Wedding Photos in a Shopping Center?

Posted on by
I work in the wedding industry and this summer we had a client that wanted her formal photos taken inside the Promenade Shopping center. We thought ok here is a neat outside the box idea so we ran with it. But let me get back to that in a second.

Part of smart growth is taking pride in the built environment. A main tenet is “fostering distinct, attractive communities with a strong sense of place.” As I’ve said many times I don’t want “Anywhere, USA”, I want to be unique. A criticism of our township by residents is we lack a sense of community. (Visioning 20/20 Survey) The purpose of this tenet is to help foster one.

Smart growth creates interesting, unique communities that reflect the values of the people who reside there, and foster physical environments that support a more cohesive community fabric – Smartgrowth.org

While looking at these photos today I thought, here is really exceptional design. This is a shopping center so well done, so unique that a Bride wanted to get her formal wedding photos taken there. And they ended up fantastic. Clearly when the developer and community planned this place, they took pride in their built environment.

Our township is currently reviewing our standards. This is a no-brainer. Our commercial standards are antiquated and reflect out-dated thinking. Frankly this is long overdue.

Today I sent a letter to our elected officials challenging them to really re-think the way we build our “places”. There’s no denying what it says about a community when you can shoot formal wedding photography inside one of their shopping centers. In my opinion thats the bar.

Take it a step further…

By creating attractive communities with architectural elements that reflect residents, there is a greater likelihood that buildings and neighborhoods will retain their economic value over time. – Smartgrowth.org

Economically we’re competing with Saucon Valley for regional shopping dollars. The taxpayer has already invested in the by-pass to facilitate this. If we want to compete, if our goal is to be exceptional and really set our selves apart as a place that holds value then when designing Hamilton Crossings and shopping centers in general is it crazy to ask the question: Could a couple take their formal wedding photos on the premise? At the Promenade one couple did. The Promenade is universally considered a success and a regional destination. Coincidence?

To see more of Amanda and Chris’s photos visit our website at www.barnoneweddings.com

PA lawmakers should make median personal income of district they serve

Posted on by

 

Erik Boehm from PA independent reports the yearly salary for lawmakers in PA. Our legislators make 83,800 a year, the second highest in the nation.

Got me thinking. Here is my riff on how I believe lawmakers should be compensated. First there is the philosophical question of should state lawmakers be paid at all. Are they full time “professionals” or should they be unpaid “volunteers”? In some states such as New Hampshire State Reps and Senators are volunteers and do not get paid. In Pennsylvania we have a professional legislature that receives the second highest yearly salary in the nation only behind California.

I believe that yes, lawmakers should be compensated. I do have an issue with the amount we pay here in PA compared to other states.

In my perfect world compensation would be based on the median personal income for the district represented. For example if median household income in your district is about 45,000 then you make 45,000.

And yes, in my proposal lawmakers could get a raise. How? Do a good job and bring up the average median household income in your district. Conversely… do a poor job and your salary gets cut.

I do believe in a full time legislature. States with unpaid tend to have weaker legislative branches compared to the executive. I believe in a system of strong checks and balances. To ensure one, we need a compensated full time legislative body.

I think a scale according to median district household income is a way to compensate that makes sense. Yes, many who run for office would be making sacrifices. Many come from very good private sector careers and take pay cuts to serve. I’m OK with that. Potential lawmakers should be willing to sacrifice if they honestly care deeply about serving/running. And maybe this would weed out those who are in it for the wrong reasons.

What do you think about this idea? 

In contrast here are the bottom 10.

bottom 10 states in legislator salary

Bottom 10 states

 

 

 

Dec 7th BOC will vote on Allen Organ Ordinance

Posted on by
A few months ago ‘Friends LMT‘ submitted a position statement to the planning and zoning committee (Doug Brown and Ron Eichenberg). We felt that further action on the Allen Organ property should be postponed until the results of the Smart Growth Implementation plan are adopted.

 

Remember, the purpose of spending 20,000 dollars in taxypayer money is to completely review our outdated zoning ordinance. As a part of this process residents should be given a forum to voice our thoughts on the way we should continue to grow our township. Currently a draft of the plan is being prepared with input from our planning commission.

