Category Archives: Lower Macungie Township

Lower Macungie Township is a township in Lehigh County, Pennsylvania, in the United States. It is a suburb of Allentown, Pennsylvania, in the Lehigh Valley region of the state. As of the 2010 Census, the township had a population of 30,633.[1]
Lower Macungie is the fastest growing area of Pennsylvania in terms of total population growth[citation needed] and is undergoing rapid suburbanization. Some fast-growing areas of the township include Ancient Oaks, Brandywine Village, Brandywine Village 2, Hills at Lock Ridge, Millbrook Farms, and Shepherd Hills. Its villages include East Texas, Minesite, New Hensingersville (also in Berks County,) Weilersville, and Wescosville.
In November 2007, township voters elected to make Lower Macungie a first class township in 2008.

Lower Macungie Trick or Treat 2014!!

Posted on by

Screen Shot 2014-09-18 at 4.38.53 PM

 

Remember, It’s a cold hard fact… On average, children are more than twice as likely to be hit by a car on Halloween than on any other day of the year. But it is COMPLETELY avoidable! –

Halloween Safety Tips from safekids.org Top Tips

  • When selecting a costume make sure it is the right size to prevent trips and falls.
  • Decorate costumes and bags with reflective tape or stickers and, if possible, choose light colors. Since masks can sometimes obstruct a child’s vision, try non-toxic face paint and makeup whenever possible.
  • Have kids use glow sticks or flashlights to help them see and be seen by drivers.
  • Children under the age of 12 should not be alone at night without adult supervision. If kids are mature enough to be out without supervision, they should stick to familiar areas that are well lit and trick-or-treat in groups.
  • Popular trick-or-treating hours are 5:30 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. so be especially alert for kids during those hours.

Related articles across the web

Cell tower proposed on Kratzer Farm

Posted on by

I wanted to dig a little deeper into the Verizon cell phone tower proposal. For those who might not know the township has been approached to lease land on the Kratzer farm for a 120 ft cell phone tower which would enhance service for Verizon customers. There is a possibility that more carriers could also piggy back off the tower in the future as well. This would result in monthly payments to the township. We’ve been initially offered 1800/mo with  2.5% increases year on a 20 year term leases re-negotiated every 5 years. I am currently looking into the market rates for other poles on public property across the Valley. Very interested to see how this offer stacks up.

Nuts & bolts.

1. It’s actually not Verizon who we’re dealing with rather a third party leasing agent who negotiates on behalf of the carrier. These firms are typically paid in performance bonuses for bringing in leases at lower rates and favorable terms.

2. There is a definite service issue for Verizon customers in and around the East Texas area. This includes the neighborhoods around WLES and into Shepherd Hills. This pole will solve these issues for 1000’s of residents. The issue is both capacity and also bandwidth as more and more folks use “heavy data” with smart phones.

When we were approached, first at the planning and zoning committee level neither Commissioner Lancsek or I had a problem with kicking up the conversation to the full board level. (I also don’t believe issues should stall or be killed in committees at the local level)

While I have not made up my mind I am genuinely interested in learning more about the proposal and of course intrigued by the potential for a stable monthly income. As I stated last night, I would insist the money be earmarked for the park system since the location would be our largest passive park. I would likely take this a step further and insist that the money at first be earmarked for a Kratzer farm comprehensive planning effort.

I also stated last night my main concern is that the 120 ft pole doesn’t adversely affect the “skyline” of the park. Having done a little research today’s modern evergreen or elm “stealth” monopoles are much better than the ones of a few years ago which frankly looked silly.

Here are some pictures:

 

This represents a 2 branch per ft. pole with no “antenna socks”.  The difference between 2 and 3 is pretty clear. IMO this wouldn’t be acceptable.

Here is a "3 branch per ft. pole". Much better looking then the less dense pole.

Here is a “3 branch per ft. pole” with antenna socks.  Much better looking then the less dense pole. The added branch density makes for a more camouflaged pole.

 

 

 

winter

Here is a how a 120ft pole towers above a wooded lot in the winter. These trees are roughly 80 ft in height vs. the 120 ft. pole. This is close to what the pole would look like on the Kratzer farm until the tree grove matures fully. Some of the species in the woods will eventually reach about 100 ft.

