Category Archives: Smart Growth 101

Smart growth is an urban planning and transportation theory that concentrates growth in compact walkable urban centers to avoid sprawl. It also advocates compact, transit-oriented, walkable, bicycle-friendly land use, including neighborhood schools, complete streets, and mixed-use development with a range of housing choices. The term ‘smart growth’ is particularly used in North America. In Europe and particularly the UK, the terms ‘Compact City’ or ‘urban intensification’ have often been used to describe similar concepts, which have influenced government planning policies in the UK, the Netherlands and several other European countries.
Smart growth values long-range, regional considerations of sustainability over a short-term focus. Its goals are to achieve a unique sense of community and place; expand the range of transportation, employment, and housing choices; equitably distribute the costs and benefits of development; preserve and enhance natural and cultural resources; and promote public health.

Gov. Corbett signs Senate Bill 351 into law

Posted on by

Senate Bill 351 was co-sponsored locally by state Senator Pat Browne (R). I wrote a quick letter of thanks to him today. Synopsis here.

Senator Browne,

Thank you for co-sponsoring Senate Bill 351 allowing municipalities to create local Stormwater Authorities. Your leadership in this area is appreciated. Recently, I won the Republican primary as the highest vote getter here in Lower Macungie Township running largely on a platform of ensuring that developers pay their own way in terms of mitigating their negative impact. This includes traffic, infrastructure and of course stormwater.

As you know, Lower Macungie is one of the fastest growing in the state. This is a tool we can explore utilizing to ensure private developers are held responsible for costs to mitigate their stormwater impact. This can now be accomplished by providing incentives for private stormwater management therefore reducing costs to local governments and most importantly the taxpayers

We have flooding issues here in Lower Macungie that we have to get a handle on. This is a tool to do that. Additionally as you know the quality of our streams directly affect the city of Allentown as we are a major source of drinking water for the city and region.

Thank you,
Ron Beitler

 

How your local state officials voted on this legislation:
State Senate passed 49-1
Bob Mensch – YES
Pat Browne – YES

State House passed 135-66
Gary Day – YES
Mike Schlossberg – YES
Ryan Mackenzie – NO
Justin Simmons – NO

Essential reading as we study Hamilton Corridor.

Posted on by

We’re about to spend 125,000 in grant money to “identify a complete street strategy for the Hamilton Boulevard corridor emphasizing land use changes, public transit, and intermodal amenities“. This is a joint project of Upper & Lower Macungie and Penndot.

I ordered “The Boulevard Book – History, Evolution and Design of the Multiway Boulevard” a couple weeks ago. Last week I was able to start getting into it. Having read through the introduction and first couple of chapters I’ve found it to be a fantastic read.

The intro clearly lays out the value of a true boulevard concept. They are statistically safer and more aesthetically pleasing while increasing property value for adjacent properties. The book contains an immense amount of research and documentation. It also lays out the artificial and flawed reasoning why we no longer build grand avenues and boulevards.

Our commissioners have pledged to build a “world class boulevard”. A concept I am 100% in agreement with. A true blvd. pays close attention to many important concepts. Livability, mobility, safety, economic growth and open space to name a few. The opposite of a blvd. would be a commercial strip. Where a boulevard becomes a living part of the fabric of a community, a commercial strip slashes it’s way through a community killing property values creating congestion and ruining quality of life. A true boulevard is a value capture machine vs. strip arterials which almost always cost more in terms of liabilities then they produce in revenue.

This attractive and very functional boulevard accommodates a lot of traffic,
encourages walking, and still allows for parking in front of the building.

This strip mall on an ‘arterial’ lacks the character of the above boulevard. Most suredly property values are lower across the street from this place. This is not a place where many people would want to walk or spend time in other then in a car going from one place to another.

I will be copying the intro from this book and giving it to our commissioners. I see it as essential reading as we begin the PCTI study. A main point of the book is how today’s design criteria that focuses exclusively on the automobile and incorrect superficial assumptions about what makes a good street inevitably leads us to build statistically dangerous and soul-less places. If we are to build a “world class boulevard”, then we have to get past these roadblocks.

There are so many ingredients that go into a boulevard. Traffic flow, parking, delivery of services, walkers, bikers and of course how frontages interact with the boulevard in a cohesive fashion. 

