Present:  Kate Bouman, Larry Harvilchuck, Terry Dugan, Tom Swan, Sandy Payne, Jen Gregory, Brian Gardner, Jerry Derham, Tony Trecoske.  Also present:  Bob Templeton

The Silver Lake Township Planning Commission and Ad Hoc Committee held a work session on Tuesday, June 16 , 2009 at the Silver Lake Township Building.  Mr. Harvilchuck called the work session to order at 7:30 pm.

Mr. Harvilchuck read the minutes from the May 5 meeting and the committee members approved them.

Mr. Dugan spoke regarding the lack of community support for zoning and the difficulty with enforcement of any zoning ordinance particularly with the cost it has been decided the Silver Lake Township will not be looking to enact zoning at any time in the near future.  By going into the Coalition it would have enabled all the member townships to share the cost.  Now there are member townships that are not enacting zoning so that increases the cost.  Mr. Dugan suggested moving forward and putting as much strength as possible into a SALDO to suit the needs of Silver Lake Township.  Once this is done, Mr. Dugan would like to take a look at zoning and see what the updated SALDO cannot do that zoning can.  Make the necessary changes to the proposed zoning ordinances and then put it aside to see what future development comes along and then if it becomes necessary the zoning ordinance would be done and could be enacted if there is community support for it.  However, residents would have to come to the township and ask that it be enacted. 

Mr. Trecoske asked if other townships that are addressing the SALDO might be interested in going as a group for enforcement. 

Mr. Fruehan spoke and said that he is aware of only a couple of the Northern Tier Coalition Members as proceeding with zoning.

Mr. Gardner received a letter dated June 15, 2009 from Attorney Marion O’Malley.  Mr. Harvilchuck read the letter to the committee.  This letter addressed the issues ordinances involving building restrictions.  Copy of the letter from Attorney O’Malley is attached.  Mr. Harvilchuck pointed out that what Attorney O’Malley is referring to is referenced in Section 603 which is Article VI – Zoning.  Mr. Templeton pointed out that the Municipal Planning Code addresses setbacks.  The Susquehanna County SALDO has different setbacks for residential properties and commercial properties.  Mr. Templeton said the County has always had different setbacks.  Section 503.41 of the MPC says that you must have uniform setbacks.  The County interpreted this as uniform residential setbacks and uniform commercial setbacks.  However, the Community Planner Carson Helfrich’s interpretation was that you must have uniform setbacks no matter was the property is being used for.  Discussion as to whether there could be different setbacks for residential vs. commercial and whether it could be accomplished through a SALDO or only with Zoning continued.  Mr. Harvilchuck quoted cases referenced in the Zoning books. 

Mr. Harvilchuck asked if there were any public comments.  Mrs. Kublo asked if anyone ever questioned the legalities of what was in an ordinance?  Mr. Harvilchuck asked why you would put something in an ordinance that couldn’t legally be there.  Mrs. Kublo felt that the average person wouldn’t have the time or money to challenge an ordinance; however, if a developer came in and didn’t like what they were told, they would be the ones to challenge.  Zoning is different than subdivisions.  Mr. Dugan felt that there would have to be uniform setbacks throughout the township. 

Mr. Harvilchuck said that Attorney O’Malley’s letter did not state under what legal authority can we make enforceable legal setbacks.  Mr. Templeton said he could not answer that based on the County’s ordinance. 

Mr. Swan said he felt that the setbacks should be decided and whatever comes down the road in the future can be dealt with at that time. 

The creation of an ordinance is to hopefully avoid problems in the future.  You cannot wait for a problem to surface and then decide what should be done because then it is too late. 

The MPC allows for setbacks to be established but it is not clear if they must be uniform throughout the township or if they must be uniform residential and uniform commercial.  This would depend on who is interpreting the MPC. 

It was suggested that the Silver Lake SALDO mirrors the Susquehanna County ordinance.  If there are any challenges to the county ordinance then the township ordinance would have to be amended as well. 

Mr. Dugan asked if a SALDO regulate the development of existing lots have versus land that is being subdivided?  There answer was no.

Mr. Fruehan suggested the smaller lots have reduced setbacks.  Many of the smaller lots have public septic so they have slightly different setbacks than the on-lot septic properties. 

Mr. Templeton was asked what attorney they use if they have any questions regarding their ordinance.  Mr. Templeton said they call Carson Helfrich who has an attorney in the Honesdale area for answers.  Mr. Helfrich will be attending the July 7 meeting and he may be able to clarify some questions.

Mr. Gardner asked the committee to look back at Table VI regarding water frontage.  The current table is set at 100 ft.  The County’s table states 50 ft. from the normal high-water mark.  Mr. Templeton was asked if the Susquehanna County Planning Commission has the authority to issue a waver if the setbacks cannot be met.  Another question is who will be responsible for enforcement.  COG will enforce the setbacks if the township gives them the authority.