Yard signs objecting to Nazareth Borough Municipal Authority's plan to use preserved Plainfield Township farm to dispose of sewage sludge sprouting like blooming bacteria

 If you drive through the center of Plainfield Township. you can not avoid seeing yard signs in opposition to NBMA's plan to dispose of 1000 wet tons of sewage sludge annually on the Hower Road farm that it purchased on November 1.  Looks like someone received a heap of (activated?) charcoal in their stocking this Christmas.

Bangor Rd S of Gap View Rd

Benders Church Rd at Colony Ln

Benders Church Rd

Colony Ln

Colony Ln

Edelman Village

Hower Rd at Bangor Rd

Hower Rd

Hower Rd

Pen Argyl Rd at Benders Church Rd

At December 16 NBMA Board meeting, possibility that Plainfield Township farm will be used as Mid-Atlantic Land Application Biosolids Research Facility is announced

 The December 16 Nazareth Borough Municipal Authority meeting was well attended, with an audience filled as in November by Plainfield Township residents.  At the November meeting, Chairman Kornos read a statement prior to public comment that appeared to be designed to ameliorate concerns of those in the audience.  However, discrepancies between this statement and comments made later in the meeting by Board members and NBMA Plant Manager Dean Minnich resulted in the inescapable conclusion that making the statement was a strategic mistake.

Undaunted, but not understanding his audience, Chairman Fornos ventured into similar territory at the December meeting.  He announced that the Authority was working with Ryan Shaw of the County Farmland Preservation Board, and Jim Clauser of the County Conservation District, with the goal to craft a Conservation Plan that incorporates biosolids application for the Hower Farm.  Perhaps Mr. Fornos is unaware that Mr. Clauser is not qualified to draft conservation plans.  The Conservation District is in fact supposed to have someone on staff capable of drafting and reviewing conservation plans, but they do not.  Mr. Shaw may not have informed Mr. Fornos that at the December Farmland Preservation Board meeting, Mr. Shaw's boss Maria Bentzoni stated that NBMA's planned use of biosolids on preserved farmland will be "destructive to" the program.

Chairman Fornos, in the most clueless manner possible, dropped a bombshell on the audience.  He read a memo received from Material Matters to NBMA that stated that the Hower Rd farm might be used as a research facility for the land application of biosolids.  He elaborated that not much is known about the practice, and he personally has envisioned something like this "for years".  If more is known, the practice would be more accepted.  In making this statement, Chairman Kornos was incredibly admitting what all the concerned citizens in the audience know - there are many unknowns.  Why would any resident want to be involved in such an experiment, and why would they want to take part in making the practice more accepted?

It is important to note that Trudy Johnston, the Managing Director of Material Matters, is the Mid-Atlantic Queen of Biosolids.  She is a long time Board member of the Mid-Atlantic Biosolids Association (MABA), and she readily would tell you that she actively encourages the land use of biosolids.  The President of MABA is a Synagro official, and a Waste Management Inc official is another Board member.  Ms. Johnston was hired by Plainfield Township as a consultant during the failed Synagro proposal from 2016 to 2019.  One nugget dropped, pun not intended, by Ms. Johnston during that time was that Class B biosolids "can be much more odorous than Class A."

Then audience members were invited to make public comment.   Note: there are a few documents at the end of this post, referred to in these statements.  A key one is a memo dated October 21, 2021, only 10 days prior to closing on the Hower farm, which rates the risk of three options for NBMA.

The following statements are self explanatory.  The theme is that the Hower farm was the highest risk option that NBMA could have chosen, and is an inappropriate solution for sludge disposal ("beneficial use" according to DEP).  NBMA has multiple options that would be far better.

1. Millie Beahn lives adjacent to the Hower farms and stated:

"I had 150 signs made up and we are putting them out.  (All 150 signs have been placed and Millie is considering printing 60 more)  We will keep coming to meetings.  I had met with Tara Zrinski (County Council) and Darree Sicher (United Sludge-Free Alliance),   Also we went to Northampton County Council meetings and the Northampton County Farmland Preservation meeting.  
We are not going to be used as guinea pigs.  - (held up the picture of the sign that has to be posted on the property where the Biosolids are spread and read it  “ACCESS RESTRICTED _ BIOSOLIDS APPLICATION" that has to be posted.  People are restricted from going on the property when the product is spread.)   From a fact sheet:  Why is sewage sludge dumped in our communities?  What is sewage sludge?  SEWAGE SLUDGE IS NOT FERTILIZER.   This is where we live our homes are within feet of this property.  We are not going to be used as guinea pigs."

 

2. Don Moore identified himself as a Supervisor-Elect in Plainfield Township, and said he was making a last appearance as an ordinary citizen.  He read the following statement.

"At a cost of $200k a year – you could dispose of your 800 to 1000 wet tons of sludge annually in a landfill for a couple hundred years with the profit off of your current farm that you obtained in 2000 by eminent domain and sold for $53.1 million.  This October 21 Material Matters document shows that you could also have it hauled away for $70-80 a wet ton, which would cost only $80,000 a year.

You stated at the November meeting that you do not plan to expand capacity.  What are you going to do with this windfall, off a piece of land that just passed the 21-year holding requirement for land obtained through eminent domain?   At last month’s meeting, when questioned about the sale, the Chairman smiled and said “that’s business.”  But NBMA is a municipal entity – not a for-proft company.   The 2020 Annual DEP report on your farm shows that the cumulative lifetime metals content is not anywhere near the maximums allowed, so why did you sell it?  It seems that ethically such a taking should not be done lightly, and not for a short term benefit.  As a municipal entity, your main purpose is to protect the health, safety and welfare of citizens.  I would respectfully suggest this should not be at the cost of negatively impacting another community’s citizens, and reaping an obscene financial reward in the process. 

Plant Manager Minnich and his wife signed petitions against the proposed Synagro Sludge Plant.  They are not near fields where the product would be spread, so they were likely concerned about being behind trucks hauling sludge to and from the plant.  This proposal is far worse, since sludge not only be trucked in, but it will be stockpiled, spread and allowed to outgas to the air.

NBMA Solicitor Pierce – has represented one or more families who preserved land in the immediate vicinity of the Hower property.  Represents both the NBMA and Nazareth Borough.  Represented both the buyer and seller of the Hower Farm.  Prior to the closing, Nazareth Borough officials were asked if they knew about a piece of property being purchased, and said no.  One would assume between the Solicitor and possibly a liaison to this Board, that the Borough would know about the pending purchase of this property.  This purchase was kept a secret.

