The Kratzer Farm subdivision will be on the agenda this Tuesday at the 7pm planning commission meeting.
The issue: Over the past 2 years the Lower Macungie Township Board of Commissioners (BOC) have been executing a policy of "getting the twp. out of the landlord business". A policy that most people including myself agree with. The issue raised with the Kratzer Farm, is applying this policy across the board without analyzing each property on a case to case basis.
For example, selling the Lichtenwalner farm made sense. With the sale we got a deed restriction on the developable portion of the property, a really neat creative adaptive reuse of the barn and lastly we have the property back on the tax rolls. However, with the Kratzer farm multiple township volunteer boards including the EAC and the Parks board have urged caution in proceeding with subdividing 1.5 acres out the 86 acre farm. Specifically a house, barn and the driveway located in the middle of the property. I agree with their calls for a more cautious approach.
Neither board argues with the policy, but rather application of the policy to this particular property. Read the letters here.
The argument to "get the twp. out of the landlord business" is that certain properties we've held have strained twp. resources for upkeep. This argument made sense with the Camp Olympic Parcels and again, with the Lichtenwalner farm. With Kratzer however the property currently makes money for the twp since we have a resident who maintains the property. While it may make sense in the long run, there is no reason to expedite the sale other then the board making one crucial mistake. They prematurely included funds from the sale into the 2013 budget. This was done before consulting with the planning commission, the EAC or the Parks and Recreation Board.
Both the EAC and Parks Board letters outline multiple reasons to push the pause button and evaluate this property further before subdivision:
- The parcel is a unique resource centrally located in the township.
- The driveway is the only centralized access to the 86 acre open space property. (Vs. Olympic where portions sold were out-parcels and the sale didn't affect the master plan.)
- The sale of the driveway could result in piece-meal development of the park since a critical piece is being cut out. One twp. planner compared it to "cutting the heart out of the property".
- One of the biggest hurdles to a township greenway is acquiring missing pieces. Here we have a crucial piece under twp control. The sale of a critical portion of the township greenway will greatly decrease options for types of recreational use. Note the greenway master plan indicates a major central trailhead on the Kratzer property.
- Funds from sale of the 1.5 acres are earmarked for "other capital projects" and included in the 2013 budget. Many believe this money should not be used for projects other then improvements to the park.
Both letters recommend a formal study of the property before proceeding. I agree 100% and spoke to this point 6 months ago during public comment at a BOC meeting. We are currently paying for a comprehensive parks and recreation planning exercise. Therefore it makes no sense to proceed with this subdivision without including this parcel in that study.
The commissioners have a track record of stubbornness. Remember, the Jaindl issue where despite reasonable objections to their policies instead of listening to residents and adjusting course very early in the process they dug in leading to a multi-year legal battle. No one argued they should have not attempted to negotiate an alternative to a proposed quarry. The problem was their negotiated outcome of industrial warehousing was far worse then a Quarry. Then moving forward the board refused to reconsider or change course despite public outcry resulting in over 100,000 dollars in legal expenses to fend off the resident supported lawsuit which could have been avoided.
I'm afraid that will be the case here. No, this won't result in a loss of taxpayer money and stakes aren't as high as Jaindl. But, it's another nuanced issue that doesn't fit neatly into this boards one size fits all thinking. Will they refuse to listen to rational arguments that their course of action is wrong? Here is a chance for this board to listen to their appointed volunteers and residents and adjust their position accordingly. The requests of the volunteer boards are more then reasonable. There is absolutely no good reason to rush this sale. It was a mistake to count on money we do not yet have. And lastly, if a budget is relying on the sale of township assets before we've sold them... well then we may have larger issues.
Learn more:
Kratzer Farm natural resources inventory
Articles, letters ect.