With Allen Organ we have a developer who is requesting a special exception to our current ordinance. They’ve submitted their own rules allowing residential units in a commercial zone. Previously our planning commission was working on a “mixed use” concept. We were supportive of the effort to create a truly integrated walkable concept. It seemed we were headed in the right direction, rolling up our sleeves and working out a township serving ordinance. At some point for some reason the process was abandoned. A few months later the “mixed use” language was scrapped and we were presented with a new “duel use” ordinance with some window dressing but overall much less smart growth principle.

I suspect the board killed the previous attampt due to density concerns. With a true smart growth ordinance density should not be an issue. In fact it can be a good thing. We need density in APPROPRIATE locations with appropriate integration to the surrounding community. The market is changing, demographics are changing. Our township needs more multifamily units to balance our tax base. That being said the previous iteration of the ordinance was heading the right direction. Then it stopped…

‘Friends’ believes we should work towards TOWNSHIP serving ordinances. Here we have a developer holding up their square peg. It’s very clear they need a certain number of units, certain configuration, certain requirements to make money of the project. When we as a township consistently allow developers to write our ordinances for us then of course they are going to create a square holes for their square pegs. But what if the best interests of the township are round holes? Why are we spending money on a consultant if we’re just plowing ahead with development before the results are adopted? (we only have a few precious greenfields left, this is one of the larger.)

All too often we present rubber stamps to developers. On December 7th this board will have another chance to show it works for the residents who elected it and not the developers.

Note: Ron Eichenberg board president is the realtor on this property standing to gain a substantial windfall from it’s sale. 

Challenging LMT officials to think big

Posted on by

 

Earlier this week Smart Growth Advocate Tom Hylton spoke to 40 residents and presented examples of communities who took the initiative to foster distinct, attractive communities with a sense of place. (One of the main tenets of smart growth). Of the many examples presented (many in nearby communities) the Mcdonalds elicited the most ooh’s and ahh’s from those in attendance.

In Freeport, McDonalds made plans to tear down a historic home to build one of its standard cookie cutter stores. Outcry from residents forced the town to adopt new rules concerning design standards. McDonald’s then built the restaurant inside the home, maintaining the exterior appearance. This was one of the first times that McDonald’s had been forced to change its restaurant design to fit local requirements.

Mcdonalds kicked and screamed along the way. But shortly after opening, the restaurant became the largest grossing in the area. And shortly after was featured by Mcdonalds in their quarterly bullitan. The residents truly did know what was best for their community.

That’s what LMT could and should start doing, enforcing design and architectural standards on our commercial developers. Instead of the typical cookie cutter buildings that comprise ‘anywhere USA’ typical ‘junkscapes’, (think our AutoZone, WaWa’s, Fast Food joints, etc) Imagine instead buildings that blend with our residential surroundings. It can easily be done here.

Our planning commission is currently reviewing our commercial standards. They’re beefing up our bland standards from the 70’s. We challenge them and our elected BOC to take a look at the most innovative standards other communities use and really push the envelope. I personaly want LMT to continue to be a special community, not ‘anywhere USA’. 

Anywhere USA Junkscape… Is this the direction we’re heading?

All its takes is vision and a commitment to creating something beautiful and unique. There are some great projects coming down the pike. In Macungie, liberty Savings bank is “recylcling” a historic building on Walnut and Main the old Singmaster house and re-adapting it into a full service local bank branch complete with drive through.

In LMT the developer of Hamilton Crossings is taking care to give us a “unique” shopping experience. So far they’ve done a good job compared to most projects in LMT but we challenge them to go even further.

Do officials in LMT have the kind of vision to keep pushing?

The Promenade locally is an excellent example of design standards a community can be proud of. The promenade has turned into a regional destination and valuable asset for the surrounding community.

Variance requests tonight for Hamilton Crossings Costco/Target

Posted on by
The developer for Hamilton Crossings will be requesting dozens of variances tonight at the 7:00 pm zoning hearing board meeting.

This is the second version of the plan to come before the board. The first was scrapped due to the discovery of mine wash on the property. The developer claims the faulty soil has “forced us to reorganize the site plan in a relatively significant way,”.