During a recent site visit, it is my understanding that a NBMA Board member referred to a concerned neighbor of the Hower Rd farm as “the opposition”.  This is the kind of comment that would expected from a project manager of a for-profit nuisance business.   I would submit that she is your neighbor.  As a municipal entity, not a private business, you should hold this citizen’s health, safety and welfare as the highest priority, and not see her or any of your new neighbors as an enemy.  In light of the facts of this case, I submit that you will be dealing with a lot of concerned citizens, both neighbors and Plainfield Township officials.  You should act to work in their interests, not against them.

Material Matters memorandum – public opposition,  three options.  This memorandum I found confusing, and it angered me.  It rates Public Opposition to Biosolids on the Hower farm a 4 on a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being highest opposition.  Trudy Johnston of Material Matters, would know very well as a former consultant that public opposition in Plainfield Township would be a 10 on a scale of 1 to 5 – off the charts.  Of the three options, Hower farm rated the highest in risk, a 2.8.  The lowest scored 1.7 and the other scored 2.7.

With $53 million in the bank, and other lower risk options available, it makes absolutely no sense at all to me why you would pursue the highest risk solution.

Contradictions in comments last month.  Will build a storage building, don’t need a building; other generators won’t dump sludge, other generators may dump sludge.  You don’t have a definite plan and you apparently don’t have a farmer.  In the memorandum the Hower Farm scored well for having a farmer experienced with biosolids – the farmer of your current property.  But I am aware that you have in fact approached a farmer inexperienced with sludge to farm the property.  You bought a property with a stream through it – where is that scored in the memorandum?  Nothing here makes sense.

At the November meeting, Chairman Fornos stated everything will satisfy DEP, implying there is no risk.  Here is a sample of DEP’s recent screw-ups / shenanigans, that had significant consequences.  Slate Hills Quarry (DEP issued permit, ground water became permanently contaminated), Buzzi Unicem (sinkholes, loss of Rt 33 bridges, which will have to replaced again), proposed Synagro plant (directed Synagro to apply for a General Permit to allow for similar plants across PA, announced they would waive a waterway obstruction permit to cover their lack of oversight years earlier, conspired to keep Township officials out of a critical meeting).

Why aren’t farmers lining up to use this stuff?  If they were, you wouldn’t be taking or buying property.  No Class B biosolids are being used as fertilizer anywhere in Plainfield Township, Rinaldi is the only farmer currently using Class A.  You could pay farmers $40 a wet ton, which would more than cover the cost of the fertilizer they will have to supplement the biosolids with, and they would come out far ahead compared with not using biosolids.  But no one is taking this deal – and there is a reason.  No one knows what is in it, and it varies greatly in what is contains.  You are applying 2.1 to 3.3 dry tons per acre to your field, or roughly 15 wet tons per acre.  To pay to haul that away at $80 per ton costs $1200, to landfill maybe $2000 or more.  A farmer pays $40 to $160 per acre for fertilizer.

You were reportedly warned by someone in your organization that this would be a mistake.  Plainfield Twp spent $210,000 to protect our environment in the Synagro saga.  We have a landfill that refuses to go away now that it has expanded to the limits of the land we have zoned for solid waste.  We have been trying to finalize plans for a park pavilion building that would be sited adjacent to this property.  Wetlands and a tributary to a HQ water quality creek, already impaired, runs through this property.  If you had contacted us prior to purchase, we could have discussed these and other issues with you.

Our Board of Supervisors Solicitor Backenstoe stated to a concerned resident at our December meeting (paraphrased): rest assured the township we will do everything possible at the earliest stages if this moves forward, including potential litigation.  You may have a war chest of $53 million, but we have ample funds to get us through a battle.

We (literally) don’t need this crap."

3. Patricia Meckler lives adjacent to the site and read the following statement:

I bought a lot in 1994 from the Howers, and built a house with my husband in 1995.  The Howers were selling road frontage lots.  This lot has beautiful views and is adjacent with many preserved farms, the Plainfield Farmers Fair and within a few tenths of a mile of athletic fields at Plainfield Park.

It was extremely disturbing and shocking to hear the Hower farm was sold to the Nazareth Borough Municipal Authority and their plan was to spread biosolids on a  preserved farm.  This also blindsided the Plainfield Township Board of Supervisors and this is wrong on so many levels.

The township, county and state pay a lot of money to preserve these farms and a municipal sewer authority should not be allowed to use this as their disposal site.  This was not the intent of the Farmland Preservation Program.  The Authority made $53.1 million selling their land for a warehouse, they should have found a commercial property without adjacent homes, our beautiful homes are right on top of this farm.

Also this property is very hilly and sloping and has many wet areas.  When we have inches of rain there are streams running through this property, down towards the Leiser farm, into their ponds and small streams and then the Little Bushkill Creek, which our township has spent a lot of time and money conserving.

The Hower farm is adjacent to the Plainfield Township Farmers Fair and within a few tenths of a mile where thousands of kids play organized sports.  Biosolids are concentrated toxic chemicals and also contain pathogens such as E. coli, salmonella, bacteria and viruses.  How can a sewer authority think that it is okay to spread biosolids near homes, athletic fields and a farmer’s fair when windborne pathogens can travel in a 6-mile radius and this will put our health and lives at risk?

All of us surrounding this farm and most of Plainfield Township have well water.  We have no access to a public water system.  Spreading sewage sludge contributes to contamination of groundwater, well water, crops and finished products such as milk.  NBMA should have selected a property with a public source of water – we do not have that.

Also, Hower Rd is windy and hilly and has limited sight-lines, and it is not suitable for truck traffic.  Also, if biosolids are spread on the fields, there will be deposits on the roads as trucks and tractors leave these fields, this product will end up on our roads, our cars will drive over these biosolids and they will end up in our garages and homes.  This is disgusting and unhealthy.

There were many good and interested people that wanted to buy the Hower farm, but it was grossly overpriced and a shady, secretive deal with the Nazareth Borough Municipal Authority was the result and it was extremely unethical.

You should consider selling it back to all of us because we do not want to see our neighborhood and quality of life destroyed.

Patti Meckler

4. Tony Borger identified himself at Chairman of the Plainfield Township Recreation Board, stated that he was making comments on behalf of only himself as a resident, and read a statement:

"Members of the Municipal Authority,

I’m here before you all to continue to voice my concerns about this Hower Farm sewage sludge disposal project.  I ask for you to reconsider the due not only to its location directly adjacent to residential homes, but also due to its proximity to our township’s recreation facilities of Achenbach’s Grove and the Plainfield Township Community Park at Kesslersville.