So now curious. What do you think? I am especially interested in hearing from those who live near the proposed tower.

Related articles across the web

Learning from our mistakes…

Posted on by

A couple weeks ago Commissioners considered the Jaindl Spring Creek Properties. This, the final vote was really just a formality since the agreement which is now law was concocted in 2010 by the prior BOC. (Including 3 Presidents – Ryan Conrad, Ron Eichenberg, & Roger Reis) When I came into office in Jan 2014 after two of these Commissioners were defeated in election I was then legally bound to their decision as terrible as I believe it was.

That being said there are still things that up to the very end leave me speechless. Here are 2 examples:

  • 1. Never at any point was freight traffic parsed out from regular traffic during engineering studies. (That being 18 wheelers vs. regular autos). To my knowledge not once.
    Baffles me. How can you expect to do everything in your power to proactively address the unique nature of freight traffic if you never once asked for the truck specific data. Surely you can’t think that truck traffic and regular commuter traffic should be treated in the same way? This in my opinion is egregious since every hearing I attended over nearly 3 years, every step of the way freight traffic was the number 1 concern voiced by residents. Yet up until the very last vote there was never freight specific analysis completed. No focus on projections of how trucks were coming and going and what routes they were likely to take.
  • 2. When asked by a resident how much in new revenue the warehouses would generate for Lower Macungie not one Commissioner from the 2010 board had any idea. 
    In 2010 Commissioners in favor of this project often gave generic answers as to why they stubbornly supported the rezoning including eluding to economic development. My question is how can you state “economic development” as a positive when up til the very last minute not one seems to have any idea what that economic benefit is? At least not in any measurable term. I never once heard a single job count and definitely not a per/acre job creation efficiency figure. In other words job creation is a great goal, but are we paving over farmland for maximum job creation? There was no work whatsoever done to calculate lifecycle ROI. Even though it was requested of the board by a resident very early on in the process during a hearing on the MOU. This resident who is a CPA even gave the board a template to use. There was no response by the board. No followup. No effort whatsoever to use tools that were physically handed to them.

Lower Macungie now has to deal with this decision moving forward. It is what it is… for us.

I re-state all this because across the valley it’s likely another community will be dealing with a similar issue somewhere. End of the day in our example the most basic questions were not asked. Please learn from our mistakes. If your community is considering zoning changes insist on the following:

1. Conduct lifecycle cost & benefit analysis. If your considering a zoning change because you seek ratables or “economic development” in your community be prepared to support that statement with ya know…. actual numbers. Don’t just build for the sake of building. Insist on positive ROI. And please, take it to the next level beyond the windfall and initial oftentimes rosy forecasting by developers. This is often misleading when your considering the long term solvency and ROI of a land development.

We have to insist that development produces a measurable financial return over the long term. Sprawl in many of it’s forms costs communities more in the long-run than it returns leading to ever increasing taxes. Insist on seeing an analysis of the math. Have the nuts and bolts conversation with the publics input. Remember arguing for more efficient job creation doesn’t mean your against job creation. Arguing in favor of smart growth doesn’t mean your anti growth. It means your against costly dumb growth. The higher the return on the public’s investments the greater its financial solvency. This leads to more capital capacity to take on other endeavors. Smart growth leads to more and better growth.

INSIST on REAL return of Investment.

2. It’s time to start thinking in terms of the next level/generation of traffic analysis. I am not an engineer, but when I see a traffic analysis for a warehouse project 6 miles away from a highway interchange I would think analysis of freight traffic would be a no brainer. Ask the “dumb” questions. Most appointed officials aren’t engineers. That doesn’t mean we can’t try to use a little common sense.

 

Community notification – Share with neighbors

Posted on by

Pennsylvania State Police (PSP) through our municipal liaison Trooper Kirk Vanim distributed a crime alert today regarding the activity of transient criminal in the East Penn area. Read the alert here.

Let’s stop this in it’s tracks:

From PSP – “Please let your family members and friends—(especially the elderly) know of this plague. They are here and they will steal from you if given the opportunity.”

Awareness is the best weapon. These transient criminals are extremely hard to catch. But once awareness is raised they pick up and leave a community.