Residents should who live in the area of the proposed center should attend the hearing tonight. There are a couple requests of note:

1. Request to increase maximum impervious coverage to up to 80%.

2. Request to increase maximum building coverage to 22.5%

3. Request to eliminate certain planted islands

4. Requests to allow higher screening fencing

I believe these items are important to scrutinize very thoroughly given our townships flooding issues. The max impervious, buildling coverage and requirements to plan tree’s and shrubbery in parking lots all contribute to a developments stormwater management. Remember, to be granted a variance the developer must present “true hardship on the property owner”. They must show why the increase in impervious is necessary and what measures will be taken to counter the increased stormwater issues.

To view a complete list of the variance requests (as of noon today the agenda for tonight’s meeting is not on the township website) you can view the BOC agenda from 11/15. The requests are exhibit BB.

Friends for protection of Lower Macungie Township will be monitoring the progress of this development. We’re dedicated to keeping residents informed about land use/development issues. For more information visit our website or join our mailing list. Also I write about local development issues here on my blog.

It’s OK to grow! Contrasting 2 development plans

Posted on by

‘Friends LMT’ is not anti growth. We recently got some press in a couple outlets for our support of the Hamilton Crossings Development.

Even Friends for the Protection of Lower Macungie, which has been critical of some of the township’s planned development, has voiced its support for the project. Mcall

We don’t arbitrarily decide what we support and don’t. We take potential projects and apply the 10 principles of smart growth. Here is an example of 5 of the ten smart growth principles contrasting the Jaindl Development with the Hamilton Crossings Development.

(Note we look at this plan purely from a land use standpoint, we don’t take a stance on the funding mechanisms specifically the grants or TIF’s)

1. Strengthen and direct development towards existing communities: Perhaps the most important criteria for our support of Hamilton Crossings. (HC) The project is being built in the designated commercial corridor of the township. This both according to county and local planning. The lions share of the infrastructure is already in place with the bypass.  It’s now all about prioritizing by seeking a return on investment to maximize taxpayer dollars. HC accomplishes this big time.

Contrast this with Jaindl. Costly new infrastructure must be built to accommodate this development on the fringe of the twp. The Jaindl development is an example of the suburban sprawl ponzi scheme.

‘No large up-front bet’
“The smart growth approach requires no oversizing, no large up-front bet with public money, no stifling congestion if the system doesn’t respond as predicted, no more building multimillion-dollar industrial parks to gamble on attracting jobs.

And remember first and foremost a fundamental principle that outlying greenfield development is NEVER smart growth. Which leads us to….

2. Preserve open space, farmland, natural beauty, and critical environmental areas: It’s not just quality of life. Although that is a huge part. It’s a building in a  sustainable way thing.  And yes, that means both environmentally but equally important fiscally. Smart Growth dictates that you build according to a transect.

Smart Growth Transect

Smart Growth Transect – From the Urban Core to rural

What leadership did in the 80’s was correctly re-zone the area’s west of Rt. 100 to agriculture protected. This remained for 20 years without challenge (until Jaindl saw his opportunity with the current BOC) The ag zoning would have ensured that the fringes of our township remained protected. Allowing development to concentrate in the appropriate core. Jaindl will essentially blow the whole transect out of proportion. Putting an extremely high concentration of high density housing, strip malls and warehousing in the most inefficient place away from services, away from infrastructure. Who pays the price to subsidize this? The taxpayers. In contrast HC maximizes investments already made. Over the course of a lifecycle cost benefit analysis it’s highly likely that HC will pay dividends to the taxpayer for decades. (The real winner being the school district)

Of course you can also make the case that the headwaters of Creeks that provide drinking water to Allentown are environmentally sensitive areas. But the environmental argument against Jaindl development is obvious. Here we’ll concentrate on dollars and cents. Greenfield development NEVER balances out in terms of cost vs. benefit. It simply doesn’t. 

3. Provide a Variety of Transportation Choices: The Hamilton bypass corridor is currently the focus of a transportation study the results of which will be applied to the corridor to even further assure it will be able to handle the traffic generated.

The hope is to eventually provide fast, efficient public transportation options for workers who can take a bus to get to their jobs along Hamilton and industrial parks in Upper Macungie and make a pit stop at one of the various shopping centers on their way to and from work. Township officials hope it will also contribute to the revitalization of the villages of Wescosville and Trexlertown.  

Again, the Jaindl development is creating traffic where currently there is nothing but cornfields. This will most assuredly lead to tractor trailer traffic bleeding onto residential streets and gridlock on Rt. 100.