I believe currently there is a disconnect between what we are saying and what we are doing. It’s no secret I am no fan of recent land development plans that are in my opinion counter to the goals of a blvd. Namely projects like the very “strippy” potential “American Kitchens” tract. Others recently such as “Shepards Crossing” are better considering our low bar but in my opinion we can push the envelope even more.

Yes, there is a learning curve between concept and changing our zoning to match the concept. But in the meantime we can be more aggressive in soliciting buy in from developers. Developers who can then request the appropriate variances to build context sensitive designs. Afterall we gave 88+ variances (some major) to Hamilton Crossings for the potential shopping center. You would think we could grant some to accomodate the goals of the boulevard project.

The Kairos group is the firm contracted to lead the PCTI study. The power point presentation was loaded onto the twp. website. I think alot of the stuff included in the presentation is wonderful. The Kairos group talks about some of the concepts in the boulevard book. For example, the roadblocks to building great places. They talk about the conventional approach vs. a context sensitive approach. I think it is critical to understand these two sometimes subtle but different approaches. The conventional approach is more likely to produce something more like the “strip arterial” above. Vs. the context sensitive approach which is more likely to produce the avenue above.

Here are some examples from the Kairos group that show what Hamilton could look like with a little vision, some regional cooperation and real buy-in by our elected leadership.

Hamilton Boulevard as it currently looks overlayed with an artists rendering of a boulevard concept.

Hamilton and Brookside intersection. Right now at certain times this is a heavily congested mess. A roundabout would allow the intersection to flow much more freely. Roundabouts are also proven to be much safer both for cars and pedestrians. Imagine working in the office buildings on Brookside and actually being able to walk to lunch at Hunan Springs without taking your life into your hands.

 

 

 

What is a complete street?

Posted on by

Recently I wrote a letter to Congressman Dent urging him to consider supporting the “Complete Streets Act of 2013”. (see below)

What is a complete street? Like many planning concepts it’s best described with photos!

Take this auto-centric roadway:

10 lane roadway without bike lanes, pedestrian crosswalks or signals, street trees, or ample buffer between the roadway and sidewalk. The roadway’s current design is not inviting or safe for pedestrians or bicyclists. Sure it has some token sidewalks which were probably a “feel good” effort to pay some lip service to walkability… but do you think people will actually walk this corridor?

Vs. this street below which accommodates cars and pedestrians

Complete Street example with on-street parking, striped bike lane, and sidewalk with buffers protecting the pedestrian from automobiles. Transit facilities are not provided since service does not occur along this corridor. Note the buildings are built with additional parking in the rear creating a pleasant environment both for cars and pedestrians. In this environment everyone wins whether you choose to walk, ride or drive.

Which of the above is a place you would rather take a stroll with your family to visit a restaurant of shop? We’re currently studying the Hamilton Corridor with the goal of making old 222 into more of a walkable “Main St.” concept. Which photograph above best represents what you would prefer Hamilton Boulevard to be in the future?

Too many of the roads in our country are designed solely with drivers in mind. The risks of such design are evident in the number of pedestrian and bicyclist deaths and injuries we see every year, and often discourage more people from considering other transportation methods.

More resources:

Smart Growth America – What are Complete Streets 

Tour of a “pedestrian friendly” diverging diamond – Designing via checklists and incorporating walkability as a “feel good” afterthought = complete failure. This is one of my absolutely favorite videos.

 My letter to Congressman Dent Re: Complete Streets Act 2013

Congressman Dent,
My name is Ron Beitler and I’m a constituent from Lower Macungie Twp. I’m writing to ask you to support The 2013 Safe Streets Act which is currently in committee.

Millions of Americans are walking, bicycling, and waiting for public transit along roads that are inadequate for their needs. These streets are incomplete – they lack sidewalks, safe space for pedestrians, and make little accommodation for people with disabilities. They hinder healthy, active lifestyles; limit transportation options; and lead to more hard earned money going to fill up the gas tank. Worse, they are often dangerous for everyone.

Currently, the notion of complete streets is a big part of Lower Macungie Townships smart growth planning. Our local Gov’t is currently undertaking comprehensive smart growth planning as well as specific corridor planning. (Hamilton Boulevard). The notion of building complete streets is a central theme in both exercises. Both initiatives have wide reaching public support.