As a homeowner, we all invest our hard earned money in our properties with the idea of living a comfortable life with our children and our neighbors.  We all have the common goal of community. To do no harm to our neighbors and have them do no harm to us.  It’s a basic principlek we all grew up with, passed down from our parents and grandparents.  Do no harm.

Our recreation facilities have been set aside by local, county and state funds to be a place for local residents in our community to visit and enjoy the outdoors.  To get an enjoyable walk in, to let our children play on the play ground, and to just get some fresh air and relax. 

The facilities are also home to the Plainfield Township Farmers Association, who host the annual Plainfield Farmers Fair.  Each year, the 5 day event brings in a couple thousand people from far and wide to enjoy the livestock, craft fair, baking contest, outdoor concerts and the popular Demolition Derby and Truck and Tractor Pulls.  If you’ve never been to it, I recommend it.  But do it quickly, because once the sludge operation begins, who knows how much longer this event will be around.

What isn’t mentioned in your Material Matters Memorandum about the Hower Farm property is its proximity to the Plainfield Township Community Park.  The park is home to several organizations who help maintain it.  The Wind Gap Athletic Association soccer program, the Faith Christian School Soccer teams, Junior Knights Baseball program, just to name a few.  The potential impact to these programs because of this careless proposal sends waves across the community.  How can they put on youth programs if the air is ripe with sewage odor.   

The investment in these properties over the years for the expressed purpose of recreation comes from local money, county money and even state money.  All that invested funding for outdoor recreation is now ready to be forfeited if we continue down this path.

At the last municipal authority meeting you were quoted as saying “this is just good business”.  I challenge that statement.  You see, you are not a business.  You have no customers, per se.  You get to determine who must pay you for disposal of their waste.  I’d say that’s more like a monopoly.  But regardless, I go back to a phrase I used earlier.  “FIRST, DO NO HARM”.  Some of our most ethical professions use that phrase, attributed to the Greek Physician Hippocrates.

The members of your board were put in a unique position.  From what I understand, you inherited a property that was taken from your neighbors by eminent domain 20 years ago.  When Mr. Chrin decided to put an interchange and warehouse farm adjacent to that property, you made out like bandits to the tune of $50M, or more, on property you took because you “needed it.” 

That property was the perfect location.  A mile from the nearest home down-wind.  You also noted at the last meeting how great the application was and that you never had any neighbors complain about odor.  Well, it’s pretty hard to find neighbors to complain when there aren’t any. 

So after making that $50 million dollars on the sale of the property, you all have an opportunity to “do no harm”.  To use that $50 million dollars responsibly for your Municipal Authority, but also ethically, do no harm with that money in your new plans to dispose of your sludge.

Just on the interest alone, it would be simple to contract disposal of that waste in a landfill for well beyond any of your years sitting in those chairs.

Another option would be to support your local cement company, the backbone of the history of the Nazareth area. 

I quote from an article from the publication Science Direct:

“Furthermore, with its chemical composition, sewage sludge represents a potential source of raw materials for clinker production, thus limiting the demand for natural fossil fuels. As results show from previous studies in this area, specific conditions of incineration in cement kilns allow for maintaining emission standards and process requirements for the production of clinker.”

https://www.bioenergyconsult.com/sewage-cement-industry/

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1364032106001195

https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1064407

You would think with all the cement kilns in the area and rising costs of fuel, not to mention the push against climate change, this option would have made the Material Matters publication. 

But instead, you chose Option 1.  Be damned the people of Plainfield Township.  Be damned the property values of the residents down-wind of the Hower Farm. 

Our houses are our biggest assets.  It’s the one thing we invest in that we can leverage for our own well being when we grow old and hopefully have some left over when we pass an inheritance to our children.  With this decision, you’ll likely reduce personal property value of your new neighbors by almost as much as you paid for the Hower Farm.  These families’ homes will become impossible to sell with sewage sludge applications taking place in their backyards.

I ask, would you want that done to you?  By a group of people who had so many other choices that would do no harm? 

I ask you to reconsider.  It’s not too late.  Be responsible.  Do the moral and ethical thing.  DO NO HARM.  Be responsible to the community and do good with a $50M dollar gift Mr. Chrin gave to you. 

When you lay your head down on the pillow tonight, let that phrase echo in your mind. 

DO NO HARM.

Thank you.

Tony Borger

 5. Rich Uliana Lives adjacent to the property.  Mr. Uliana had a question - he asked "if this stuff is safe, explain to me why if I sell my property, I have to fill out a disclosure stating that this has been applied adjacent to my property, and in the process reduce my property value.  I'm going to go ahead and sit down because I don't believe any of you have an answer."  Board Solicitor Al Pierce, who was rather belligerent and raised his voice multiple times during the public comment period, doubted this was true.  Mr. Uliana stated that he would forward evidence it is the case to the Board.

edit 12/25 Here is the proof, from the PA Association of Realtors Seller's Disclosure.  Come on, Mr. Pierce.  A good attorney would know not to admit he isn't aware of something like this.

6. Dorothy Williams Ms. Williams lives immediately downstream of the runoff of the site, and receives heavy stream and surface flow associated with storm and winter melt.  She expressed concern that in her senior years, her house is her greatest asset, and when the proposed use destroys her property's value she does know what she will do.

7. Jason Lewis Mr. Lewis, having listened to the previous speakers, several of whom questioned the wisdom of the Authority's plan, asked how many of the Board members were familiar with the property and understood how sloped it is, prior to deciding to purchase it.  No Board member responded.

Follow up comments

Ms. Meckler observed that the spreading of sludge on preserved farmland, as proposed, is inconsistent with the purpose (and legally binding deed language) of the preservation of farmland in perpetuity - forever.  Mr. Moore put a finer point on this, pointing out that the steady buildup of metals and pollutants such as PFAS in biosolids in the soil never goes away - which mean use of the land for agricultural purposes is being degraded.  This is antithetical to the goal of the Farmland Preservation Program as Ms. Meckler stated.

Observations

It should be noted that most Board members appeared somewhat nonplussed throughout the public's comments.  One wonders if they were led down this path by one or two members who cast this plan as a good idea.  The public was allowed to speak as long as it wished, which was acknowledged and appreciated by multiple attendees.  They were treated with respect, with the exception of one individual on the dais.

As multiple speakers addressed, NBMA is flushed with cash, so to speak.  Riches beyond most municipality's imaginations, and NBMA is a municipal entity.   Mr. Borger's exhortation that NBMA should "DO NO HARM" is perfectly stated.  Why in the world would they foist this operation on Plainfield Township, and its residents?  There is obviously significant cost in biosolids disposal, but NBMA has far more assets than it seems likely to need.  Is this an uninformed choice, pedestrian greed, or could it be something more insidious - such as a conspiracy between parties who are interested in increasing the "beneficial use" of biosolids across the state?  Could choosing a property with a HQ creek tributary through the bottom of it have been intentional, and not just an apparently ill-conceived choice?  To make it easier to defend applying biosolids near surface waters in the future?