There is no reason in today’s age of mass email alerts, social media and text alerts that every LMT resident shouldn’t be aware this is happening.

Let’s spread the word! Share this post with others. Pick up the phone and call any elderly family or neighbors that may not have access to the mass alerts!

How do we safely move freight in Lower Macungie/Greater Lehigh Valley?

Posted on by

For better or worse we’re now in the business of moving freight in Lower Macungie Twp. Much of our former agriculture land (which was at one time very high ROI, low impact and great for property values) is now or about to become warehouses. (very low ROI and extremely high impact terrible neighbors)

Moving freight is now a huge part of our local and regional economy. Because of that, local governments have to address the issue.

How do we achieve balance between the needs to move freight and safety/quality of life?

How do we achieve balance between the needs to move freight and safety/quality of life?

In Upper Macungie distribution warehouses probably always made sense due to a location directly adjacent to I-78 with direct highway access to all points N, S, E & W. In Upper Macungie they have the ability to separate the trucks from residential portion of the township. Here in Lower Macungie we are much further from interchanges. Therefore, trucks coming in and out of the township to and from the warehouses are frequently ending up on local residential roads. Day and night trucks rumble through Macungie and Alburtis intermingling with pedestrians and residential neighborhoods. In Lower Macungie we see them on local roads such as East Texas Rd, Spring Creek Rd, Sauerkraut Ln, Willow Ln ect.

In the next 10 years the amount of warehouses will double. The biggest of these mega warehouses are forecasted to generate up to 40 trucks an hour 7 days a week and 24 hours a day. The problem will only get worse.

We need answers. Moving forward how do we balance the needs of a safe, livable community with the need to efficiently move freight? I’m not sure there is a blueprint. Are there any other examples of areas that have gone this far overboard with distribution warehouses? 

Continue reading →

Corporate Welfare

Posted on by

Last night at the township BOC meeting one colleague fellow Commissioner Ryan Conrad asserted that participating in the TIF is not “corporate welfare”.

It’s important residents understand where Commissioners stand on issues. This issue in particular outlines stark philosophical differences and approaches to land development, development subsidies and who should shoulder the costs of impacts both immediate and projected. Therefore it’s crucial residents understand very clearly without semantic interference where each Commissioner stands. Every four years we receive a job review in the form of an election. Therefore, I would be remiss if I didn’t clearly state that I fundamentally disagree with Mr. Conrads assertion in the strongest of terms. 

“Corporate welfare” in this instance has been used as a rallying cry for residents who by and large support the project but without the 20 year tax forfeiture. Some institutional supporters have tried to use semantics and word games to insist this doesn’t qualify as corporate welfare or that the townships decision on participating in the TIF could somehow derail the project. This is a disingenuous game and unfair to residents.

The facts remain:

1. If Lower Macungie participates in the TIF 50% of the developers incremental taxes will be siphoned away from the township.

2. The money instead is siphoned back to the developer and other private interests through LCIDA where it would be used to pay back construction bonds for basic improvements that are required of all developers seeking to do business in the township.

3. With this TIF, tax money is forfeited and instead used to pay for what otherwise would be the responsibility of the developer. In other words the normal costs of doing business. Infrastructure costs every other developer has to pay for themselves. In this case it is the bare minimum infrastructure improvements required by Penndot to build a shopping center of this magnitude.

4. The bottom line is that this mechanism pads the developers bottom line. TIF will increase profits of private business interests and decrease the return received by taxpayers. It is preferential treatment for one chosen business. It is a subsidy of both of the sellers flawed piece of land and of the buyer. It is a distortion of the market that will hurt other local businesses.

5. While you can argue that creating the TIF district could pull the plug on the entire TIF, (including the school district) the townships participation (remember they are 2 separate ordinances and two separate votes) is purely symbolic and will have absolutely zero impact on the developer building the project. In other words, with or without the township participating in the TIF this shopping center is coming. This is a certainty. I can’t be anymore clear about that. There have been attempts to blur this line. 

Lower Macungie’s participation in the TIF is giving one developer receiving special treatment for purely symbolic reasons. We are a relatively affluent township with a healthy and robust economic climate, therefore TIF is unnecessary and borderline egregious to even consider.