Complete streets are also proven to be economic engines. When a street is accessible it becomes a magnet for commercial activity. Additionally traffic congestion costs us all money. As a proponent for Complete Streets I believe that as a community becomes safer, more attractive, and provide more transportation choices, local economies have a better chance of thriving and property values rise.

Thank you for your time.
Ron Beitler
5540 Lower Macungie Rd.

 

Want to Help Replant Sauerkraut and Willow Lane Trees? Here’s How

Posted on by
After - Sauerkraut Lane in Lower Macungie Township

After – Sauerkraut Lane in Lower Macungie Township. After PPL tree cutting.

When trees were clear cut on Willow and Sauerkraut I was hoping residents affected would band together to spearhead an effort to re-plant in light of the township failing to take the reigns. The entire community is affected by the unfortunate decision to remove the streetscape buffer.

It comes down to property value. For me, a house is the biggest investment I’ll make in my life. That rings true for most people. Residents not only adjacent to affected streets but also nearby lost property value. Street-Scapes add value to our community.

There is alot of interest in residents taking matters into our own hands and addressing the issue. Residents I’ve spoken with are interested fundraising and coordinating an effort to replant the buffer with approved small trees and shrubs in appropriate locations.

Neighbors working together is critical. Streetscaping is only effective when it is coordinated. It’s a design issue but the most cost effective strategy. Compatible trees and shrubs can be purchased in bulk. A unified design will make the replanting more attractive and effective. Plus it’s a great way for residents to work together to take a disheartening situation and make the best of it.

We can take this situation and make the best out of it. Who knows, a new street-scape with flowering dogwoods, redbuds, ornamental grass, low lying evergreen shrubs and witch hazel would be beautiful all 4 seasons. (all these species are approved by PPL and endorsed by the EAC) We could make the street-scape even better then it was before.

I’ve talked already to one landscape service willing to discount or donate resources.

I live near but not directly adjacent to the cutting, but I feel strongly about the community wide benefit of replanting. I’ve spoken out at many meetings over the last 2 years regarding the benefits of a coordinated, attractive streetscape.

  • Traffic Calming. Studies show cars drive slower on tree lined streets. (Trees in travel perception)
  • Stormwater Management. Trees absorb 30% of precipitation through leaf and root system.
  • Safer walking environment
  • Softens the harsh features of utility poles.
  • Added value to all our homes. Up to 10% increase in nearby home values.

Do you live adjacent to the cut zone? Are you willing to volunteer time or resources to help restore the neighborhood to it’s prior charm? Winding Brook resident Randy Fritz is coordinating an effort to look into alternatives and options. Please contact him at GIJoe196910@yahoo.com.

Here is the before image. An evergreen stand went the length of Sauerkraut Lane adjacent to Winding Brook Manor in Lower Macungie

Inexplicable decisions…..

Posted on by

I commented on a proposal to preserve the Kratzer Farm property at the last BOC meeting. I’m going to capture video and post later on this week.

Read my full position here.

The board was asked if they would consider applying the 86 acre Kratzter Farm to a county conservation program that would permanently protect the open space. To sweeten the pot, the program actually pays the township to do it. $5000 /acre. So say 50 acres of farmland on the property gets accepted into the program thats 250,000 dollars directly to the township coffers. I can think of alot of ways this money could be used.

Friends LMT requested a free preliminary review of the property and it ranked very high indicating it is likely funding would be granted.

The response by Commissioners made no sense. Of the two that spoke up, Ron Eichenberg stated “We don’t have time to hold a hearing”. This demonstrates 1. He didnt understand the request, 2. He is clueless or 3. This just happened to the straw he grasped at to make the request go away. First, we only asked for the application to be filled out. It’s no different then any grant application. Second, the board doesn’t ever hold hearings before authorizing staff to apply for a grant.

Another Commissioner went on about the house, driveway and barn. They are earmarked to be sold off. My position is that the house and barn and specifically the driveway should not be sold until the Parks and Rec comprehensive planning committee has a chance to review the big picture. This issue of subdividing this 1.5 acre portion is completely unrelated to applying for permanent preservation mechanisms for the remaining 84.5 or so acres. Again, two separate issues.