What is real?

Memorandum from Material Matters to NBMA,

rating the risk of three options for disposal of NBMA's sludge

NBMA Plant Manager Dean Minnich and his wife live in Pen Argyl, a half mile from the location of the proposed Synagro sludge drying plant.  They signed a petition objecting to the plant, and Mr. Minnich also as a Council Member voted along with Pen Argyl Council in objecting to the proposal.

Christmas Poo returns to Plainfield Township after 2 year absence - Nazareth Borough Municipal Authority purchases pristine preserved farmland to use as crap disposal site

 In September 2019, after 2 years and 10 months of stonewalling Planning Commission requests for evidence of compliance with regulations, Synagro Technologies withdrew its proposal to develop a crap bakery in Plainfield Township, to be placed on Grand Central Sanitary Landfill property.  This facility would have dried Class B biosolids into pellets, to spread on farmland as a pseudo, powered by the posterior, fertilizer.  It is now known that Synagro was under heavy scheduling pressure by Waste Management, owner of the landfill, to obtain approval.  For over a year Grand Central had been working on plans to request an expansion of the solid waste zoning district, so the the landfill could expand in 2028 when it is expected to reach capacity.  At the final hearing, Synagro representatives stated that they wanted to continue with the application, and were seen pleading with landfill representatives for an extension of time, which apparently was denied.

Like clockwork, within only a few months of Synagro's exit, the landfill requested and was duly denied its request to expand the township's solid waste zoning district.  As if the township's forehead has a shit magnet embedded in it, the Christmas Poo that first landed with Synagro's bakery in November 2016 returned like a comet with a 5-year period on November 1, 2021.  With no advance notice, the Nazareth Borough Municipal Authority purchased the Hower Farm, on Hower Road, with the intent to dispose annually on the farm the entire output of sewage sludge from its facility.  Approximately 1000 wet tons, or 202 dry tons, would be dumped.

Mr. Hankey's return - "Hidely Ho! neighbor"

You might ask, what did NBMA do with its crap until now?  Well they spread it on their own farm, in Palmer Township, which they took by eminent domain in 2000.  Presumably, they should have had to prove that they had a great public need to take this property.  You might ask why they don't continue disposing of their crap in their own backyard.  It appears the primary motivator is financial - they sold 50 acres of their current 58.2 acre farm on December 9. 2021 for $53.1 million dollars.  That is $1,062,00 per acre.  Yes Virginia, there really are gold, emeralds and gems in that crap.

Who knew that warehouse developers would pay this kind of money for land?  Regardless, apparently the NBMA sold its property solely to make a windfall profit on land that they took only 21 years ago from its previous owner, using eminent domain.

Concerned citizens attend the November 18, 2021 NBMA meeting, 

and receive conflicting information

News of the November 1 property closing escaped the same day.  At the November 10 BOS meeting, Plainfield supervisors voted to retain environmental attorney Jack Embick, in anticipation that NBMA will proceed with their intended use of the property.

The following is a recap of what happened at the November 18, 2021 NBMA meeting, when concerned citizens confronted the NBMA Board.

The regular November Nazareth Borough Municipal Authority meeting was attended by several citizens who identified themselves as Plainfield Township residents.  The Chairman announced at the beginning of the meeting that the agenda would be changed, and regular business would be completed, following by comments at courtesy of the floor.

 Oddly, no mention at all was made during the regular business portion of the meeting that the purchase of the Hower farm has closed on November 1.  Since this is where the Authority plans to dispose of its sludge moving forward, it seems like a suspicious omission.  It was announced that a draft budget had been completed, but no figures were announced.  It was mentioned later, near the end of the meeting, that the Authority has sold a piece of land believed to be 50 acres, for over $50m dollars – an astonishing figure, if true.  That will help the budget for sure.

 Prior to public comment, the Chairman read a statement indicating that the Hower farm has in fact been purchased, and it would be used for "agricultural purposes" and the Authority would spread its Class B sludge on the property.  Furthermore, "no dumping of sludge not produced by the Authority is planned."  The statement included the bold assertion that this is a safe fertilizer, and all DEP and EPA regulations would be adhered to.  The Chairman stated that a sludge storage building may be needed, and constructed on the Hower farm.

 There was about 45 minutes of public comment, with concerns raised about decreased property values, pollution of runoff and neighboring wells.  Also, Plainfield Township Recreation Board Chairman Tony Borger, who made it clear he was speaking on behalf of himself, voiced concerns about users of the neighboring township property being affected by odors and pollutants emanating from the property.

Authority Plant Manager Dean Minnich stated that the sludge is tested and complies with regulations.  Township resident and farmer Bob Krobath stated that the DEP is "bullshit", and "can't be trusted."  Township resident Don Moore pointed out that the EPA Inspector General issued a report in 2018 that found that sludge contains 55+ substances known to be hazardous, and there are no standards or testing done for them.  Tony Borger read a 2017 letter authored by Pen Argyl Council, including Authority Plant Manager Dean Minnich, in objection to the Synagro plant.  It cited concerns over pollution, odors and traffic.  Borger asked how Minnich could have been so concerned about the impacts on health of the Synagro facility, which only processed the product, and now assure people that spreading the Authority's product is totally safe.

Near the end of the meeting, several things were stated by Authority Board members:

1. Sludge is spread twice per year on the Authority's current property

2. It is not known yet how many times a year it might be spread on the Hower farm.  Could be once, could be twice or three times.

3. It could take a year to begin using the new property.

4. Sludge might be stored in a building on the new property before being applied.

5. While spreading sludge from other sources is "not planned", it might happen.

6. When asked about reports of receiving $50m+ for a piece of Authority property the Chairman smiled and replied "that's business."

7. Plant Manager Minnich contradicted the earlier statement about a building "I don't see why we would ever need to store anything there."

8. News of the sale got out quicker than expected, and the Authority is not ready to fully answer questions.

The Authority is planning to have a Q&A session at some point to address questions and concerns of citizens.  Maybe they will change their mind and just pay to dispose of their sludge in a landfill - they can afford to with that $50m+.

NBMA completes sale of its property for $53.1 million

On December 9, 2021 a deed was recorded, confirming that NBMA received $53.1 million for a 50 acre property that they took from the previous owner by eminent domain in the year 2000.  That's just "business" according to NBMA Chairman Kornos.  Sucks to be the victim of the eminent domain action.