 4. Mix Land Uses: The Hamilton corridor will be a shining example of mixing uses when it offers expanded transportation choices, by creating a setting that better serves a range of users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, transit riders, and automobiles. Residents will have be given a choice on whether or not they choose to use their cars and if they do, traffic will flow efficiently because the area was designed to handle it. This is all due to the proximity of COMPATIBLE land uses. This is a fundamental flaw with Jaindl development. Warehouses are naturally incompatible with residential development. The Jaindl development is slamming a square peg in a circle hole to maximize profit at all costs. By locating services away from the core on the fringe even if you do provide say public transportation the cost to the taxpayer is more expensive then the Hamilton corridor which is closer to the core. Also by mixing land uses as the corridor does, fire and police protection are more

5. Make Development Decisions Predictable, Fair, and Cost Effective: Perhaps the biggest knock on the Jaindl development. It’s well documented the flaws in the process. A confidentially negotiated MOU, changing a 20 year zoning precedent without proper notification and without meaningful public input, a developer whose lawyer says basically ‘this development is happening regardless of the the community thinks’. This is perhaps the perfect example of predatory development.

Vs. HC and a developer that goes out of his way to work with the community. A process (perhaps amplified by the TIF application) that is clearly in the public realm. Every resident knows exactly whats on the table for this property. Perhaps no other project in the history of the township has the public been better informed on the issues surrounding it. It’s clear the developer wants to build an interesting, unique place which reflect the values of the people who reside here. They are definitely heading in the right direction. We challenge them to take it even further.

HAMILTON CROSSINGS COSTCO TARGET

Work to be done…

The Hamilton Crossings Project is not perfect. But it does have promise. Right now the project is seeking funding. Some have issues with the public funding portion. Additionally the developer is seeking dozens of variance requests. Including one serious red flag regarding maximum impervious coverage. Residents will need to monitor this carefully.

Thank you to our veterans

Posted on by

Area veterans memorials. Take a moment to visit one on this beautiful memorial day!

8th of November – Big n Rich

“Greater love hath no man than to lay down his life for his brother.”

Below are some photos I took on a walk today visiting the 3 memorials near the office. All iphone instagrams.

Arthur Kern of Allentown. Served in World War II looks at his service brick at Macungie VFW Post 9264

Arthur Kern of Allentown. Served in World War II looks at his service brick at Macungie VFW Post 9264

Eagle Scout Derek Weber helped recruit volunteers and raise funds to construct the LMT memorial dedicated to fallen heroes. Derek and his family continue to help maintain the memorial in pristine condition.

Eagle Scout Derek Weber helped recruit volunteers and raise funds to construct the LMT memorial dedicated to fallen heroes. Derek and his family continue to help maintain the memorial in pristine condition.

Macungie Park Veterans Memorial

Macungie Park Veterans Memorial

Jaindl lawyer comments don’t reflect reality

Posted on by

     

The Subdivision portion of the ongoing 700 acre Jaindl Warehouse, Strip Mall and tract housing development had it’s day in court Tuesday.

Morning Call Article

Developing this land is a long and complicated process. The subdivision is just another step in the overall process. Remember, the appellants were already successful in challenging the zoning change that would have laid the groundwork to allow hundreds of acres of previously protected farmland to be developed with millions of square ft. of warehouses, strip malls and tract housing. The subdivision is another step that divides the larger tracts into smaller tracts for sale.

I take issue with some characterizations made by Jaindl attorney Joe Zator. Specifically and I quote from the hearing: 

“My client isn’t going away,” Zator said. “This property is going to be developed. It’s just a matter of time. A half-dozen residents can persist as long as they want, but development will occur.”

Yes, there are a half dozen residents who are physically challenging the subdivision and the zoning but they are supported by:

  • Over 1000 residents signed a petition encouraging the Board of Commissioners to reconsider the zoning change. (They ignored this…)
  • 125 residents attended the meeting the board voted on the subdivision plans. There may have been more but the meeting overflowed into the hallway and adjacent room.
  • Over 75+ people have made individual donations to the legal fund ranging from 5 dollars to 1000 dollars.

I find it insulting to hear the continuing public be damned attitude as Mcall’s Paul Carpenter put it 1 year ago. Basically Jaindl and our elected officials are saying, this development will happen and we don’t give a damn what the public thinks.