A vote for the TIF is a vote to take money out of the pocket of Lower Macungie residents and funnel it to private interests over a 20 year period. This is compounded by the fact some Commissioners seated on this board just recently voted to raise taxes.

If any Commissioner believes this is the right thing to do, then they should stand by that decision and not try to rationalize it by making statements like “The developer still pays 100% of it’s taxes” while ignoring the fact that half those taxes are siphoned away from the township back to the developer by padding their bottom line through the Lehigh County Industrial Authority. The other misleading notion I’ve heard is no “corporation is receiving a direct subsidy. Last time I checked TCH development and The Goldenberg group are in this to make money. They are indeed both private businesses who will benefit from TIF subsidy in terms of increased profits. No, the “nameplates” Costco and Target aren’t the direct beneficiaries but they are indirect beneficiaries. No matter how to slice it private interests are the gov’t sponsored winners in this shell game and taxpayers and other local businesses are the losers.

 

Guest blog – Jim Palmquist: Walk this way: Lower Macungie becoming pedestrian friendly

Posted on by

The following was submitted by Jim Palmquist the chair of the LMT walkways group. You can view the website here. It also appeared as an op-ed in The Morning call.

Surprise, surprise. Lower Macungie Township, the place where almost everyone drives wherever they go, has a major section that is almost completely walkable. About a quarter of Lower Macungie residents live in a walkable community! Who knew?

Lower Macungie is a place where thousands of people can walk or ride bikes on walkways to a drug store, grocery store, state liquor store, medical and dental offices, banks, churches, convenience stores, restaurants and other merchants and services.

walk way

 
But wait, there’s more!. Continue reading →

Got a phone call from owner of a business today….

Posted on by

Got a phone call from a business owner today. He owns a business in the Giant shopping center. I will let them name their business should they choose to if they publicly address the Lower Macungie BOC which I encouraged them to do. If you have been following this issue for awhile they attended a county meeting and spoke out.

They honestly believe their small business will absolutely be hurt by Hamilton Crossings. When you own a small eatery in a shopping center you count on foot traffic to drive customers into your place of business. The “Giant shopping center” is located just blocks away from Hamilton Crossings and is clearly struggling.

Now please understand one thing. And this is my opinion but I think the business owner shares it. Competition is one thing. Business owners accept this. As a township Commissioner I encourage it. It’s survival of the fittest thing. The problem is when the playing field is skewed. Plain and simply TIF’s when abused and utilized in a community that isn’t distressed disrupts the free market. Utilizing this TIF in this area where an existing inventory of businesses have not benefitted from the same treatment will hurt other business owners. Many small businesses in the “Giant” shopping center will now have to compete with potential new business in a government chosen shopping center on an uneven playing field. At least one owner is certain this will hurt him and his employees.

Does anyone out there believe that this is fair? If so I’d love to hear why.

Competition is a fact of life for small business. It leads to more options and better pricing/service. When this happens the consumer wins. My problem is it’s fundamentally unfair to choose the winners with this kind of government intervention in a community that isn’t distressed. Hardworking people will be hurt by this TIF. Does anyone out there believe Lower Macungie is a distressed economy?

Above is a picture of 5 empty storefronts in the Giant shopping center. This is just one corner. In total there is over a dozen vacancies.

Above is a picture of 5 empty storefronts in the Giant shopping center. This is just one corner. In total there is over a dozen vacancies.

*Additional note: Some have said “well this shopping center is run down” “That’s why no one wants to shop there”. I don’t disagree. The “Giant/Redners” shopping center is one of the worse “Strip Malls” in the whole Lehigh Valley. It’s dated. Ugly. Terrible. Traffic flows poorly. Some locations the parking lots are downright dangerous.

To that point, note that the same company owns the “Kohls” side. And they did acknowledge this. At least in terms of spending some major money on recent renovations of. This included new landscaping and a facade renovation (Kohls). From what I understand more improvements are coming and they are slowly making there way to the “other” side where giant is.

the point is, this is the natural order. Your shopping center is crummy and because of that you can’t attract good tenants? Then invest money and fix it. Or fail in the open and free market. What isn’t natural is when a gov’t chooses a winner. Then that new shopping center which “needed” the special treatment succeeds because it’s allowed to divert 50% of it’s taxes to repay bonds for 20 years. 