Editor's Note: The Nazareth Municipal Authority is not a "business", it is a municipal entity.  The Chairman's flippant response when challenged over selling the Authority's current farm for no other apparent reason than a windfall profit is disturbing.  The Chairman's response, together with the conflicting statements that crap storage on site will/will not take place and that sludge from outside sources will not/may be disposed of earns the Nazareth Borough Municipal Authority the vaunted Golden Turd Award - the first to be awarded for the year 2021.

NBMA joins distinguished previous Golden Turd Award recipients recognized on this blog: Waste Management, Green Knight Economic Development Corporation, Synagro, and the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection.

Congratulations 2021 Golden Turd Award Inductee
Nazareth Borough Municipal Authority!

Coming tomorrow - a summary of the December 18, 2021 NBMA Board meeting

Anti-Solid Waste Expansion Candidates Win in Plainfield Township

 In Plainfield Township, two candidates who oppose expanding the township's solid waste district, were elected on Tuesday.  Glenn Borger (R) and Don Moore (D) received the top highest vote totals.  Here is a local article on the outcome (click to read):

The results are unofficial, but all the ballots have apparently been counted:

This blog was named the Poop and Water Extraction Blog, partially in recognition of the failed Synagro sludge processing plant proposal ca. 2016.  That project, to be located on Grand Central Sanitary Landfill property, and in which Green Knight Economic Development Corporation was a partner, was inappropriately sited initially in the wrong zoning district on Mr. Cornman's watch as both the Green Knight Synagro Project Coordinator and Planning Commission Vice Chairman.  Then it was proposed at an environmentally inappropriate site within feet of a very large quarry pond.   

Expansion of the solid waste zoning district would allow a new landfill to be constructed when the current one is full, and also the potential for a new sludge processing company to partner on a project with Green Knight in the future, free from the issues that the quarry pond presented.  Voters apparently believe that Plainfield Township deserves to be known for something other than solid waste uses.  Bob Cornman, the Vice President of Green Knight, did not succeed in getting onto the Board of Supervisors in an off-year election.

Plainfield Township Voters Choose Between Two Bipartisan Slates in Supervisor Election to Fill Two Seats

 In the primary election this year, as covered on this blog, Upper Mount Bethel Township Supervisor candidates John Bermingham (R) and David Friedman (D) joined forces, asking voters to vote for them if they were of the same party, and to write in the candidate in the other party, for two open Board seats.  The reason was the majority of the Board of Supervisors had allowed a developer who owns over 700 acres to rewrite several sections of the zoning ordinance and SALDO.  The election results show that a majority of citizens did not agree with this actions of the BOS; the tactic worked and two candidates who supported the ordinance changes were frozen out of the general election.  Unfortunately, concerned citizens remain on the defensive and are fighting the changes in an appeal to the Commonwealth Court.

 In Plainfield Township, a PAC is supporting two candidates, Glenn Borger (R) and Don Moore (D) in an election of two supervisors.  There are two other candidates, Bob Cornman (R) and Joyce Lambert (D).   The PAC has signs with the two candidates they support on them, while Mr. Cornman and Ms. Lambert are supporting each other; each has a sign for him or herself and the other in their yard.

Joyce Lambert's House with signs for herself (D) and Bob Cornman (R)

PAC sign supporting Glenn Borger (R) and Don Moore (D)

What has created these alliances?  A failed request to rezone farmland to solid waste, to allow Waste Management to create a new landfill in the township, since Grand Central Sanitary Landfill on Pen Argyl Road is forecast to exhaust all space in the solid waste zoning district in 2028.  The new landfill would have been to the east side of Pen Argyl Road, while the current one is on the west side.  Waste Management envisioned a "Twin Peaks" landfill, but the township Board of Supervisors voted against zoning additional space for solid waste disposal in July, 2020, by a vote of 3-0-2.  Steve Hurni abstained because he has a conflict of interest as he is a board member of Green Knight Economic Development Corporation.  Joyce Lambert abstained because she felt she did not have enough information, though the request was straightforward and WM had submitted over 900 pages in support of its request.

Gary and Linda Perin's property that had been proposed for the new landfill at Delabole and Pen Argyl Roads, titled under the name "Slate Spring Farms LLC", was posted with campaign signs for Joyce Lambert and Bob Cornman as early as October 4:

On October 21, the signs were no longer there, indicating possibly a strategic shift to not advertise that Ms. Lambert and Mr. Cornman are believed to be pro-expansion:

It appears that Waste Management is unwilling to take "no" for an answer.  Mr. Hurni and Mr.  Cornman are board members of Green Knight, which operates a landfill gas to electricity plant that benefits when GCSL does well.  It would have to shut down the plant some years after GCSL closes, when the production of landfill gas decreases.  Mr. Hurni also has yard signs for both Mr. Cornman and Joyce Lambert in his yard.  Mr. Hurni curiously asked the State Ethics Board in August 2020 if he could vote on GCSL and Green Knight matters as a township BOS member, after abstaining for 8+ years.  In September he was told "no", and in October Ms. Lambert attempted unsuccessfully to put rezoning back on the agenda of the BOS.

Mr. Hurni was a top individual supporter of Representative Marcia Hahn (R), contributing $2,000 to her campaigns in both 2016 and 2018. Mr. Bermingham was sanctioned by the Republican Party for supporting Mr. Friedman in the UMBT primary - looking at Mr. Hurni's yard one wonders where these holier than thou people are now?

Plainfield Supervisor and Green Knight Board member

Steve Hurni's front yard on October 21, 2021

Mr. Cornman recently stated that if elected, he would resign from Vice President of Green Knight, a position he has held for 22 years, and put all his efforts into what is best for the citizens of Plainfield Township.  Mr. Cornman and Mr. Hurni have been board members of Green Knight since its inception in 1999.  While they could immediately vote on matters related to the landfill or Green Knight if they resign from Green Knight, due to no longer having a conflict of interest in the eyes of the State Ethics Board, who would believe that either one does have a practical conflict of interest?  Mr. Cornman only a few years ago was the Green Knight Project Manager for the Synagro proposal to locate a sludge drying plant on Waste Management property, and the community was unanimous in its objection to this.  Mr. Cornman's idea of what is best for the community has been established.

The Poop and Water Extraction Blog was created to inform citizens of zoning and planning issues that concern them.  We try not to stray into politics.  However, there is no way for Waste Management to continue to operate a landfill beyond 2028 in Plainfield Township unless the balance on the township BOS changes.  Unlike UMBT, voters have observable evidence before the election of their leaders to choose the direction of their township.