Yes, perhaps it would be appropriate for a hearing once it comes time to actually take action. But for now the request was just to keep the door open for further deliberation by applying. To me it’s a no brainer that represents another failure to attempt to protect our remaining open space and farmland.

Question & Answer – TIF Funding/Hamilton Crossings

Posted on by

Rec’d this question today. I thought it was worthy of a blogpost answer.

From Facebook – William DeMauriac – Ron, what is your position on spending tax revenue on any private project like the Hamilton Crossings?

1. My position is two fold. First. The development itself is a good project, but more importantly it’s in the right location. Aside from making development pay it’s own way with elected officials ensuring projects that receive waivers and exceptions provide the community an return on investment, smart growth is guiding growth to appropriate locations. Location is everything for this massive shopping complex. Costco will attract regional shoppers, the location is ideal since our interior residential roads will not be affected by non-local traffic.

Further, the developer Tim Harrison is community conscientious. And trust me, I’ve heard the song and dance developers give in front of our BOC and Pcom many times over the last 3 years. After personally sitting down with Tim last week I am confident he is genuine in his desire to build a project not only himself but the community can be proud of. He has shown a willingness to go above and beyond.

2. Secondly we have the funding mechanism. There are questions to be answered still. What will the terms be? As you know, the TIF committee meetings which consist of reps from the Twp, EPSD and County are occuring now an ongoing. I appreciate those including Percy Dougherty and others from the EPSD who requested these meetings be public. Unfortunately, that request was denied. The argument made was that developer finances will be discussed. I’m of the mindset that when seeking public funding, your finances become the business of the public.

Moving beyond that however, one of my personal goals is to encourage growth that does not rely on the taxpayer to shoulder burden. Elected officials should be questioning the terms and conditions of the TIF every step of the way and be willing to let the developer walk if the terms and conditions do not benefit the community from a lifecycle cost benefit analysis perspective.

Too often our elected officials in LMT are all too willing to give away something (waivers, exceptions, density, intensity) for nothing. This is a fundamental focus of my campaign. I’m not anti growth I’m pro smart growth. The fact that officials argue we still need economic development after 2 decades of robust growth is proof we’ve grown in an inefficient way. After two decades we should be in pretty good shape. To indicate we aren’t by claiming we need growth is fundamentally telling. It’s time to stop and evaluate the status quo. Win or lose I hope my candidacy will force that conversation.

Thanks for your question William.

Ron

 

Why won’t township officials consider traffic calming measures?

Posted on by

It is by far and away the most frequent complaint the township receives. Almost monthly letters are read at BOC meetings written by frustrated residents dealing with speeding issues on their local streets. Many of these letters ask about speed bumps or speed tables. The answer the BOC usually gives is something ambiguous or vague to the effect of if they install one set they will get a request for more or something about creating more work for public works and plowing.

You cannot argue with the effectiveness of these measures that physically slow down traffic. It’s both a quality of life issue and a safety issue. Penndot actually actively promotes these measures via it’s “traffic calming handbook” publication.

The handbook outlines protocols for when traffic calming measures are appropriate. I’m beginning to research other policies local township governments in the state have in place for facilitating resident requests for traffic calming.

It’s been far too long elected officials have buried their heads in the sand regarding the fact that if they continue the growth policies they currently have in place they cannot avoid forever dealing with the negative by-products such as speeding issues, truck traffic and volume issues on our local roadways.

It’s like building warehouses without no truck zones on nearby local streets or allowing elementary schools to open without signage or 15 mph school zones.

See a pattern here? 

The past two presidents of the board have been Roger Reis and Ron Eichenberg. The President is responsible for framing issues and putting items on the agenda. There have been some major failures over the past two terms.

 

 

 

 

Letter to BOC – 1/8 – Lifecycle Cost Benefit Analysis

Posted on by

Letter below sent to township Board of Commissioners after attending today’s ‘curbside chat’ where Charles Marohn from Strongtowns.org advocated for developing in a fiscally sustainable way. This is one tool I have personally advocated for over the past two years.

Gentleman,

Please once again see attached “Cradle to Cradle” cost benefit analysis of the Jaindl Project and please note it was presented to the board approximately 2 years ago. I also did personally about a year ago via public comment.