The “this will take decades to build out” line that our elected officials use is ridiculous also. They basically admit hey this sucks, but it won’t happen all at once so thats ok. It’ll happen over 2 decades. As if people could care less or are so naive about their children or the future.

We disagree and we’ll carry this out til the conclusion and without overwhelming public support we wouldn’t have been able to take it this far.

Donate here
Join our mailing list here
Stay updated here

Only with continued support will we be able to continue to stop this gamechanging development that will forever change the tone of our community.  Please click the links above.

Important resident survey! Parks, Recreation & Open Space!

Posted on by

Important resident survey! Parks, Recreation & Open Space!

As part of the Lower Macungie Comprehensive Recreation, Parks and Open Space Planning, the township (twp.) is gathering public opinions on preferences and current usage of our park and recreation system. Please take a minute to fill out! Your input will help to guide the recommendations of the planning process being facilitated by KMS design group and funded by the same grant used for Greenway planning.

Why this is Important? – Officials will use this information to evaluate both current and future service and amenities. Additionally there are some critical questions that relate to open space, farmland preservation and our quality of life!

Click here to take the survey

 

For example: Do you think the twp. would benefit from a dog-park as Upper Macungie has recently built? Do you think we need to do a better job of protecting farmland and open space? Do we have too many fields for one activity and not enough for another? How about lighted fields? Would you use them? Would you be willing to pay a user fee for a dog park or lighted fields? Just a sample of important issues covered.

‘Friends LMT’ is a community smart growth advocacy group. Our goal is the keep the public informed on local gov’t, land use and development issues. We’ll be attending most public meetings in this process. Want to stay informed on the progress of this initiative? Visit at our facebook page! Not a member? Just bookmark as you would a normal webpage and visit often.

LMT Officials Stand Firm on Resident’s Request for Flooding Buyout

Posted on by

The residents who came in front of the Lower Macungie Township board of commissioners pleading for matching funding to attain a federal FEMA buyout of their properties in Ancient Oaks on Spring Creek Rd were denied the request.

Read more here

One of the residents returned tonight to ask for a explanation. She broke down at the podium.

The Commissioners rationale was they did not want to set a precedent for other residents to come to the township for flood funding.

My issues with this decision was two fold. A precedent was already set by a previous board. The 2009 board worked with FEMA and PEMA to fund buyout for sever repetitive losses per lehigh valley hazard mitigation plan. (LMT highest risk) Secondly, this attitude is basic burying our heads in the sand that development in LMT has affected the flood plains.

I met and visited with one of the families making the request a few weeks ago. They purchased their home in 1996. PRIOR to the building boom where we experienced 40% growth in a decade. Also I have lived next to this river for almost my entire life of 33 years. And yes, it’s always flooded. The difference now is the frequency and the rate/speed it rises. Don’t tell me that development hasn’t affected the flow rate. I’ve seen it with my own eyes.

It’s important to note that not only did the greater building boom happen after but for a  specific example the Wal-Mart swale was approved in 1999 and built shortly after. I firmly believe that the Wal-Mart swale (that floods out Spring Creek Rd. after most major rain events) is a major contributor to our flooding issues. The backflow is a significant cause of flooding upstream of Mill Creek and Spring Creek Rd. As most township residents can attest and have seen first hand, the waterflow across Spring Creek from Wal Mart and other points into Upper Macungie Township north of Hamilton Boulevard resembles a raging river during floods. Also take a look at the 4 seasons bridge sometime after a flood. Tell me it isn’t holding back the river. I have no idea how it’s allowed to be so low. (in contrast to the new pedestrian bridge at graymoor which was built with a higher span as to not impede the flow of the river)

There are basically two possible scenarios here:

1. Flooding wasn’t as bad when Ancient Oaks was approved and it has gotten worse since then due to twp. development decisions. 
or 
2. The flooding was this bad when Ancient Oaks was built. In which case the twp. approved homes in a known flood plain. (due to developer pressure to maximize profits?)

Either way, doesn’t the township bear some responsibility?

It is unfair to blame these residents for “purchasing flood prone property” when either a poor decision allowed for houses to be built where they should not have or the sprawling development that our leaders have allowed for 2 decades have increased flooding issues  AFTER the residents 2/3 residents seeking a buyout purchased their homes.