Below is a profile of the four candidates.  Only Mr. Moore appears to have a campaign website.  It is located at donmoore4supervisor.blogspot.com

Glenn Borger – Completing a second term as a Board member.  Believes in keeping taxes reasonable, operating the township debt free, and spending wisely.  Supporter of recreation, open space and retaining the character of the township.  Former member of Planning Commission, Environmental Advisory Council and Recreation Board.  Mr. Borger voted against the landfill’s request to expand in July 2020.

Don Moore – Believes in respecting the agricultural roots of the township and preserving farmland.  Former member of Environmental Advisory Council and Zoning Hearing Board.  Advocate for adhering to and updated zoning ordinance and SALDO, locating uses in accordance with the Zoning Map and following the township’s Comprehensive Plan – its vision for the future.  Mr. Moore spoke out against the Synagro and Waste Management proposals due to their lack of compliance with the zoning ordinance, SALDO and Comprehensive Plan.

Bob Corman Jr. – Former long time Planning Commission member and Chairman, and Vice President of Waste Management-created nonprofit Green Knight Economic Development Corporation for over 20 years.  Also, member of the Recreation Board and Environmental Advisory Council.  Unsuccessfully advocated for Green Knight Energy Center to be placed where not permitted by zoning in 1999 - a solid waste use in a commercial industrial zone.  He was the Green Knight Synagro Project Manager and despite recusing himself, he participated in the first Synagro Site Plan review.  He suggested multiple times that the plan to place the Synagro plant in the exact location of the proposed Energy Center in a commercial industrial district could be conditionally approved.  Voted off the planning commission after this meeting, and Synagro was forced to move to a site in the Solid Waste district where it was permitted.

Joyce Lambert – Long time township secretary, and current Board member.  Often focused on tax revenues, but missing the big picture.  Believes that preserving open space costs the township taxpayers money, but does not seem to realize that more residential development means increased school taxes and overall taxpayers will pay higher taxes. Ms. Lambert made a motion in November 2020 to revisit Waste Management’s proposal to rezone farmland to solid waste after the BOS had rejected it, but failed to receive a second.

Two cross party write-in candidates defeat pro-corruption competitors in Upper Mount Bethel Township Board of Supervisors primary

The ground shook in Upper Mount Bethel Township when hundreds of write-in ballots were canvassed in an off-year election.  There were two Democrats and two Republicans on the ballot, running for two seats on the Board of Supervisors.

In a Republican stronghold, Democrat David Friedman received 330 write-in votes, cast by Republicans on their ballot.  Incumbent candidate and former Chairman John Bermingham received 660 votes, and loser incumbent candidate Anthony DeFranco received 253 votes to round out the Republican primary results.  Thus, DeFranco is now a lame duck on the Board, and during his remaining meetings he will have to suffer the embarrassment of looking at write-in winner Friedman sitting in the audience, waiting to take his seat.  Republican Bermingham also performed a coup, by receiving 213 write-in votes on the Democratic ballot, besting the 104 vote tally of candidate Stavros Barbounis.

DeFranco spearheaded the effort to allow developer Lou Pektor and his River Pointe Logistics development (now renamed "RPL" to thinly conceal the reputation of River Pointe) to escape many of the zoning and development regulations that apply to everyone else.  DeFranco and BOS member Robert Teel worked feverishly to allow Pektor to circumvent numerous zoning variances and special exception approvals that were scheduled to be addressed at an advertised Zoning Hearing Board hearing on March 24, 2020.  Instead, this hearing was cancelled, and Pektor drafted an amendment (the "text amendment") which was rushed through a hasty approval despite objections of the Township Engineer, the Lehigh Valley Planning Commission, and many citizens who were aware of how amendments are supposed to be drafted and reviewed.   This amendment exempts Pektor's kind of developments in the township's I-2 and I-3 zoning districts from many regulations.  The piss-poor excuse for haste by DeFranco and Teel was there was an alleged single business anxious to locate in Pektor's development.  This business' interest evaporated like a fart in the wind by the time the amendment was approved by a majority of supervisors through a corrupt process.  Barbounis in an interview failed to state objection to the corrupted process by which the amendment was passed, so voters passed over him.  If you aren't with us, you are against us - thanks for participating.

Thanks to DeFranco and Teel and the two other supervisors who supported their effort to roll out the red carpet to a vulture, UMBT citizens are left with the township's pants down around its ankles, waiting for a telephone pole to be shoved by Pektor into its ass.  Pektor has since shifted into 3rd gear, proposing an Neighborhood Improvement Zone - which if approved would make his projects eligible for grants and funding.  A NIZ would also give him a seat at the table to control matters outside his development, but within UMBT.

Now Pektor has unveiled yet another bold move in this chess game in UMBT - he is putting pressure on the Bangor Area Commercial and Industrial Development Authority (BACAIDA) to rapidly approve an agreement by which the BACIDA will take ownership in name only of the Met Ed property in UMBT, which is also in a zoning district that his developments are exempted from regulations.  Phase II of an EPA remediation would take place, after which Pektor would take ownership and he has announced plans to place a 900,000 sq ft warehouse on that property.   The BACAIDA is playing ball with Pektor, having agreed at its May 11 meeting to complete a draft agreement, which may be approved at a planned "emergency" meeting in June.  This agreement would assist Pektor in obtaining funding and grants.  Look for this to be advertised on short notice (2 day requirement for an alleged emergency meeting) - this should be an in-person meeting.

Pektor's urgency to achieve check and mate may be to get all the pieces of his plan in place before a return to the transparency and regular order of public meetings, the imminent departure of DeFranco from power, or a combination of the two.  He's ready to shift into 4th gear, and 5th won't be far behind. 

It's a shame that DeFranco and Teel have put the citizens of UMBT in such an unenviable position of fighting the Goliath of Pektor.  The pummeling of DeFranco and Barbounis in an off-year election by cross-party write-in votes is reflective of the corruption that pervades the current Board of Supervisors.

The UMBT citizens nightmare with Pektor is a word salad of acronyms.  The LERTA will screw the township out of tax dollars; the BACAIDA is said to be a "conduit" for funding of Pektor's project on Met-Ed property using OPM; the LVPC has given a thumbs down to the text amendment, the amendment proposed only a few weeks later to correct some of the screwups in the text amendment, and Pektor's projects; Pektor is proposing an NIZ to gain funding and grants (more OPM) as well as a seat at the table in decisions affecting his projects and surrounding properties.  In short, this is FUBAR, and SSDD.

Supervisor candidates Bermingham and Friedman poised to successfully block pro-River Pointe candidates from Upper Mount Bethel Township general election

 In Upper Mount Bethel Township there were four candidates in the primary election, vying for two Board of Supervisor (BOS) seats, two Republicans and two Democrats.