This particular lifecycle analysis focused on the total costs to residents of the various waivers/exceptions granted in the MOU. In general these are the concepts that Charles Marohn talked about in today’s ‘curbside chat’. Including the ongoing costs of infrastructure and services. This strategy can and should be applied to all large scale development projects.


Simply put, usage of this tool or something simliar shows when development offers ROI on taxpayer investment and when it does not. This is the crux of what I have always questioned about the negotiated MOU and ongoing development projects in the township.


About the analysis: This was well thought out and researched but please note it does contain assumptions. The point however was to illustrate a process which was never done here in the township to my knowledge. Moving forward from the MOU this process needs to be implemented on future projects.


Please consider adding cost benefit analysis of all greenfield and large scale development projects into the scope of the smart growth review. This is one of the philosophical issues that frames the way we grow which in turn influences the patterns.


Thank you
Ron Beitler

LVPC comments on Allen Organ Ordinance

Posted on by

Below are LVPC’s comments on the pending Allen Organ Ordinance. (allowing for apartments in commercial zones, sketch plan shows 75,000 ft supermarket and 200+ apartments)

Concerns seem valid. Interconnectivity is key. Not only inside developments but with exterior roads. This is how you limit the affect on traffic issues. We must stop developing via isolated pods that dump the majority of traffic primarily into large arterial intersections. Unless we want to start looking like Macarther Rd. New developments should have multiple entrances, exits and connections. Both for Pedestrians and Auto. This avoids funneling traffic into single large intersections.

The section reads “Direct access to an arterial road is required…..” which is fine, but the ordinance should go further encouraging additional connections to other local and collector roads. For example with the sketch plan floating around there should possibly be another truck access road off Gehman Rd. The ordinance should avoid allowing developments that funnel all traffic into one intersection. Traffic is a major concern in the township.

This sketch plan would create gridlock at Willow Lane and Rt. 100. The LVPC sees this. This should concern Macungie Borough as well. I hope they also provide comments. I know communities are getting fed up with Lower Macungie just doing whatever they want. Upper Milford and Republican Supervisor Rob Sentner in particular has expressed this.

So here we have another opportunity to see what this board does. Do they dig in and double down as they usually do or do they actually react to a comment by the LVPC. They rarely change ordinances after they are advertised.

Strongtowns.org to host Smart Growth discussion in LMT

Posted on by

On January 9th ‘strongtowns.org’ will host a curbside chat in Lower Macungie. The strongtowns message focuses on new strategies for the economic realities that face our communities.

For years communities have emphasized growth over resiliency. Sound familiar? Over the last 2 decades LMT has seen unprecendented growth. Strongtowns asks a simple question. With all the rapid growth have we adequately set ourselves up for the long term? Have taxpayer investments in growth and infrastructure produced a return on our investment moving forward?

Strongtowns compares ‘growth as the magic bullet’ policy to a ponzi scheme. This occurs when municipalities swap near term cash advantage for long term financial obligations. Stop and think about it for a second. We have officials who publicly support the Jaindl development by claiming we “need the taxbase”. Same can be said for Hamilton Crossings or the Allen Organ supermarket/apartment project. Ask yourself one simple question, after two decades of supercharged growth how can we possibly still need more taxbase. When does it end? Does it ever end?

As we approach total build out how do we begin to position ourselves for long term resiliency? What happens when there are no more greenfields and the developers have moved on to the next ‘green pasture’ and the long term infrastructure obligations must be maintained or replaced by township taxdollars. What happens when we need another fire station, a police dept, upgraded stormwater systems or a new High School? How do we continue to pay for all this without a massive tax increase?

Thats the core issue strongtowns focuses on.They support growing in a fiscally sustainable fashion where projects are reviewed from a lifecycle cost benefit and quality of life analysis.  They advocate for analyzing the status quo not blindly doubling down on it. Strategy that leads to financial sustainability not policy that relies on perpetual growth.

I hope to see you at this presentation. It’s certainly very thought provoking and relevant to the issues we as a community face now and moving forward.

Strongtowns.org presents a ‘curbside chat’
Date: January 9th

Where: Lower Macungie Township Building
3400 Brookside Road

Time: 8:00-9:30 AM