Related articles across the web

Time to sign kids up for playground program

Posted on by

Registration is May 28th for the LMT playground program! Connections to neighborhood parks create a vibrant sense of place. They are one of the quickest and most effective ways to cultivate a sense of community and improve our quality of life. The extremely successful Lower Macungie playground program has been doing this for years. I remember participating in a version of the longstanding playground program as a kid many years ago. My neighborhood playground was and still is East Texas Park. These connections to my hometown are a big reason why I decided to stay here in Lower Mac in the same neighborhood I grew up in. In fact this summer I’ll be getting married in the ET park gazebo.

How to enroll:
LMT residents may enroll children, ages 6 to 11, from 6 p.m. to 8 p.m., Wednesday, May 28, into the 7 week summer playground program. More information here.

The cost is $110, and the program is open to LMT residents and runs from 9 a.m. to 12 p.m., Monday, June 23, to Friday, August 8 at the community center 3400 Brookside Road. The program offers arts & crafts, games, sports and a few pool days. Each program includes a series of special events including:

  • Special Game Days
  • Pizza Days
  • ‘Rita’ Days
  • Complete the Playground Season with a fabulous Round-Up Day.

The program is offered at the following parks: Quarry Park, Church Lane Park, East Texas Park, Wild Cherry Park and Hills At Lockridge Park.

Pictured: East Texas Park Gazebo

Pictured: East Texas Park Gazebo

Connect with Lower Macungie:
Official LMT Facebook Page
My Commissioner Page 
Follow on Twitter
Sign up for LMT email alerts

Thoughts on East Penn School District and Hamilton Crossings TIF

Posted on by

I attended the School Board meeting last night as an interested taxpayer and watched the debate about TIF. The decision was disappointing but I felt the debate was moreso. Important points were completely missed. The board by and large failed to look at the situation from a big picture standpoint. Some compartmentalized the decision and limited the thought process to a single parcel instead of evaluating the economics of the decision regionally. End of the day the board voted 5-4 to remain a part of the Hamilton Crossings TIF. Earnshaw, Bacher, Ballard, Fuller and Rhoads voted for the TIF. Vinovskis, Munson, Donches and Heid voted against it. (for the motion which was a vote against the TIF)

The bottom line is Lower Macungie isn’t just growing an industrial and commercial base our base is pretty much about to explode. At the same time single family home construction the primary driver for school age kids has ground to a halt. Certain school directors seemed oblivious to that. I found it a bit alarming. How do you make a decision about the application of an economic development tool meant for distressed communities without considering the bigger economic picture? How can you make an economic development calculation when compartmentalizing the districts forecast to one parcel seemingly oblivious to what’s going on around it? This decision shouldn’t have been made considering one parcel in isolation. It should have been made considering the whole picture.

I’ve written here before about the objective criteria I apply when considering a TIF. For me it centers around the ‘but for’ test. The name comes from the expression, “Development in a community would not occur but for the use of TIF.”

To evaluate this criteria you have to look at the big picture of Lower Mac and ask without TIF do we have economic development in the East Penn School District? The answer is absolutely. Therefore by using a TIF when it’s not necessary we skew the market. By applying TIF in a healthy growing local economy we’ve hurt the development potential of other commercial sites. This matters for the school district because these other sites would have paid 100% of there tax burden. The mistake is compounded by the fact that millions of dollars in new assessed value is coming to the districts coffers from industrial projects immediately in the next 5 years. This isn’t speculation. We’re talking approved or nearly approved projects.

Bad decision. Plain and simple. I always felt this was a bad deal for the township but at first I actually thought it was at least an understandable decision for the school board. The more I thought about it my opinion changed over the last 6 months. Why? Because I started looking at the big picture.

Where I sit today as a taxpayer of 2 school district properties (my home and my business) I’m going to resent last night’s decision to leave money on the table the day directors vote to raise my taxes. This will unfortunately happen sooner rather then later. Big picture we never address underlying issues. We just chase development and bury our heads in the sand.

GET INVOLVED: Do you live in Lower Macungie? Township Commissioners will consider TIF next. The public hearing is this Thursday. Consideration of this topic will start no later then 8pm at the township building. More information here.

Related articles across the web