Republican incumbent candidate John Bermingham was the sole voice of reason on the BOS during the runup to the Board of Supervisors essentially granting multiple zoning variances and SALDO waivers, under the thin guise of a zoning amendment (known as the "Text Amendment").  The Text Amendment was authored by developer Lou Pektor, who requested several significant changes to the ordinances that would specifically exempt his kind of business from regulation.

The other Republican candidate was incumbent Anthony DeFranco, who spearheaded with comrade Robert Teel  the effort to clear the decks in UMBT for Pektor's development.  DeFranco is the driving force behind the township's Economic Development Committee, which has cheerlead for Pektor's development, by holding regular meetings with representatives of Pektor's team.  DeFranco and Teel appointed themselves to the township planning commission, to keep the oiled wheels of corruption running smoothly down the track.

On the Democratic side was David Friedman, a 44-year long resident of the township, former member and chairman of the planning commission, and member of a zoning update committee.  Mr. Friedman has been active in questioning and challenging the process by which the Text Amendment was passed, and believes it was not in the best interest of the township.  He believes in responsible development, and using an accepted public process with citizen input to make well-planned changes to township ordinances.  Not the process used to pass the Text Amendment.

The other Democratic candidate was Stavros Barbounis, also a former planning commission member, who does IT work for the township and is the chairman of the parks and recreation department.  He has been a resident for 6 years.  In an interview by the Morning Call, Mr. Barbounis said he was concerned about "procedural problems" in following regulations, but apparently he was not sufficiently concerned about the Text Amendment to speak against it.  Rather, he said that he felt the previous zoning was "too restrictive" for Pektor's kind of development.  That doesn't justify side dealing with a developer to grant several variances and waivers, by ramming a zoning amendment that the developer himself authored through approval - against multiple the recommendations of the township engineer.

Bermingham and Friedman asked voters in their respective parties to write-in Friedman and Bermingham, in lieu of voting for DeFranco and Barbounis - a bold but not improper thing to do.  In this fashion, if the write-in tallys exceeded the vote totals for DeFranco and Barbounis, they would not be on the ballot in November.  A local blogger critiqued and questioned this strategy - you can find his post here, and pointed out the the Slate Belt Republicans Association ex-communicated Bermingham for his actions.

It appears that this maneuver may have succeeded.  The unofficial results show that write-in votes significantly exceeded the totals for DeFranco and Barbounis, and Bermingham and Friedman were the top vote recipients.  Unless a lot of people wrote in another candidate(s), or errors in spelling were made, Bermingham and Friedman will be the only candidates on the ballot in November.  This is democracy in action, folks.  Screw me over once, blame on you.  Screw me over twice, blame on me.  If these results bear out what it appears they may, Bermingham may feel it was worth losing out on receiving the SBRA's annual calendar.

Example of why you must do due diligence when buying property - 3396 Green Meadow Circle Bethlehem

This blog focuses on projects that do not meet zoning.  Let’s look at a property being sold for residential use, and see how an unsuspecting buyer in a hot market may commit to buying a property that may be not buildable.

The property in question is at 3396 Green Meadow Circle, in Bethlehem City.  It is 3.48 acres, and is off the end of a cul de sac in a very nice neighborhood.   The Altonah Estates development was created in the 1960s by an attorney named Ellwood Shimer, and the homes were “estate homes”, some of which were owned by doctors and lawyers.  The lot is the last one in the development that was not built on (except the neighboring lot which was not built on for similar reasons, and then purchased as buffer by an adjacent landowner).  The asking price is $179,000.  Neighboring lots have water and sewer service – but as will be seen services to this lot are problematic.  The listing for the lot is here.  Note that several illustrations of exotic custom home designs are shown, and interior home pictures, but there is only one picture of the lot that is up above, on what we will see is an inaccessible area.  There is a picture of the street, but not of the frontage of the lot that is for sale.  A picture of the frontage from Google Maps is shown below, since the Realtor chose not to present an accurate depiction:

At first glance this lot looks attractive, rectangular and overlooking the city

First hints of problematic nature of the lot - steep slopes

So, why was this lot never developed?  Steep slopes.  The elevation lines above are at 20' intervals.  The north end of Bethlehem is home to “Camel’s Hump”, which is a hill that juts up about 200 feet compared with the surrounding terrain.   The Archibald Johnson estate is on the north side of Camel’s Hump, and this property is literally on the south side.  The peak of the hump is a few hundred feet off the northeast corner of the property.

Report of developer Shimer negotiating to possibly allow for a reservoir on the property

In the 1940s, there began discussion of the possibility of a reservoir on Camel’s Hump.  This idea was still being evaluated in the 1960s, and there is evidence that the developer had discussions with Bethlehem of this possibility.  The reservoir would have been fed via gravity from Bethlehem reservoir(s) to the north.  However, this plan was scrapped and in 1978 the developer made the last adjustment to lot lines, as shown in the diagram below.  Note that the plan states “City can not serve [water] over this elevation [450']”, and  this elevation is right near the street.

Last subdivision of subject lot, with water service limitation warning

A prospective buyer contacted the City Engineer, and he stated that static water pressure at the cul de sac is 32 psi – the bare minimum for water service.  He stated that a supplementary pump would be need to be provided for a home on this lot.  He also stated that the sewer connection in the street was not extended to the end of the road, and that the lot owner would have to pay to rip up 130 feet of city street, excavate, and replace the paving.  Furthermore, the steep slopes on this lot would make a sewer connection problematic, as a 2% slope is the recommended maximum, while the lot has slopes of 35% and more.  Gravity sewer lines do not function properly with too steep a slope.  Thus a non-standard solution will be needed to connect sewer to a home anywhere on the lot.

A neighbor with a two-story house reports that he has only a half basement due to a large boulder that could not be removed.  He had to install his own water pump to supplement the city pressure, and water and sewer cost $34,000 to install.  Part of this cost was excavating in rock to run the lines.

The Bethlehem Zoning Officer was asked about building on this lot, and his first response was to point out that Bethlehem has a Steep Slopes Ordinance.  The Ordinance has requirements for the minimum lot size required for developing on slopes over a certain percentage.  Slope is rise over run, like a line.  So a 45 degree slope would have a slope of 1/1, or 100%.  You can do the math to find out a 15% slope is 8.5 degrees, a 25% slope is 14 degrees, and a 35% slope is 19.5 degrees.

“Ready to Build”

The advertisement for the lot until a month ago included statements such as “there is a designated driveway entry”, “ready to build” and "utilities available on site".  We covered the last one above, and we will see that none of these is true.

