Present:  Lawrence Harvilchuck, Jen Gregory, Brian Gardner, Sandy Payne, Kate Bouman, Tom Swan, Peg Miller, Francis Fruehan

The Silver Lake Township Planning Commission and Ad Hoc Committee held a work session on Wednesday, February 4, 2009 at the Silver Lake Township Building.  Laurence Harvilchuck called the work session to order at 7:30 pm. 

Mr. Fruehan read the minutes from the January 27, 2009 work session, and then raised several points. Mr. Fruehan stated that he believed that the minutes from the November 19, 2008 were not reviewed before being posted on the township website. Also on the November 19, 2008 minutes, Mr. Fruehan disagreed with whether Mr. Dugan had actually said that he talked to the township solicitor and the solicitor’s opinion was that the setbacks in the current SALDO only applies to new subdivisions and not to existing parcels. Mr. Fruehan felt that what was said was that it was the solicitor’s opinion the current SALDO would be difficult to enforce.  Since Mr. Dugan was out of town, discussion on this point was tabled until the next meeting when Mr. Dugan would be present. Another item that Mr. Fruehan pointed out was that his handout did not include warehouse as was referenced but various commercial buildings. Mr. Fruehan also had a few items he wanted to discuss regarding the January 27, 2009 work session.  One issue that has not been resolved in his mind is whether or not a SALDO can regulate setbacks on existing lots.

The presentation Mr. Harvilchuck had put together for the January 27, 2009 meeting after receiving and reviewing the PA Zoning Law and Practice books shed a lot of light the issue.  Mr. Fruehan felt that the three questions the presentation included had not been asked by the committee, and Mr. Harvilchuck replied that these were general topics of concern to the committee as a whole. The questions were: What is the difference between SALDO and Zoning?  Can you zone with a Subdivision ordinance?  Can land use regulation be enacted through many different ordinances rather than one unified ordinance?  

Land use and Zoning are interchangeable. To try to zone using a variety of ordinances is overreaching, which the courts do not like. The presentation did shed a lot of light on these questions relating to both SALDO and Zoning. However, Mr. Fruehan suggested once again that perhaps separate ordinances should be considered for specific problems.  Mr. Harvilchuck believed there were a limited number of specific issues that could be addressed outside of Zoning—i.e. junk yards; where the state has given municipalities the authority to regulate those issues without a zoning ordinance. 

The survey the committee filed out late last year had highlighted a large number of concerns shared by the members of the committee.  Mr. Gardner asked if they were realistic potential concerns. Mrs. Miller felt they were as did Mr. Harvilchuck. Mrs. Bouman pointed out that there would be no harm in trying to address them now instead of waiting until it is here.  Mr. Harvilchuck pointed out that this is a planning process. Mr. Gardner felt that there should also be a realistic side as well. Mr. Fruehan felt that the survey list with potential problems/uses should be boiled down to be more realistic—i.e. a gas well compressor station.  In talking to people outside the committee, Mr. Fruehan said a lot of people are concerned about quarries as well as saw shops.  Mrs. Bouman said the fact remains that what can be done with Zoning that cannot be done with a SALDO is to control uses. Mrs. Bouman also pointed out that if a SALDO is developed that tries to do what Zoning can do it may end up being more restrictive because items such as soil types and grades of the land etc. and that the SALDO cannot take into account local conditions. These uniform standards across the entire township may make it even harder for people to do what they want, and that the proposed Zoning Ordinance is already viewed by some to be very watered down.  According to the 2009 PA Zoning Law and Practice books a SALDO cannot have different standards for different uses.   

It was Mr. Fruehan’s opinion that nothing has been done to modify the current proposed ordinance.  Mr. Fruehan would like to see a summarized list of the proposed changes, which Sandy Payne will prepare for the next meeting. Chapters V, VI and VII of the proposed ordinance need to be reviewed for questions.

At this point Section XII was started.  Mrs. Gregory asked if COG would administer zoning, or if someone would be hired under the proposed zoning ordinance.  No decision has been yet made, though Mr. Swan and Ms. Payne indicated that enforcement would be a priority with the township. Silver Lake does not have to administer through COG. The perception is that the problem with COG would be the fees. 

Mr. Fruehan questioned 1200.2 under Section XII – “This ordinance regulates all matters and activities authorized by Article VI of the MPC.”  His question was whether we would want to regulate everything authorized under the MPC or regulate things stipulated in one of the prior chapters.  Mr. Harvilchuck pointed out that we are looking specifically at Article VI of the MPC, and that an ordinance can not govern or regulate what is not already defined as being covered by the ordinance when written.

Mr. Gardner asked about 1200.3C creation of a lot or alteration of lot lines – it this a SALDO?  Mr. Harvilchuck explained this is the balance between SALDO and Zoning and how they work together. Currently, the existing SALDO can regulate lot size because there is no zoning. SALDO covers division of land, provision for streets, easements, common lands and improvements needed to support development.  If no zoning is present then it also covers uniform setbacks and lot sizes. If lot lines or lot size is changed than it is planning and not zoning.  It was asked if an Assessment Permit is required then would you have to bother with getting zoning approval?  A regulated structure is not necessarily a building; it could be something like a cell tower.  In zoning you can have different setbacks for accessory buildings as compared to residential buildings. 

The next work session is scheduled for February 11 and will finish Administration section and go into Section V. Mr. Harvilchuck adjourned the work session at approximately 9:10pm