thus 3-0-2, and the request to consider expansion of the Solid Waste district was denied.
One citizen asked a question that revealed a difference of opinion between Solicitor Backenstoe and Waste Management counsel. The issue is that if the Board were to deny the request (as it ended up doing), Waste Management believes it may have a right to appeal to a judicial body, because its interpretation of the Ordinance is that the Board must submit all rezoning requests to the Planning Commission. In other words, if the township did not follow procedures prescribed by its Ordinance, the Board's decision could be appealed to the Court of Common Pleas. Mr. Backenstoe's interpretation is that the Board only must submit something to the Planning Commission in the event a hearing is to be held to consider adoption of an amendment. Since there would be no hearing in the event of denying the request, there is no need to submit anything to the planners.
Mr. Backenstoe explained that other courses of action that Waste Management could take are:
- Submit an amended or different rezoning request
- File a curative amendment
- File a substantive validity challenge*
*Per the PA Municipalities Planning Code, a validity challenge may be filed with either the Board of Supervisors or Zoning Hearing Board. If it is filed with the BOS, it must be accompanied by a curative amendment.
Think green - greenbacks