Discussion with owner “This is the place” (Brigham Young, 1847)

A prospective buyer met the landowner on site, who proceeded to lead the way up a ramp on the left side of the property, through the “designated driveway cutout”.  The ramp is fairly steep – a 20% grade and about 200 feet long.  The owner proceeded to the top left of the property, and stated “don’t you think this is the place to build a house?”  Indeed, this is the least steep portion of the property, as well as would have the best view if trees were removed.  Remember, this juts upward almost 200 feet above the north end of Bethlehem.  The problem is, there is no way to get up there.  The owner supplied Sheet 2 of a three sheet site plan she and her husband paid to have created in 2006.  Here is a hi resolution version obtained later from the engineer.  Note areas with no shading are over 25% slope.

Owner's site plan showing extensive proposed excavation and grading

Discussion with owner’s engineer

The owner paid a whopping $175,000 for this lot in 2004, and hired an engineer to create a development plan for a house.  This plan required a massive 24 foot excavation at the deepest point, and well over an acre of disturbance.  The proposed driveway would have a 15% slope, while the Ordinance allows a maximum slope of 10%.  This engineer was contacted, and he stated that the maximum must have been 15% when he created the plan.  He also stated “I would not agree to purchase that lot unless you have obtained ALL approvals.  Zoning, Engineering and Conservation District (erosion and storm water)”.  Further, he stated “I would suggest a plan that proposes the absolute minimal disturbance” which is the exact opposite of the plan he was hired to create.   The engineer supplied the two missing sheets of the site plan he had created.

Sheet 3 of owner's site plan showing proposed 15% driveway profile and existing grades

Sheet 1 of owner's site plan showing areas of 0-10%, 10-15%, 15-25%, and >25% grades

Any development will have to conform to current zoning, so the 10% is the maximum driveway slope.  If there is significant rock formation below the surface, the proposed 24’ excavation may not even have been possible to achieve.  Even if it can be, the proposed excavation for the owner’s plan might exceed $1m.  If disturbance exceeds an acre, an NPDES permit is required, which alone may cost $20,000.

The Steep Slopes Section of the Zoning Ordinance

Bethlehem Zoning Ordinance Steep Slopes on Scribd

The three page section of the zoning ordinance is shown above, and it contains everything that will make this lot difficult very to develop.  The complete ordinance is here.

1. Steep Slopes pertains to construction on slopes >15%
2. Construction on slopes >25% requires a 4 acre lot, slopes>35% a 10 acre lot
3. Walls no greater than 5' tall
4. Driveways shall have a slope no greater than 10%

What the site plan reveals

An inspection of Sheet 1 of the site plan reveals that within the building setback (dashed line), there is no location adjacent to the street with less than a 25% slope to build.  The “construction area” is defined in the steep slopes ordinance as an area of disturbance such as driveway, house, etc.  To build near the top of the property requires routing a driveway through areas of slopes >25%.  Therefore, a lot size of 4 acres or more is required, but the lot is 3.48 acres.  Also revealed is that the ramp is outside the building setback, so nothing could be built on it.  Furthermore, Sheet 3 shows the existing ramp has a 20% slope, so it can not be used as a driveway.  If the slope of the ramp is lessened to 10%, this requires excavating down about 10 feet.  But the steep slopes ordinance allows for 5’ high maximum retaining walls.

If a home could be built off the cul de sac frontage, it is impossible for there to be a garage within the setback due to the steepness of the existing terrain.  Who is going to build a custom home, and not have at least a one-car garage?

An analysis shows that with an absolute minimum 15% driveway up the ramp and beyond, using three tight switchbacks, it is possible to reach near the top left of the property.  However, a 15% grade driveway with tight setbacks is a significant hazard for winter driving, as well as 50% in excess of the 10% permitted.

Discussion with Zoning Officer

With the previous site plan in hand, the Zoning Officer was revisited.  He agreed that a variance would be needed for the minimum lot size to develop on steep slopes.  He also agreed that walls over 5’ tall will require a variance, and that a driveway over 10% will require a variance.  Basically, to build anything on the lot will require a zoning variance.

Discussion with Conservation District

A specialist with the county Conservation District was contacted, and provided the topography of the lot.  The Conservation District will have to approve an Erosion and Sedimentation plan for development on the lot.  He stated that there would likely be multiple controls required, which would be very expensive, for development on this lot.  A swale at the top of the property to intercept water from offsite, drainage at each driveway setback, and a filter basin.

Not “ready to build”

The fact that multiple variances will be needed to put a home anywhere on this lot by definition means it is not “ready to build”.  It is ready to be a pain the butt and bank account of the person who purchases it.  It is a beautiful property, but it is essentially not buildable.  Who would pay to create a custom home on the 35 to 50% slopes at the bottom, and not have even a single car garage?  Hoping to obtain variances to build on the upper portion is even more of a gamble – there is no guarantee variances would be granted.  Neighbors would have a legal right to appeal in court if variances were granted to build anywhere on the lot.

And if one does build, and new runoff issues are created that affect neighbors (there currently are some runoff issues in the area), who is going to be blamed?  The person with the highest property - this lot.

Neighbors threatened with Cease and Desist for speaking with Prospective Buyers

It is reported that concerned neighbors are informing prospective buyers of the issues with this property, including that there are drainage issues in the area, and zoning variances are needed to build on this lot.  It is also reported that these neighbors have been threatened with a cease and desist by the Seller's attorney.  Now why would that be?   Those things are facts.

Realtor makes some adjustments to listing based on feedback

A Realtor and lot owner have an obligation to to divulge known issues with a lot that affect its value and ability to be developed.  Feedback on the above issues was supplied to the listing Realtor. The ad now reads that a “designated opening for a walking path” is present (no longer a driveway), and the phrase “Ready to Build” has been removed from the listing.  Now it reads that it is ready for you to bring your engineer, architect and dreams.  A buyer better also bring a big fat loan from a bank, and be prepared for nightmares, in order to build on this property.  The neighbors report that the current owner’s husband was asked if he checked the zoning prior to purchase, and he replied “why would I have to do that?”  It is noted that he never was able to build his dream home on the lot – that is why he should have checked the zoning.

This blog post is supplied to show that due diligence is needed when buying property.  The Seller would like nothing more to dump this property, possibly onto an unsuspecting new owner.  The prospective buyer she spoke with was not told of anything her engineer found in 2006, nor supplied with anything except an 8-1/2 x 11" copy of Sheet 2 of the Site Plan.  In the interest of full disclosure, the Realtor should hand each prospective buyer the 3-page Steep Slopes ordinance, as well as the 3-page site plan.  But will she?